Mafiascum.net

In post 127, Rise wrote:Agree in that the list didn't say much, but is that really scum indicative? Could it not be a townie trying their best? I do think there's parts in it that's worth questioning but your full tunnel on them really wasn't something I could agree with.

As for my vote on Blatant, like I said, I find their behaviour really weird and I'll clarify once I'm on a computer (which is soon). I'm not a fan of their recent posts either so I'm happy with where my vote is right now.

Rise - how do you think scum would be more likely to play:
1) trying to pretend to be townie, being helpful, making statements that look like they're doing something, avoiding behavior that draws attention or gets them voted (my impression of Map Wolf so far)
2) trolling, being weird, calling further attention to the fact that people are already voting/suspecting them (my impression of Blatant Scum so far)

I strongly disagree with you that scum are more likely to play in style of #2 than #1.

In post 136, Rise wrote:

In post 125, GuiltyLion wrote:

In post 120, GayBabyJailor wrote:guiltylion: how would you think blatant scum is town after 109

the better question is why should I think he's scum for that? What scum agenda does it serve to self-vote there? The default odds that his slot is town is 75%.

like sure you can make an argument that it's all WIFOM to defuse pressure and make us sympathize with him, but that's competing against a town explanation where he's meme-ing/trolling (which he indicated he'd do in 65) or genuinely frustrated at TGS' interaction with him. I don't have a strong reason to prefer the scum explanation over the town explanation.

I see townies self-vote all the time, it literally just happened in my last completed game. It's a different context since this was near EOD and Doolittle wanted to make sure a lynch went through, but the idea that "town never self-votes" is inherently wrong.

Yes, self voting is not a thing only scum do, but it's still weird behaviour. Why would any normal townie do that? Does it not make you want to question him at all?

meh, not really. I thought of a few reasons town would do it, I thought of a few reasons scum would do it, I don't really think the scum reasons are more likely than the town reasons, so it's not interesting or indicative to me

In post 150, GuiltyLion wrote:

In post 127, Rise wrote:Agree in that the list didn't say much, but is that really scum indicative? Could it not be a townie trying their best? I do think there's parts in it that's worth questioning but your full tunnel on them really wasn't something I could agree with.

As for my vote on Blatant, like I said, I find their behaviour really weird and I'll clarify once I'm on a computer (which is soon). I'm not a fan of their recent posts either so I'm happy with where my vote is right now.

Rise - how do you think scum would be more likely to play:
1) trying to pretend to be townie, being helpful, making statements that look like they're doing something, avoiding behavior that draws attention or gets them voted (my impression of Map Wolf so far)
2) trolling, being weird, calling further attention to the fact that people are already voting/suspecting them (my impression of Blatant Scum so far)

I strongly disagree with you that scum are more likely to play in style of #2 than #1.

Why would town play #2?

People do all sorts of stuff for all sorts of reasons. Might be genuinely frustrated, might get a kick out of messing with other people, might use it as a tool to help them find scum taking the bait. I'm not saying you're town of that play style, just that I don't find it scummy.

- I would like your thoughts on Rise, now that she has posted and come to your defense.

On the topic of Map Wolf, I do agree with what Guilty is saying about the way they are playing, but I don't want to be easily convinced. Guilty is clearly a very experienced player and I would like to read into things myself before easily following someone else's conclusion with none of my own input.

Map Wolf- as your first reads list was the bare bones of a reads list, and nearly everyone was declared neutral, what are your feelings now? A lot more information is present now than at the time of that post. Could you post another reads list of sorts, or at least opinions on some of the players, so we can see your current stance and beliefs?

Lynching

With 9 votes in play, it takes 5 to lynch.

Blatant Scum

(2): Rise, GayBabyJailor

Map Wolf

(2): faüstiv, GuiltyLion,

Gjt

(1): Map Wolf

Rise

(1): Blatant Scum

Not Voting

(3): Gjt, Titus, TheGildedSun

Deadline:

(expired on 2019-11-20 10:30:00).

I'm modding a recreational mathematics game in another part of the forum that needs two replacements. PM me if you're interested in replacing in.[/area]

Also, Map Wolf: Do you like where your vote (on Gjt) is at the moment? If so, why?

In post 152, Blatant Scum wrote:

In post 150, GuiltyLion wrote:

In post 127, Rise wrote:Agree in that the list didn't say much, but is that really scum indicative? Could it not be a townie trying their best? I do think there's parts in it that's worth questioning but your full tunnel on them really wasn't something I could agree with.

As for my vote on Blatant, like I said, I find their behaviour really weird and I'll clarify once I'm on a computer (which is soon). I'm not a fan of their recent posts either so I'm happy with where my vote is right now.

Rise - how do you think scum would be more likely to play:
1) trying to pretend to be townie, being helpful, making statements that look like they're doing something, avoiding behavior that draws attention or gets them voted (my impression of Map Wolf so far)
2) trolling, being weird, calling further attention to the fact that people are already voting/suspecting them (my impression of Blatant Scum so far)

I strongly disagree with you that scum are more likely to play in style of #2 than #1.

Why would town play #2?

https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Yoda

my read on Map Wolf mainly comes from their earlier posts. I don't know if there's an actual term for it, but let me explain.

38

That's a rather fast conclusion to be honest.

Not that it makes you scum, since that would perhaps be a bit aggressive.

sometimes when scum are making an FOS that they add something at the end like 'but I could be wrong' or 'it's my opinion so don't read too much into it' etc. That's what Wolf is doing here; he's shadethrowing Gjt then counterpoints it by saying 'not that it makes you scum because...'

Scum do this because they need to appease to town. Town aren't scared of being questioned or accused. Scum are. Scum FOSses are made up and they don't like being questioned on it. I mean town do it but town are less likely to add something that mitigates their FOS at the end of their statement than scum.

He does it again in his readlist in 42.

Faustiv, neutral for now. Is kind of aggressive,

but I don't think that's all that alignment indicative at least so far.

Gjr, neutral leaning somewhat scum. Seems defensive in tone,

but this could also be town too afraid of being lynched.

(Which you shouldn't be all that much, since being lynched early doesn't lose the game)
Blatant, neutral. Some stuff posted doesn't make sense to me like 24. Hasn't actually tried to read anyone. Yet.
Titus, V/LA for now.
TGS, Neutral.
GBJ, Town-leaning. Seems a bit aggressive for scum.
Rise, not posted so far.
GuiltyLion hasn't posted either.

I could see what Wolf said in 126 as a possibility, that the readlist was made for convenience sake for future reference,so I'm not really looking into the fact he made a readlist itself but rather the content of it.

He also townreads GBJ yet in another game claimed he scumread a player for a similar playstyle. Wolf was town in that game.

I agree with a lot that GuiltyLion said about the slot.

reason for tr on GayBabyJAilor is that, whilst he is being scumread, his playstyle or tone hasn't changed. He's not panicking. He's a new player and I think GBJ as scum here would have wilted a bit but I'm seeing no signs of that.

also i lied about my blatantscum TR. I think he's kinda null actually, I just wanted to see how people would react if I TR a slot that was being shadethrown; see if anyone panicked.

what i still don't get is why blatant scum self voted. I don't want to see someone else defend their actions as wifom, i want to see them say it themself.

In post 135, faüstiv wrote:
The problem is if you "don't make conclusions" then it's:

a) hard to see your genuine thought process
and
b) super convenient for you to change the way you vote/read things later in the game without having to explain what changed, when, and why.

And that also ties into the larger point of like - if you weren't making conclusions then what were you hoping to gain from posting them?

further I would also kinda reframe it as I'm not asking for

"conclusions"

(implying some kind of final and definitive read) more than just like

"judgments"

. Saying somebody "could be town or scum" doesn't give any actual insight into what you are thinking. Saying "I think [x] is town for [y] reason" is far more useful to players trying to sort you, even if you then decide you were wrong later. It's also makes it a lot harder for scum to fake convincingly

+

In post 154, GuiltyLion wrote:

@Map Wolf

- I would like your thoughts on Rise, now that she has posted and come to your defense.

Noted.

In post 135, faüstiv wrote:Ok

I asked that question because in Newbie 1757 you had a slight scumread on a player because he was ‘direct’ and ‘disfriendly’ and you were town in that game. It just pinged me as odd that you TR a player in this game for similar reasons.

eager to see your case on GBJ now.

also I’ll elaborate on that read when I get back at a computer.

That game (I assume you mean 1737 as I didn't participate in 1737) was three years ago. I think I use more reverse psychology thinking right now.

In post 157, TheGildedSun wrote:Also, Map Wolf: Do you like where your vote (on Gjt) is at the moment? If so, why?

I have considered moving it. I don't really have a strong case on them atm.

I don't agree with that line of thinking.

Thoughts change as the game progresses. You don't have to put a conclusion at the end of each FOS you make. You have to look at the motivations behind the vote and the accusations, the reasoning, to determine whether someone is scum or not.

I would align that sort of thinking with more with scum than town as it shows is that the player is afraid of being questioned when their reads change, even though players changing reads happens in pretty much every game.

In post 164, Map Wolf wrote:

In post 135, faüstiv wrote:Ok

I asked that question because in Newbie 1757 you had a slight scumread on a player because he was ‘direct’ and ‘disfriendly’ and you were town in that game. It just pinged me as odd that you TR a player in this game for similar reasons.

eager to see your case on GBJ now.

also I’ll elaborate on that read when I get back at a computer.

That game (I assume you mean 1737 as I didn't participate in 1737) was three years ago. I think I use more reverse psychology thinking right now.

yeah my bad ,that game.

do you have any more recent games?

In post 167, faüstiv wrote:

In post 164, Map Wolf wrote:

In post 135, faüstiv wrote:Ok

I asked that question because in Newbie 1757 you had a slight scumread on a player because he was ‘direct’ and ‘disfriendly’ and you were town in that game. It just pinged me as odd that you TR a player in this game for similar reasons.

eager to see your case on GBJ now.

also I’ll elaborate on that read when I get back at a computer.

That game (I assume you mean 1737 as I didn't participate in 1737) was three years ago. I think I use more reverse psychology thinking right now.

yeah my bad ,that game.

do you have any more recent games?

I have no games after 2017 onwards.

alright cool

To be honest, I still don't like GBJ pushing Blatant. It feels a bit fake or convenient. Still, if Blatant is town, then their behavior is really not useful at all. I will VOTE: Blatant Scum as I don't like their posts myself tbh:

65 is a pretty stupid post. Their entire posting history consists of short comments with little substance.

To be clear, what I don't like is GBJ seemingly pushing him quite hard.

In post 170, Map Wolf wrote:To be honest, I still don't like GBJ pushing Blatant. It feels a bit fake or convenient. Still, if Blatant is town, then their behavior is really not useful at all. I will VOTE: Blatant Scum as I don't like their posts myself tbh:

65 is a pretty stupid post. Their entire posting history consists of short comments with little substance.

To be clear, what I don't like is GBJ seemingly pushing him quite hard.

This has already been spoken about. As I, and Guilty Lion have said, it seems too obvious. Why in the world would mafia attempt to stand out? Unless they're trolling. If they're trolling, then maybe looking into a policy vote. I'm pretty sure a slot can't just refuse to contribute to the game, regardless of alignment.

Is it just me or does Map Wolf's sudden vote on Blatant seem a little contrived? He provides no backing other than things that have been mentioned over and over and I feel like it's in an attempt to move the heat off of him back onto Blatant.

In post 171, TheGildedSun wrote:

In post 170, Map Wolf wrote:To be honest, I still don't like GBJ pushing Blatant. It feels a bit fake or convenient. Still, if Blatant is town, then their behavior is really not useful at all. I will VOTE: Blatant Scum as I don't like their posts myself tbh:

65 is a pretty stupid post. Their entire posting history consists of short comments with little substance.

To be clear, what I don't like is GBJ seemingly pushing him quite hard.

This has already been spoken about. As I, and Guilty Lion have said, it seems too obvious. Why in the world would mafia attempt to stand out? Unless they're trolling. If they're trolling, then maybe looking into a policy vote. I'm pretty sure a slot can't just refuse to contribute to the game, regardless of alignment.

Is it just me or does Map Wolf's sudden vote on Blatant seem a little contrived? He provides no backing other than things that have been mentioned over and over and I feel like it's in an attempt to move the heat off of him back onto Blatant.

I'm not trying to push towards a lynch. I'm trying to have Blatant participate more.

Rise defending me in 127 feels a bit convenient. Like "Look, I was right about his alignment!" in the case that I'm lynched and flipped as town. I do agree on their criticism of Blatant in 131.

In post 132, Rise wrote:Also I liked Map Wolf's #126. It answered a lot of my questions for his earlier list so I'm not gonna question further.

Don't like this post. There's nothing wrong with questioning me. There are people that should perhaps be questioned more, but questioning me is never going to hurt town as it forces the actual scum to give away information.

So I don't really like the whole defending me thing. If they are town, then there's nothing wrong with questioning me and no need to defend me hard. If they are scum, then trying to appear on my side is pretty convenient.

My apologies. I didn't realize this had started.