Mafiascum.net

In post 140, Flea The Magician wrote:

In post 138, Vaxkiller wrote:

In post 131, Flea The Magician wrote:I can promise you flavour is NAI.

So tell me yours.

Even the might Zeus pales in comparison to the power wielded by I. <3

I can stop the mighty zeus in this tracks.

the power of dance?

no. dance is banned.

oh thank god

I dont know how to dance

would you like me to teach you?

Not much time, so just skimmed the thread. Grendel seems towny.

In post 122, Marky Mark wrote:Uncrowned on the other hand, rocks up, votes for me, and contributes 0 to the conversation. Just does not help us move the game forward

or find scum, which is ofc lined up with scum's motives

This is wrong.

Assume you're scum here. Doesn't this entirely ruin your premise?

What if I told you I was joining in to get a reaction from you? To force you to generate content you may not have been willing to do without added motivation?

Now we've seen how you react - and it's not a good one. This line in particular is over-explainy.

"Which is ofc lined up with scum's motives"

But is it really? You're making the assumption that scumcrowned would think it's plausible that you'd get quicklimmed, which doesn't happen often, especially with this number of players. Then I'd also have to bank on nobody suspecting me when it came to my vote, which was self-claimed sheep. Do you think in a 14 player game there is any scenario where I win here as scum if you get elimmed?

No, not really.

The fact of the matter is this: My vote was NAI. I could and would do it as either alignment. I could wine and be self-biased and say it's ever so slightly more town indicative, but only people with decent experience of my play would get that so it's pointless.

My senses tell me one of the people discrediting me for this vote are trying hard to get early towncred. I don't believe multiple scum would take the exact same approach on my slot, so I'll assume there's only one scum in there for now.

ANYWAY

I can't dance, but I can damn well sing Hell music is even a core part of my sections.

Also the chumby muse is fucking goals. The sass tho *chefs kiss* Sadly I am a cross between the big tall one and the chumby one just with less sass and more chaos

Given it's a uPick, I'd be surprised if any of us were vanilla. I'd assume all town are PRs and all baddies are PRs. Honestly we don't want to give scum more information already.

Uncrowned calling out an over explaination with an over explaination seems dodge to me. VOTE: Uncrowned



Hey Not Known 15, drop a vote for me <3

In post 129, Fidget wrote:

In post 103, Mistyx wrote:i dont think acting performative in rvs is really a solid basis for a wagon

VOTE: uncrowned

i dont like that you just hop in and follow a wagon without other thoughts provided!!

do you have any individual takes on anyone?

Why not? For scum, looking towny is more important than not looking towny, after all, and I would argue it's probably the easiest to fake content at the beginning.

In post 94, Uncrowned wrote:I'll sheep this.

VOTE: Mark

I am considering suspecting Uncrowned, but at the same time, it would have been quite easy to have commented on anything at all. He does not even elaborate on why he is voting Mark. This is potentially a complete lack of caring about his own appearance... If I were scum, I would have some thoughts prepared before entering the thread.

I see that the point being made is that Uncrowned does nothing to move the game forward or find scum.. which I would disagree with quite vehemently, actually. Although I cannot judge yet whether the intent was to move the game forward or not, I think it does, possibly more substantially than if he had said more.

So to summarise your logic:
1.) - I agree here that scum care more about looking town, but town have another major incentive to be proactive: finding scum!
2.) - like eh idk maybe. Feels like Too scummy To Be Scum (TM) logic somewhat

I'm still trying to get a feel for you, but phrases like "I am considering suspecting" feel scummy to me. If you SR or TR someone then own your suspicions. If you think its NAI then that's cool too, but either way, being vague is not super helpful here.

In post 143, cassowary wrote:

In post 141, Porkens wrote:

In post 125, Marky Mark wrote:'They are doing pro-town things, but it might be scum doing it for towncred' (my verrry loose paraphrasing) feels like a pretty thin justification for a vote on someone lol

That “lol” looks forced.

lol

You beat me to the obvious response here lol

In post 147, Grendel wrote:its a matter of what you seem to be doing vs what you are actually doing. It feels to me like you are playing for town cred, and not to solve the game.

On some level you are working with town + those other things you said. However its v easy as scum who want to play a protown looking game to play agreeable with townies/ look really reasonable. THeres less stress b/c the answers are already available to scum.

Your point is still essentially that scum could replicate anything that I've done this game. This is true, but does not make me scum.

are you pleasing w Grendel to nullread you or something?

In post 155, Uncrowned wrote:

In post 122, Marky Mark wrote:Uncrowned on the other hand, rocks up, votes for me, and contributes 0 to the conversation. Just does not help us move the game forward

or find scum, which is ofc lined up with scum's motives

This is wrong.

Assume you're scum here. Doesn't this entirely ruin your premise?

What if I told you I was joining in to get a reaction from you? To force you to generate content you may not have been willing to do without added motivation?

Now we've seen how you react - and it's not a good one. This line in particular is over-explainy.

"Which is ofc lined up with scum's motives"

But is it really? You're making the assumption that scumcrowned would think it's plausible that you'd get quicklimmed, which doesn't happen often, especially with this number of players. Then I'd also have to bank on nobody suspecting me when it came to my vote, which was self-claimed sheep. Do you think in a 14 player game there is any scenario where I win here as scum if you get elimmed?

No, not really.

The fact of the matter is this: My vote was NAI. I could and would do it as either alignment. I could wine and be self-biased and say it's ever so slightly more town indicative, but only people with decent experience of my play would get that so it's pointless.

My senses tell me one of the people discrediting me for this vote are trying hard to get early towncred. I don't believe multiple scum would take the exact same approach on my slot, so I'll assume there's only one scum in there for now.

So, I agree with you here that your vote leading to me getting immediately limmed is unlikely. The problem though is that a naked vote on a top wagon with no other content (until now) means that:

-It is next to impossible for the rest of us to get a read on your slot, as there is nothing to go off
-It is impossible to try and refute you as you have not provided any justification.

So tldr its an easy play as scum to avoid doing anything too controversial, while gently building heat on a slot in a way they can't directly refute.

So no, I didn't make the assumption that scum!you was trying to quicklim me, its just a scummy post. Pls dont put words in my mouth

In post 160, the worst wrote:are you pleasing w Grendel to nullread you or something?

It's up to them how they want to read me, but they are voting me on flawed logic. If people vote me for reasons that don't make sense then I will hold them to account.

What are your thoughts on the game so far? Do you usually just comment from the sidelines at this stage of D1?

lol

VOTE: Porkens

In post 161, Marky Mark wrote:So tldr its an easy play as scum to avoid doing anything too controversial, while gently building heat on a slot in a way they can't directly refute.

Is it really an easy play if it's going to draw this much attention? There are plenty of better ways I could've entered this thread that wouldn't have made me the talking point/vote for multiple people.

Town can also build heat on a slot in that manner. Acting as if it's something only scum would do is flat out wrong and feels like an attempt at shading something and calling it scummy when it's definitely not exclusively scummy.

In post 163, Vaxkiller wrote:lol

VOTE: Porkens

You think that was a sincere lol Vax?

In post 157, Marky Mark wrote:So to summarise your logic:
1.) Being proactive in RVS more likely comes from being scum than town - I agree here that scum care more about looking town, but town have another major incentive to be proactive: finding scum!
2.) Uncrowned's naked vote on the top wagon is less scummy than if they had justified it - like eh idk maybe. Feels like Too scummy To Be Scum (TM) logic somewhat

I'm still trying to get a feel for you, but phrases like "I am considering suspecting" feel scummy to me. If you SR or TR someone then own your suspicions. If you think its NAI then that's cool too, but either way, being vague is not super helpful here.

You seem to be getting the idea that I'm scumreading you for being proactive/protown. What I find suspicious about you is how some of your posts give the appearance of being protown, but in reality are easy to make and mostly just make you seem like you're doing something than are actually doing something.

I recognize that town can do this too, but I wouldn't classify this as scumreading you for doing anything towny. You do have better posts that make me feel maybe you just have a large desire to create content due to how excited you are for the game, even if it's very little things.

I would argue that a naked vote is not outright scummy, and sheeping an early wagon with a naked vote is not scummy either. I think it's actually pretty protown.

"I am considering suspecting" maybe poor wording. My kneejerk reaction was to scumread Uncrowned for obvious reasons, but the more I thought on it, I ended up closer to town. I had briefly considered voting there but I landed elsewhere.

In post 164, Uncrowned wrote:

In post 161, Marky Mark wrote:So tldr its an easy play as scum to avoid doing anything too controversial, while gently building heat on a slot in a way they can't directly refute.

Is it really an easy play if it's going to draw this much attention? There are plenty of better ways I could've entered this thread that wouldn't have made me the talking point/vote for multiple people.

Town can also build heat on a slot in that manner. Acting as if it's something only scum would do is flat out wrong and feels like an attempt at shading something and calling it scummy when it's definitely not exclusively scummy.

I mean we now know that it drew a lot of attention, but that is only through the benefit of hindsight.

and yeah tbf town can build heat on a slot too and there is merit in pushing a slot sometimes to see how they will react.

In post 166, Fidget wrote:You seem to be getting the idea that I'm scumreading you for being proactive/protown. What I find suspicious about you is how some of your posts give the appearance of being protown, but in reality are easy to make and mostly just make you seem like you're doing something than are actually doing something.

I recognize that town can do this too, but I wouldn't classify this as scumreading you for doing anything towny. You do have better posts that make me feel maybe you just have a large desire to create content due to how excited you are for the game, even if it's very little things.

Ok so if, as you say, being proactive is something that scum and town can both do, then that means you aren't SRing me for doing something towny, you are SRing me for doing something nullish?!

In post 148, Grendel wrote:No, historically town pr pops and outs info quicker and under less pressure then scum 9 times out of 10.

Scum have a lot more to lose if forced to claim early b/c it locks them into a claim, and makes the follow-up days harder. Like yes, they dont fear being NK'd, but they do fear town catching them at night, or town wondering why the player hinting at having a strong PR is still alive several days later.

Granted Porkens didnt hard claim. They hinted at having a confirmable/strong town role of some sort. So im not hard TRing them. But i think they presented a good enough reaction that I would town lean them.

I see. Thank you.

In post 144, cassowary wrote:Less flippantly: I don't find mark's behavior very scummy and I think a lot of the accusations on him look a bit like grasping. Unless, like, you know him really well and are super confident he wouldn't say 'lol' in this situation normally? I am not even convinced he appears that much to be a 'voice of reason.'

Don't know about the 'lol' thing. Here are some things that struck me as more performative than actually useful:

So, forcing reads early, what felt like overdoing it in RVS to me, and a couple of very SE/IC ish posts where he tells Pork/Grendel to stop arguing and answer each other, and asks Turin for his thoughts on anything.

I am somewhat appeased by Marky just being excited for the game, but there is a lingering question in my mind.

In post 125, Marky Mark wrote:'They are doing pro-town things, but it might be scum doing it for towncred'

In post 157, Marky Mark wrote:1.) Being proactive in RVS more likely comes from being scum than town - I agree here that scum care more about looking town, but town have another major incentive to be proactive: finding scum!

In post 159, Marky Mark wrote:Your point is still essentially that scum could replicate anything that I've done this game. This is true, but does not make me scum.

Mark never seems to frame my suspicions quite right, this is not what I'm saying nor the other people who have pointed out his potential performativeness. It is much easier to strike down our argument when he frames it this way. Intentional or not though, I don't know.

Hopefully that post explains it better, Mark?

Uncrowned (4): Mistyx, Marky Mark, Cassowary, Flea The Magician

I feel pretty confident there is scum on this wagon (or to a lesser extent, Uncrowned is scum, but that is not my current thinking).

In post 144, cassowary wrote:Re other thoughts, I find uncrowned's opening super weird - like, why come in that way? If you hadn't caught up on the game to have other opinions, why cast a vote in your first post when we were already kinda coming out of rvs? Feels like scum trying to imitate slacking town. I'll join the uncrowned wagon for the sake of having a vote somewhere.

I think this is a much better justification for voting Uncrowned than him being scummy for not contributing to the discussion. This is actually something I was considering myself. The last game I have seen of Uncrowned, he mentioned intentionally playing different to try out a new playstyle. It was less effort than his usual style (However, he did not naked vote in RVS, and he did have early reads, so not totally slacking so much as trying somewhat less). He was town that game, though.

In post 156, Flea The Magician wrote:Uncrowned calling out an over explaination with an over explaination seems dodge to me. VOTE: Uncrowned
*sips tea and noms a biccie*

This doesn't strike me as very good faith. Based on what criteria are you considering Uncrowned's response an over-explanation, and why does that make him scummy, in any case?

VOTE: Flea

In post 165, Porkens wrote:

In post 163, Vaxkiller wrote:lol

VOTE: Porkens

You think that was a sincere lol Vax?

I didn't even think about it. Just such a weird thing to nit-pick out of the all the other material he has said.

lol

i think fidget and cassowary are town

my issue with uncrowned's follow up posts is that they're focused on his own slot instead of trying to sort any others

so i think it's fair to keep pressuring him until that changes