Mafiascum.net

They all have their own hands but they come from different Moms Vote Count

I wish I knew that many daves

Lord Gurgi wrote:People. I was high and drunk when I voted for Farside. My initial post was my first post. At this point I'm asking about theory. I don't see why early meta reads should be any less legitimate than other early reads. Isn't meta most useful when you have the least information from other sources?

I don't think early meta is non-legit as a matter of principle. However, I can't think of a single early meta argument that I don't think is so weak as to be counterproductive.

pops wrote:
So I took a couple of seconds to say that I've seen farside start off a thread with a girl's club as town, so it's probably not a valid tell one way or the other. I don't have a metascumread or metatownread on farside, I just have evidence that the tell Amrun was trying to use is more a product of her social nature rather than her alignment.

Any reason you said "farside runs the estrogen club as town" rather than "I have seen farside run...etc"

scooby wrote:
My theory is that at least one scum is going to take the "serious approach" and try to look active in the breaking point, following also the criteria that scum don't put all eggs on one basket. Also, the "serious approach" basket had least people on it.

There's a fairly basic problem with this, and with most arguments that try to divide the players based on activity and then say "there are X scum in this or that group". Namely, whilst it is true that scum do not want to put all their eggs in one basket - not everything in this game is important enough to count as an "egg" (ie. something scum should actually be worried about).

For instance, nobody says "Well, half the players in this game are using good grammar. Scum don't want to put all their eggs in one basket...etc"

The key point is that the "all eggs in one basket" logic only works if scum actually think that there is any realistic risk in them all acting the same way - or even considering it to be risk-relevant to begin with

(especially in RVS when, I would argue, people are far less likely than normal to be strategically thinking from the perspective of their alignment)

Lurconis wrote:
Not a fan of Lord G's jumping on the scooby "wagon" either, seems to me like an attempt to get attention on someone other than himself.

1) Do you disagree with anything LG has said about scooby? If not, why shouldn't LG vote him?
2) Assume you are LG. Assume you are scum. How worried are you about the amount of attention people are giving you?

Alright, hey again folk, seems like the real game has started now.
First 4 pages = basically nothing. Only thing there is the pops post... not really a fan of the way that happened.. there was absolutely nothing to base anything on, so why try?
The scooby situation seems a bit ridiculous. I guess two arguments could be said. Scooby is town, and was looking for some logic to throw into the machine..... I agree with Scooby's logic. Most games I have seen thus far, there is scum within the first few serious posters.
No one on Scooby's list looks like they have any real tells yet, other than pops... that's another reason my vote is on pops.
Now let's assume Scooby is scum. Then this post would be motivated to get a lynch moved on with as fast as possible, AKA, he is joining the very B group that he made. ...Yeah I could see it being plausible, but unless told other wise by someone who knows scooby, I'm inclined to believe he was throwing logic into the puzzle.

Eeerrr sorry about that folk, that was me. For ISO purposes:
Alright, hey again folk, seems like the real game has started now.
First 4 pages = basically nothing. Only thing there is the pops post... not really a fan of the way that happened.. there was absolutely nothing to base anything on, so why try? vote:popsofctown
The scooby situation seems a bit ridiculous. I guess two arguments could be said. Scooby is town, and was looking for some logic to throw into the machine..... I agree with Scooby's logic. Most games I have seen thus far, there is scum within the first few serious posters.
No one on Scooby's list looks like they have any real tells yet, other than pops... that's another reason my vote is on pops.
Now let's assume Scooby is scum. Then this post would be motivated to get a lynch moved on with as fast as possible, AKA, he is joining the very B group that he made. ...Yeah I could see it being plausible, but unless told other wise by someone who knows scooby, I'm inclined to believe he was throwing logic into the puzzle.

DrippingGoofball wrote:Do you have a hard six-pack?

I don't know about six pack, but feel free to rate my arms:



You may allow the flattery to bias your opinion.

Lord Gurgi wrote:Also, High Lord Gurgi (haha) thinks that everyone should

Vote: Farside22

. Do it now.

Why.

elvis_knits wrote:OK so kison or umbrage is a double voter. We should probably figure that out so that nobody can go "whoops" later. Unless the person with a double vote already knows, in which case fess up now.

I am the double voter. Fuck with me or my homeboy/girl town kids in the hall and you will feel my unending wrath.

Lord Gurgi wrote:Farside, it's meta. You're scum, I can feel it. Also it was a cross faded read, so I stick with it.

Lord Gurgi wrote:Why can't you have early meta reads? This is a strange concept to me.

What is/was your meta read. You are being sketch.

scooby wrote:I'd say that it's more likely we find scum in group B just for the fact that scum want to look active in the breaking point.

This is horribly bad, you oozing sack of scum. This argument could be used at any point of the game, but it does not make it right.




Take two for the road.

Lurconis wrote:Do we think Kison didn't know about the double vote power and didn't tell us or it was a passive ability?

Why are you so curious about my godlike powers.

Lain wrote:I agree with Scooby's logic. Most games I have seen thus far, there is scum within the first few serious posters.

Well, duh.

In any game of Mafia, roughly 25% of players, at least, will be scum. So, if you keep tabs on whether or not any of the first 3 or 4 "serious" posters in a game are scum, it will almost certainly turn out that, on average, at least one of them is scum.

That's a completely boring statistic and is absolutely useless as far as scumhunting goes.

No one on Scooby's list looks like they have any real tells yet, other than pops... that's another reason my vote is on pops.

1) Define "real tells" in the context of RVS. As in, RVS is mostly about finding material to question on, etc. I haven't given Scooby any of my scumpoints yet (see first two lines of this for an explanation of what I mean), but the line of inquiry is valid.
2) What "real tells" are there on pops?

Now let's assume Scooby is scum. Then this post would be motivated to get a lynch moved on with as fast as possible, AKA, he is joining the very B group that he made. ...Yeah I could see it being plausible, but unless told other wise by someone who knows scooby, I'm inclined to believe he was throwing logic into the puzzle.

Wait...so because, on your reading, scooby's argument would be contradictory, that makes it likely he is scum?

(FWIW: I don't think his argument is contradictory. At some point, a player has to be able to say "I think these people became serious too early on" - though, whether or that sort of argument is BS or not is an different matter )

Kison wrote:
I don't know about six pack, but feel free to rate my arms:

<snip to avoid cringing>

You may allow the flattery to bias your opinion.

Policy lynch anyone????

Im afraid he'll punch me...

Took Weerz wrote:Most games I have seen thus far, there is scum within the first few serious posters.

Did you know that in most games if you pick 1/4 of the playerlist at random, there's a really good chance you'll hit scum? Should I even bother reading posts, or should I just pick my scumreads based on die roles?

Die roles? We can be a die? Are you softclaiming dice, UT?

>_<

rolls, you dick

Took Weerz wrote:Most games I have seen thus far, there is scum within the first few serious posters.

There is scum in the players whose first posts have an even number of words.
There is scum in the players that post pictures.
There is scum in the players that scratch their scalps while posting.
There is scum in the players that lurk.
There is scum in the players that wall-post.
There is scum in the players that are quick to get serious in the RVS.
There is scum in the players that are lactose-intolerant.
There is scum in the players that don't have a /confirm post.

I think I cracked the game.

DrippingGoofball wrote:

Took Weerz wrote:Most games I have seen thus far, there is scum within the first few serious posters.

There is scum in the players whose first posts have an even number of words.
There is scum in the players that post pictures.
There is scum in the players that scratch their scalps while posting.
There is scum in the players that lurk.
There is scum in the players that wall-post.
There is scum in the players that are quick to get serious in the RVS.
There is scum in the players that are lactose-intolerant.
There is scum in the players that don't have a /confirm post.

I think I cracked the game.

Why are you ignoring the scum in the players who have even numbers on the playerlist? Is it because you are one of them?

Stuff that's caught my attention:

VP Baltar 101 "Anyone claiming meta on page four of a game with an excessively jokey RVS is probably scum." If the RVS is excessively jokey, there's not much else to go with. I don't think VP Baltar is being genuine here.
farside22 108-114-116: It seems to me like farside22 took Gurgi's meta vote on her too seriously. Why not just laugh off or ignore an early crappily weak meta read on her, if she's town? Her reaction fits better with scum with a guilty conscience.
VP Baltar 126: "so you want to have a pedantic debate about the worthiness of early meta is what you're saying?" is a bit of a misrep of Gurgi, because farside22 and VP Baltar were the ones questioning the validity of the meta read (e.g. farside22 121 and VP Baltar 124. So it's not like Lord Gurgi started a theory discussion out of the blue.
scooby 142: "scum want to look active in the breaking point" - I think this is projection on scooby's part: he's scum and wants to look active, and he's projecting that logic onto everyone else.
scooby 148: "Prove this. Now." This is very much a gut hunch, but that abrupt response sounds to me like it could come from scum happy to have found something they can legitimately challenge someone about.

Lurconis 157: "Don't think farside is scum and don't like that people started jumping on it."
Lurconis 158: "Ok so upon rereading it doesn't seem like either of the other two votes on farside were serious.[...]Not a fan of Lord G's jumping on the scooby "wagon" ..."

I get a sense here of Lurconis thinking he could play the "start a wagon then switch to jumping on people who jump on the wagon" approach, as a pre-planned tactic rather than genuine scumhunting. The 'either' in the second sentence quoted from 158 contradicts the first sentence - the 'either' must be implying Lord Gurgi's vote on farside22 was scummy too, but he says Lord Gurgi's vote on farside wasn't serious. But Lord Gurgi can't have jumped on the wagon in a scummy way if it was just a joke vote.

vollkan 177: "I don't think early meta is non-legit as a matter of principle. However, I can't think of a single early meta argument that I don't think is so weak as to be counterproductive." Even very weak reads early game aren't counterproductive - if nothing else, they start discussion and move things out of RVS.

How I see things at the moment:

Looking ugly: farside22, Lurconis, scooby, VP Baltar
Softly tweaking my doubts: elvis_knits, Mysterio, popsofctown
Still in the closet: Internet Stranger, Medicated Lain, Mist Beauty, SpyreX, MrBuddyLee
Some warm feelings towards: Amrun, Porochaz, vollkan
Handsomely townish: DGB, Kison, Lord Gurgi, Umbrage, Untrod Tripod

no harm adding to the pressure on him

@scooby: why is SpyreX scum (as you stated in 142)? And, if you felt so strongly enough to state it as baldly as that, why didn't you vote him instead of pops?

Kison wrote:

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm that's pretty hunky dory, it looks like Mysterio has some competition. That Corona hat and the painted on mustache sure are draws.

I'm looking for a long-term boyfriend, though. I want to play house. Do you want to play house with me?

imaginality wrote:scooby 142: "scum want to look active in the breaking point" -

I think this is projection

on scooby's part: he's scum and wants to look active, and he's projecting that logic onto everyone else.
scooby 148: "Prove this. Now." This is very much a gut hunch, but that abrupt response sounds to me like it could come from scum happy to have found something they can legitimately challenge someone about.

This sort of argument is like a siren's song to me.

VOTE: Scooby

imaginality wrote:@scooby: why is SpyreX scum (as you stated in 142)? And, if you felt so strongly enough to state it as baldly as that, why didn't you vote him instead of pops?

FOS buddy, vote townie?

@imaginality the either was refremcing scooby, I agreed with umbrage he seemed scummy but was not a fan of lod g's joining that wagon either. Probably less clear cause of the kison ?

@kison I was asking about your god like powers to establish if was something you knew about or if there was mod surprises. Also nice hat but you should put on a dif shirt or the chicken lady will show up and that clucking can get annoying

-from phone

Dammit, I have got to stop this habit of opening the reply window, typing up a reply, and then completely forgetting about it.

scooby wrote:

Umbrage wrote:I

find only scum do the group A/group B trick.

It gives the illusion of scumhunting when you're really saying anyone could be scum.

Prove this. Now.

How about this: I've always done it as scum, and never as town. I've never seen it successfully used to catch scum. I've never seen it provide solid reasoning to vote someone, it's always used as an excuse to vote the person they want to vote.

And this isn't even touching the fact that the scum had to purposefully had different attitudes in RVS for your theory to hold water, and that doesn't seem likely at all. I challenge you to find a game where this happened. Hell, I challenge you to find a game where somebody went "HEY, THOSE TWO GUYS WERE JOKING AND SERIOUS IN RVS, THEY MUST BE TEH SCUMZ!!!".

It's a bullshit tell used in a scummy way.

Scooby wagon is okay.
-Theory is full of fail (but town have crap theories sometimes too)
-His demarcation between groups A and B is wrong (who he put in the groups makes me question his perception or think he's bending things for scummy purposes)
-His choice of pops from group B is not supported (so feels like he just wants to get on the wagon - this is the scummiest part, IMO)
-Defense of Lord Gurgi is also nonsensical and scummy
-Random jibe at SpyreX feels off (somebody mentioned this also).

I don't like some of the stuff people have said about Scooby though:
-Prozac saying the "Prove this.Now." is making demands and scummy. I feel like anybody could say the Prove This Now thing. But Prozac also sites Umbrage's reasons, which I like, so w/e I don't hate Prozac. But I do feel Prozac teased me with the promise of a picture of cats having sex.
-Vollkan went professor mafia on Scooby telling him why his theory is crap, even though I think several people already did this. This wasn't horrible, but it made me tingle, and not the way that Kison makes me tingle. Reason is 1)Didn't add anything to convo; 2)If you're going to explain everything like the professor then tell me why you think his particular bad theory is more likely from scum than town.
-imaginality bothers me the most:

DrippingGoofball wrote:

imaginality wrote:scooby 142: "scum want to look active in the breaking point" -

I think this is projection

on scooby's part: he's scum and wants to look active, and he's projecting that logic onto everyone else.
scooby 148: "Prove this. Now." This is very much a gut hunch, but that abrupt response sounds to me like it could come from scum happy to have found something they can legitimately challenge someone about.

This sort of argument is like a siren's song to me.

VOTE: Scooby

I can't believe DGB likes this. It's like all imaginality's arguments are about scooby's motivations, which imaginality can't actually know so it's obvious he's making it up.

Other news:

Kison is sexy.

Pops explanation is okay. I'm not hot on him anymore. Except pops and Amrun having their own romantic interlude and ignoring Scooby drama is borderline weird.

Went back and reread LG. His first post calls farside scum. His third post, 31 hours later, says he's high and votes farside. Then he says it's meta. Then he tries to defend himself by blaming it all on being high and drunk. Was he high and drunk all weekend? I never did drugs, so I dunno, but I feel like this story keeps changing and still makes no sense.

Scum:
LG
Imaginality

Maybe:
Scooby

Town:
DGB
Umbrage



VOTE: Lord Gurgi

Actually, I don't find LG's actions that scummy. All anyone's been able to prove is that he wasn't paying attention to the game. Farside's been far scummier. She's ignored the scooby case to keep attacking Lord Gurgi, OMGUS anyone?

Farside is always like that. It's basically pointless to attack her if you want a better read on her. Response to pressure helps me read most people, but not with her.

With LG it's not about not paying attention, it's about blaming his actions on meta (when there was almost no posts in this game to go off for comparision), and also blaming his actions on being high and drunk, when there was a 31 hour time gap. I mean... is he saying he was high and drunk all that time? Maybe I'm old and not hip to these things anymore, and as I said, I never did drugs, but that kinda seems like a long time to be high and drunk.

I think I was correct in my RVS vote actually. He did claim to be high when he made the vote. EK not reading back over that interaction at this point to double check herself makes me suspicious.

I did read it back and I know he said he was high when he voted farside. But he said farside was scum in his first post, 31 hours before the post where he said he was high.

so you're suggesting he planned out the high comment and backpedal from that vote later?