Mafiascum.net

In post 149, furtiveglance wrote:

In post 146, DeltaWave wrote:

In post 144, furtiveglance wrote: I just thought Inutile was excited about playing, that's the vibe I got.

Have you played with inutile before?

I've played with similar players.

idk this is very reminiscent of how I played scum when I first started playing mafia. i'm not going to tunnel on him but i do feel it's suspect

i'm actually interested in hearing from the sideliners since this has mostly been the same few active people talking

@

The read on /shiki is more of a tone/meta read too. I've played with 's other alts and she also played in a game I hosted. To be fair, if someone has so many alts, they could just play in a different way on each alt and no one would notice. tends to play the exact same way tone-wise when she's town, and this game is no different. Her interactions with you sounds like town! sorting and your responses sound like a townie defending himself.

In post 22, inutile wrote:

In post 8, Ausuka wrote:This is a pretty standard game opener for this site, I didn't really have anything to say to you because nothing you said was alignment indicative, sorry for ignoring you

yeah your opener pretty paint by numbers but you're aware so

like

vote someone
say something about someone else in same post
encourage engagement
make an early read!!

I don't think it would be typical of scum to try to make a read out of this, but in my mind it reads as typical of town! to try to make a read out of you being friendly in your opening post (5).

She actually said herself what she does in mafia games, and I confirm that in my experience it's true:

In post 26, inutile wrote: but not alignment related, so! more a wondering aloud

Tl;dr: your interaction with looks like town vs. town, and shiki is just being herself.

As for strictly you, I would say that your tone reads as towny in general, but I would say that my townread of is stronger than my townread of you, as there is significantly less content and active scumhunting in your posts.

In post 131, BlueBloodedToffee wrote: Serious vote?

It wasn't when I cast it, but now that I have caught up, I don't really feel inclined to change it. I think pressure on that slot is justified.

I checked the past few Mini Normal 13 player setups and it seems like the norm is 10:3 with a few power roles.

In post 122, furtiveglance wrote:

In post 82, hoppip wrote:

In post 76, DeltaWave wrote:

In post 73, hoppip wrote:

In post 67, DeltaWave wrote:

In post 40, inutile wrote: i would rather this not continue to detract from us finding mafias

This has big "how do you do fellow kids" energy

VOTE: Inutile

What do you think of the rest of its posts?

frankly most of it confuses me and it seems like lots of weird rationalizations. unless this user is normally on edge all the time, it looks bad

Hmm...I suppose that's fair. But I'm not so sure that "looks bad" is the same as "looks scummy." For instance, I think it looks bad that you're shading Inutile for superficial reasons. But do you think that's scummy?

Town

If this was a Newbie game, I would be more likely to agree. But I find clueless behavior like this in Normal games more suspicious. I guess this is a risk actual newbies take if they don't play a newbie game before jumping to the Normal queue.

Vote Count 1.2

Nuclear Gandhi (3): Eiralox, Greeting, Frogsterking
inutile (3): DeltaWave, Nuclear Gandhi, Mohab500
DeltaWave (2): furtiveglance, BlueBloodedToffee
furtiveglance (1): Ausuka

Not Voting: Juice, inutile, hoppip, hutmeil

With 13 alive it takes 7 votes to forcibly remove a player.

Day 1 ends in (expired on 2022-08-28 15:00:00)

In post 141, Frogsterking wrote:Do what I said or I won't explain ANYTHING to you.

.........................................................

In post 131, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:

In post 100, Eiralox wrote:Bonsoir i be Eiralox and im here for the synth apocalypse.

Frogster and Mohab are lock town, we won't be voting there.

VOTE: Nuclear Ghandi

this is scum. guillotine asap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaGAk07qgf8

Well, you're seeing the game at the opposite end of the spectrum to me so we probably need to talk. All three of these are bad.

Nah i'm right. that's it for talk.

In post 92, Mohab500 wrote:

Vote: Inutile

I am just on the wagon, trying to lynch some rando early on good strat

How is this town? Eliminating some rando.....that's a low chance of success. Plus the use of 'just' - it's a minimiser. Mohab doesn't want to be looked at too closely for bandwagoning, and justifies it pre-emptively.

I have my reasons. No one's going to vote Mohab. Ghandi is still blatant scum. looking for the partners.

In post 160, Eiralox wrote:I have my reasons. No one's going to vote Mohab. Ghandi is still blatant scum. looking for the partners.

Do you want to share those reasons? Or at least invent some?

In post 131, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:Hi Ausuka, I think you're town and this is a bad vote. Change it please?

Hi - I do kind of see why people are going after Delta but I don't see it right now. I think furtive is more suspicious than anyone else and him broadly agreeing with your view on the gamestate doesn't really convince me otherwise

In post 143, furtiveglance wrote:

In post 120, Ausuka wrote:

In post 113, furtiveglance wrote:Here are some reads of mine.

Consensus (or close to consensus) reads I have:

Frogsterking, Ausuka, Inutile, Hoppip Town

Reads that aren't consensus (I think):

Nuclear Ghandhi Town, Mohab sus, DeltaWave sus

In post 67, DeltaWave wrote:

In post 40, inutile wrote: i would rather this not continue to detract from us finding mafias

This has big "how do you do fellow kids" energy

VOTE: Inutile

I sus DeltaWave for this, and I think their delayed omgus style interaction with hoppip (83) also is mafia.

VOTE: DeltaWave

I'd like if you could elaborate on your townreads.

Can you elaborate on your thoughts on 83 as well? I really do not see what you're seeing there

I missed this intially because I posted right after. I townread you for the progression on inutile, it looked natural. Frogsterking is making a lot of reads early on which I usually find towny. Inutile and Hoppip both just seem to have an innocent kind of energy, I can see their approaches to the game being from a town perspective.

83 interested me because DeltaWave says Hoppip is acting sus after their interaction in 82, in which Hoppip said DeltaWave 'shaded Inutile for superficial reasons', which is what it looked like to me as well. Hence I called it a delayed omgus.

Ok, the townreads don't do a lot for me but to be fair it is very early in the game, so

I don't think hoppip was really calling Delta suspicious in post 82. He seemed to be saying that Delta's point is bad but he's not necessarily scum for it. In any case, I'm still not really sure what you mean and why you find it suspicious - it's only one post after so not really delayed, and anyway don't you think town could suspect someone who they're in some sort of confrontation with? The idea of 'delayed omgus' just feels off to me honestly.

Ausuka, can you talk to me about why Furtive is scum please?

, any thoughts about my townreads?

In post 164, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:Ausuka, can you talk to me about why Furtive is scum please?

It's mostly vibes. The main thing I would say I don't like is his post pushing delta, more specifically I think the thing about "delayed omgus" feels artificial and I think is unlikely to come from a natural thought process.

In post 165, Greeting wrote:

Ausuka

, any thoughts about my townreads?

I think the inutile read is pretty convincing but I'm townreading it anyway.

One thing I'm wondering about is that you implied you townread me pretty heavily earlier but now are saying you don't think I've been scumhunting much - did your read change or something?

In post 167, Ausuka wrote:

In post 165, Greeting wrote:

Ausuka

, any thoughts about my townreads?

I think the inutile read is pretty convincing but I'm townreading it anyway.

One thing I'm wondering about is that you implied you townread me pretty heavily earlier but now are saying you don't think I've been scumhunting much - did your read change or something?

Wait, what? townreading . What do you mean by that sentence?

As for the read on you, while reading the thread, the tone and responses looked towny, but when I checked your ISO, the overall game contribution looked worse than ’s.

I know? I meant that your case would lean me to townread inutile, but I was townreading it anyway.

In post 161, furtiveglance wrote:

In post 160, Eiralox wrote:I have my reasons. No one's going to vote Mohab. Ghandi is still blatant scum. looking for the partners.

Do you want to share those reasons? Or at least invent some?

Im not sharing. And i'm starting to think you and ghandi are together. I don't like toffee's entrance or wrong read on frogster but I can still sort of see town there. But you? Toffee's defense of Ghandi is blatant, yours isn't and that wearies me.

In post 163, Ausuka wrote:

In post 143, furtiveglance wrote:

In post 120, Ausuka wrote:

In post 113, furtiveglance wrote:Here are some reads of mine.

Consensus (or close to consensus) reads I have:

Frogsterking, Ausuka, Inutile, Hoppip Town

Reads that aren't consensus (I think):

Nuclear Ghandhi Town, Mohab sus, DeltaWave sus

In post 67, DeltaWave wrote:

In post 40, inutile wrote: i would rather this not continue to detract from us finding mafias

This has big "how do you do fellow kids" energy

VOTE: Inutile

I sus DeltaWave for this, and I think their delayed omgus style interaction with hoppip (83) also is mafia.

VOTE: DeltaWave

I'd like if you could elaborate on your townreads.

Can you elaborate on your thoughts on 83 as well? I really do not see what you're seeing there

I missed this intially because I posted right after. I townread you for the progression on inutile, it looked natural. Frogsterking is making a lot of reads early on which I usually find towny. Inutile and Hoppip both just seem to have an innocent kind of energy, I can see their approaches to the game being from a town perspective.

83 interested me because DeltaWave says Hoppip is acting sus after their interaction in 82, in which Hoppip said DeltaWave 'shaded Inutile for superficial reasons', which is what it looked like to me as well. Hence I called it a delayed omgus.

Ok, the townreads don't do a lot for me but to be fair it is very early in the game, so

I don't think hoppip was really calling Delta suspicious in post 82. He seemed to be saying that Delta's point is bad but he's not necessarily scum for it. In any case, I'm still not really sure what you mean and why you find it suspicious - it's only one post after so not really delayed, and anyway don't you think town could suspect someone who they're in some sort of confrontation with? The idea of 'delayed omgus' just feels off to me honestly.

Ok, you're right that delayed omgus isn't the right term. It's a knee-jerk reaction nonetheless, it felt to me that DeltaWave didn't want to allow Hoppip to put a bit of sus on them without getting the last word. As to whether or not Hoppip did put sus on DeltaWave, I would argue the answer is yes, whether intentional or otherwise. They said that DeltaWave 'looked bad' to them. So I read into that a bit, I thought DeltaWave looked worse from the whole interaction. I understand your issue with buzzwords like 'omgus', I have the same thing. But in this case I thought it was notable that DeltaWave didn't let it slide, they said they would respond later but made the point of saying that hoppip was being 'somewhat sus'.

In post 170, Eiralox wrote:

In post 161, furtiveglance wrote:

In post 160, Eiralox wrote:I have my reasons. No one's going to vote Mohab. Ghandi is still blatant scum. looking for the partners.

Do you want to share those reasons? Or at least invent some?

Im not sharing. And i'm starting to think you and ghandi are together. I don't like toffee's entrance or wrong read on frogster but I can still sort of see town there. But you? Toffee's defense of Ghandi is blatant, yours isn't and that wearies me.

Is it not blatant? I was quite clear that I townread them, I suppose it's just an unepxlained read. Then again, Toffee (as you call him) hasn't explained his read on Gandhi either. What makes his read more blatant than mine?

I said defense, not reads. im not keen on repeating myself.

In post 170, Eiralox wrote:

In post 161, furtiveglance wrote:

In post 160, Eiralox wrote:I have my reasons. No one's going to vote Mohab. Ghandi is still blatant scum. looking for the partners.

Do you want to share those reasons? Or at least invent some?

Im not sharing. And i'm starting to think you and ghandi are together. I don't like toffee's entrance or wrong read on frogster but I can still sort of see town there. But you? Toffee's defense of Ghandi is blatant, yours isn't and that wearies me.

Another thing - I don't get the refusal to share. This game is about co-operation. If you repeatedly refuse to talk you're transgressing, which may get you a sanction. And 3 sanctions is a full desadulation. And I might vote you for the simple crime of not talking.