Mafiascum.net

Palmer is giving me thing vibes

Childs, what's your opinion on Norris and his push on Windows?

In post 124, Childs~ wrote:

In post 112, Palmer~ wrote:

In post 109, Norris~ wrote:Palmer, Windows literally said "catching a thing everyday and nobody can stop us" which is true for any game? Is that not literally just "explaining" (maybe stateing is a better word for you if you want to be a nitpicky demonspawn) the obvious?

I mean, yes, it's "stating the obvious", but the whole post itself is obviously trying to shoehorn in as many "Thing" puns as possible. I think that gives it much more context (and vibes more towny) than if you take his post literally.

I think you are reading too much into it

In what way is Palmer “reading too much into it” any more than Norris? My literal first thought on Norris’ initial post on Windows is that they were reading too much into Windows’ intro, which was clearly made in a joking tone.

In post 126, Palmer~ wrote:Childs, what's your opinion on Norris and his push on Windows?

the push feels hollow at best

I currently don't see anything wrong with Windows besides the fact that his name is actually a "thing" and it's the reason why I rvs voted him

I would like people like Norris to stop defending someone who's response to pressure is horrendous.

In post 127, Nauls~ wrote:

In post 124, Childs~ wrote:

In post 112, Palmer~ wrote:

In post 109, Norris~ wrote:Palmer, Windows literally said "catching a thing everyday and nobody can stop us" which is true for any game? Is that not literally just "explaining" (maybe stateing is a better word for you if you want to be a nitpicky demonspawn) the obvious?

I mean, yes, it's "stating the obvious", but the whole post itself is obviously trying to shoehorn in as many "Thing" puns as possible. I think that gives it much more context (and vibes more towny) than if you take his post literally.

I think you are reading too much into it

In what way is Palmer “reading too much into it” any more than Norris? My literal first thought on Norris’ initial post on Windows is that they were reading too much into Windows’ intro, which was clearly made in a joking tone.

you are absolutely correct homie, i was thinking about that just now, let's say they are reading too much into that which i feel is nai

clarification I feel windows post 8 is NAI

In post 120, Lars~ wrote:

In post 39, Blair~ wrote:hsialsrbbeftcaglutrcbostfotsatdadayasacsfttgrtrtmfttsptbiwtlaitwdalutfctootfhtwb

Head spinning incessantly, Angel looked stoic, resolute, betrayed by each falling tear. Crying again, gaze laboriously unwavering, thoughts repressed. Crying because of suffering twice forgotten over time, suffering always that dies and decays and yet always still above consciousness, suffering from the time given reluctantly to rich terrible men from the towers, suffering pretending to be immortal wisdom. The last Angel in the world, dying alone, looked up, took flight, careening towards oblivion, only to find himself tainted with blood.

If Lars is a Thing we've already lost

In post 119, Norris~ wrote:will the changelings not just take over whoevers most townread though.. ill stop townreading people.

I guess people should post more and talk in their natural voice so we can have more post history to compare off when things go bad

I am suspicious of Bennings

In post 92, Norris~ wrote:disagree, i very much like Clark as of right now. The questions theyre asking seem very newbish by nature

This is a very interesting take, and I'm pretty sure 28 belies that they are not new

I also strongly dislike their response to the wagon on them

In post 128, Childs~ wrote:

In post 126, Palmer~ wrote:Childs, what's your opinion on Norris and his push on Windows?

the push feels hollow at best

I currently don't see anything wrong with Windows besides the fact that his name is actually a "thing" and it's the reason why I rvs voted him

I would like people like Norris to stop defending someone who's response to pressure is horrendous.

I mean, if you agree with me the push feels hollow...

I know I shouldn't like Nauls for 127, but it's hard not to. I won't, though.

In post 113, Fuchs~ wrote:VOTE: Palmer

I don't really love this vote but I think the followup reasoning is unlikely to come from scum

In post 133, Blair~ wrote:I am suspicious of Bennings

why? I liked their posts so far

I dislike Palmer and Clark(? I think) calling Copper out as being defensive. It seems to me more often a line scum use to dismiss town explaining themselves where if town stay silent then scum would say they have no defence... so it seems like a rhetorical argument rather than a valid point.

In and of itself that can also come from town who are assuming their target is scum rather than trying to convince others of it. But in Palmer's case this also rang suspicious to me: post 111 (not just that Palmer is okay with a wagon on a townread (123 I think explained that part okay) but the way he dismisses all his reads " I don't think any of my ideas are going to be >rand right now" which is like, yeah no shit, we're barely out of RVS. I don't think town feel the need to undermine their own posts in that way.

And while the explanation for the wagon stuff
post 123 in itself was okay I felt the second part of that post seemed to deliberately misunderstand Fuchs' point.


I'm also not convinced a town Blair posts his code so confidently especially with giving the answer to the first code. That to me feels more likely scum trying to appear to be town. Where's the "shit if town go with this and scum crack the code then this move will lose the game for town" sense of caution? Also I kinda feel someone genuinely trying it as town would more likely have checked the rules to confirm if it's okay or not.

VOTE: Blair

There are a few more things I want to comment on, will do after work.

In post 134, MacReady~ wrote:This is a very interesting take, and I'm pretty sure 28 belies that they are not new

I also strongly dislike their response to the wagon on them

I skipped over a bunch of posts and the one post i did see reminded me of a newb style.

I'm somewhat puzzled how you can come to the conclusion that you 'like' clarke when you haven't been reading many of their posts and seem to have skipped a lot of the discussion on them as well

In post 138, Windows~ wrote:I'm also not convinced a town Blair posts his code so confidently especially with giving the answer to the first code. That to me feels more likely scum trying to appear to be town. Where's the "shit if town go with this and scum crack the code then this move will lose the game for town" sense of caution? Also I kinda feel someone genuinely trying it as town would more likely have checked the rules to confirm if it's okay or not.

My assumption is that Blair came up with their idea of the code between the time of sign ups and the time that role pms went out, and therefore checking the rules or not is NAI.

The way I see it, is that during that time frame, they started thinking about what to do about the swap mechanic, -> Came up with the idea for their code -> thought it would be an effective way to hamper it -> got role pm

I feel like if they had that idea, and thought it was a good way to mess up the scum team, they just... would not have done it if they rolled scum. Until someone just broke their code, it actually seemed like a pretty full proof way to deal with the issue, and scum!Blair would not want to hand their full proof plan on how to deal with the issue to the town.

Especially in an Anon game where there would be no preconceived notion on whether Blair is the type of person who would have worked on some kind of answer to that problem.

In post 138, Windows~ wrote:I dislike Palmer and Clark(? I think) calling Copper out as being defensive. It seems to me more often a line scum use to dismiss town explaining themselves where if town stay silent then scum would say they have no defence... so it seems like a rhetorical argument rather than a valid point.

In and of itself that can also come from town who are assuming their target is scum rather than trying to convince others of it. But in Palmer's case this also rang suspicious to me: post 111 (not just that Palmer is okay with a wagon on a townread (123 I think explained that part okay) but the way he dismisses all his reads " I don't think any of my ideas are going to be >rand right now" which is like, yeah no shit, we're barely out of RVS. I don't think town feel the need to undermine their own posts in that way.

And while the explanation for the wagon stuff
post 123 in itself was okay I felt the second part of that post seemed to deliberately misunderstand Fuchs' point.


I'm also not convinced a town Blair posts his code so confidently especially with giving the answer to the first code. That to me feels more likely scum trying to appear to be town. Where's the "shit if town go with this and scum crack the code then this move will lose the game for town" sense of caution? Also I kinda feel someone genuinely trying it as town would more likely have checked the rules to confirm if it's okay or not.

VOTE: Blair

There are a few more things I want to comment on, will do after work.

Windows gets to be town more than any of you imo

I don't feel like we should forget about Clark yet, because the gut still hasn't said a word besides "why me?" But I do agree with these points

In post 142, Fuchs~ wrote:Until someone just broke their code, it actually seemed like a pretty full proof way to deal with the issue

I didn't break their code, but I guess if it was convincing to others then it's effectively the same result

In post 143, Childs~ wrote:I don't feel like we should forget about Clark yet, because the gut still hasn't said a word besides "why me?" But I do agree with these points

I'm not moving my vote until they respond more to their wagon

In post 123, Palmer~ wrote:

In post 116, Fuchs~ wrote:So after reading it, I opened your iso. So far you have claimed to have had alignment thoughts on Lars, MacReady, Copper, Windows, Clark, Nauls and Garry. Largely light comments, but all voiced, which made it look more like you are just going through the motions of calling things town or scum, vs have real thoughts on these players.

I don't understand this point. If I hadn't voiced those opinions, then you wouldn't know I had them, no?

Its too many thoughts on too many people, with none of them fleshed out. Just light thought into light thought.

I feel like when people are genuinely sorting a player list there is a level of distraction or focus as they are thinking about things. Like, focusing more on the people they have stronger thoughts on, or focusing more on someone they want to get stronger thoughts on.

Instead what I am seeing with you is a scattershot, which looks more like it is for the sake of looking like you are sorting then genuine sorting.

Of those 7 names you have commented on,

I feel pretty good about Palmer, Fuchs, and Windows being town, and Garry to some degree as well

In post 117, Norris~ wrote:

In post 116, Fuchs~ wrote:Did not really like this post

In post 111, Palmer~ wrote:I don't currently think Clark is a Thing. I can understand the feeling of annoyance that people took his post the wrong way. Though I don't have anything against a wagon there, as I don't think any of my ideas are going to be >rand right now, and info is info.

Nauls gives me town vibes. Gut tells me that a Thing, if they were planning an entrance to the thread with content, wouldn't have chosen a single post from page 2 to form all their content on.

Garry also feels slightly towny. Explanation purposefully omitted for now.

@Copper, give me your strongest Human and Thing read?

You think clark is town, but you are okay with a wagon there because "info is info" does not feel like a genuine thought.

Saying that someone is town because on page 5, the most interesting thing they saw while reading was on Page 2 also does not feel like a real take either.


So after reading it, I opened your iso. So far you have claimed to have had alignment thoughts on Lars, MacReady, Copper, Windows, Clark, Nauls and Garry. Largely light comments, but all voiced, which made it look more like you are just going through the motions of calling things town or scum, vs have real thoughts on these players.

OKAY fuchs is town

In post 118, Norris~ wrote:fuchs tell me where to vote and ill do it.

Norris, why does you deciding that I am town mean that I get to decide your vote?

And also, why did you then tell me to tell you where to vote, instead of following my vote / reasoning in the very post you quoted?

In post 32, MacReady~ wrote:

In post 19, Palmer~ wrote:Ah, we're getting serious?

I like Lars' and MacReady's intros, probably for bad reasons. And I think Copper's is slightly more likely to come from a Thing.

Yeah, I thought that post would help transition out of RVS a bit.

Clark's 17 felt a bit off to me, but other than what I've already mentioned, I didn't get anything out of the posts prior to mine

In post 33, MacReady~ wrote:I like Palmer

VOTE: clark

Yeah I'm willing to just accept MacReady at this point. These posts look very genuine and smooth and authentic and good and real and townie and perfect and non-thinglike (thingy, thinglike? what's the proper term...)