Mafiascum.net

In post 1446, mastina wrote:

In post 1441, PJ. wrote:Why is it excusable and not bannable when you play in a game throwing manner but inexcusable and bannable when I play in a game throwing manner?

Because what I did wasn't game-throwing. Claiming mason had a legitimate game purpose; it exposed scum in a way which couldn't be done otherwise. Becoming conftown on D1 is also not inherently a bad thing. Yes, it means that the masons die fairly early on, but that's not inherently a bad thing because I don't trust myself in the lategame anyway and the scum killing me instead of, sayyy, an investigative PR, means that said investigative PR has the time to generate useful results unimpeded. There's actual, provable, game utility in claiming mason, even on D1.

You can disagree with the theory, but from a theory standpoint, it is not unambiguously game-throwing.

Shooting conftown as town, on the other hand?

That?

That's unambiguously game-throwing.

Claiming to become conftown's not gamethrowing because there's utility in it (you're still playing to your wincon even if the decision to claim is not the MOST optimal); shooting conftown as town is gamethrowing because it is literally playing against your wincon.

In post 1216, Alisae wrote:

In post 1215, Titus wrote:

In post 1214, Alisae wrote:why would you want to follow masons that are gamethrowing????????
Asking for a friend

Alchemist doesn't think they are and nor do I.

Here are the things mastina did this game
- get into a fight that is probably a TvT with Cheeky
- claimed mason and outed their buddy because Cheeky reasonably thought mastina could be scum for some reason
- continued to push that one read and nothing else because their ego demanded it.

I'm sorry, how is that not gamethrowing?

In post 1450, PJ. wrote:

In post 1216, Alisae wrote:

In post 1215, Titus wrote:

In post 1214, Alisae wrote:why would you want to follow masons that are gamethrowing????????
Asking for a friend

Alchemist doesn't think they are and nor do I.

Here are the things mastina did this game
- get into a fight that is probably a TvT with Cheeky
- claimed mason and outed their buddy because Cheeky reasonably thought mastina could be scum for some reason
- continued to push that one read and nothing else because their ego demanded it.

I'm sorry, how is that not gamethrowing?

In post 1229, Alisae wrote:the language I'm using is

intentionally manipulative

.

In post 1437, Cafe Stile wrote:I liked this reasoning, I really did. BUT
Whether or not he really townread us based on these reasoning at that moment when Maika posted, I'm doubtful
It feels like he's being lazy and only loosely following the game, but he comes up with a pretty decent reason to townread a slot mostly null, yeah i dont really know if its real.

In post 1436, mastina wrote:

In post 1229, Alisae wrote:Titus ur town because you realized that the language I'm using is intentionally manipulative.

I wouldn't be so sure about that--I read what you were saying as basically intentional trolling; it was pretty self-evidently obvious that you weren't saying those things seriously and were saying them in jest.

In post 1452, mastina wrote:

In post 1450, PJ. wrote:

In post 1216, Alisae wrote:

In post 1215, Titus wrote:

In post 1214, Alisae wrote:why would you want to follow masons that are gamethrowing????????
Asking for a friend

Alchemist doesn't think they are and nor do I.

Here are the things mastina did this game
- get into a fight that is probably a TvT with Cheeky
- claimed mason and outed their buddy because Cheeky reasonably thought mastina could be scum for some reason
- continued to push that one read and nothing else because their ego demanded it.

I'm sorry, how is that not gamethrowing?

In post 1229, Alisae wrote:the language I'm using is

intentionally manipulative

.

In post 1439, mastina wrote:

In post 1316, Alchemist21 wrote:Why the fuck is another pair of mason claims going around?

Because town players feel like trolling. (The mason claim troll could come from scum, sure, yeah, I just don't think it did; both Flavor Leaf and Chaos Wind are townreads.)

In post 1448, Cafe Stile wrote:

In post 1201, Alchemist21 wrote:

In post 1191, Tet wrote:

In post 1190, CheekyTeeky wrote:

In post 1185, Tet wrote:Are you wildcatting?

Sure Alchemist could die but I don't have a read on him, not theory crafting around a read that I don't have.

You chose to answer the weakest point in my argument and strawman. Dude just scumhunt instead of being scummy. Any reads would help.

Titus, fl, tttt all slots I've pinged out as scum. Doesn't really matter for the first two. TTTT is possible but not a strong read of mine.

I've said all this though. And defended you, but I digress.

VOTE: Tet

1135 looks like scum fencesitting. That post and 1186 look like he’s afraid to stick his neck out and is more concerned with making a vote that will look good to everyone.

ummm

alchemist is probably scum for this one

- Hideri

p.edit idk which one of them is chemist and which one is eragon, i'm not used to either of them shitposting this hard.
note: go dig their meta sometime

In post 1451, mastina wrote:Elsa Jay

jjh927
Brock and Onyx

Alisae
Flavor Leaf
Skygazer

(Also in like 97.5% of my games I townread someone I shouldn't be townreading, soooooo.)

In post 1451, mastina wrote:Elsa Jay

jjh927
Brock and Onyx

Alisae
Flavor Leaf
Skygazer

Tet
Chaos Wind
Xtoxm

Pink Ball
Emperor flippyNips
Shiro

TTTT

Cafe Stile

Alchemist21

Titus

Panzerjager
CheekyTeeky

In post 1461, Cafe Stile wrote:Because I think 1135 is a good townie post with a new angle to look at the wagons with "Mastina claiming is like a perfect catalyst for scum to push a cheeky mislynch." and he's clearly analyzing who is more likely scum based on such angle
whats the scum fencesitting about it

1186 saying "I already want to vote TTTT" isn't something to be said to not offend people

Your read on Tet here are based on twisted facts.

- Hideri

In post 1446, mastina wrote:

In post 1441, PJ. wrote:Why is it excusable and not bannable when you play in a game throwing manner but inexcusable and bannable when I play in a game throwing manner?

Because what I did wasn't game-throwing. Claiming mason had a legitimate game purpose; it exposed scum in a way which couldn't be done otherwise. Becoming conftown on D1 is also not inherently a bad thing. Yes, it means that the masons die fairly early on, but that's not inherently a bad thing because I don't trust myself in the lategame anyway and the scum killing me instead of, sayyy, an investigative PR, means that said investigative PR has the time to generate useful results unimpeded. There's actual, provable, game utility in claiming mason, even on D1.

Becoming conftown on D1 is also not inherently a bad thing. Yes, it means that the masons die fairly early on, but that's not inherently a bad thing because I don't trust myself in the lategame anyway and the scum killing me instead of, sayyy, an investigative PR, means that said investigative PR has the time to generate useful results unimpeded. There's actual, provable, game utility in claiming mason, even on D1.

In post 1467, Alisae wrote:You claiming mason doesn't make the game any easier to solve when you were already super obvtown.

In post 1466, Alchemist21 wrote:

In post 1461, Cafe Stile wrote:Because I think 1135 is a good townie post with a new angle to look at the wagons with "Mastina claiming is like a perfect catalyst for scum to push a cheeky mislynch." and he's clearly analyzing who is more likely scum based on such angle
whats the scum fencesitting about it

1186 saying "I already want to vote TTTT" isn't something to be said to not offend people

Your read on Tet here are based on twisted facts.

- Hideri

Twisted facts? The questions he was asking looked like he was looking for a safe place to vote. He’s been non-committal and I think he cares more about blending in that pushing scumreads. Now explain what part of that is based on twisted facts.