Mafiascum.net

In post 26, ItalianoVD wrote:

In post 20, Not_Mafia wrote:VOTE: Not_Mafia

Do it someone. Sheep him. :twisted:

In post 176, Nosferatu wrote:prodge to post when i'm sober

In post 174, callforjudgement wrote: I did mean #31. "Bad post".

In post 174, callforjudgement wrote: Optimal strategy for scum would generally be to lurk (and thus give nothing away), except that intentionally lurking tends to look scummy in its own right. So the next best option, and one that happens ridiculously often in practice, is making posts that don't do or mean anything to make it look like you aren't lurking; you get the benefits of lurking and dodge some of the disadvantages.

In post 174, callforjudgement wrote:I've been maintaining that this is a real tell for years (e.g. here). Actual results have been mixed; I've seen three joke scum claims, and one of them was from scum (from Firebringer here), but one of them was from Not_Mafia (for whom a scumclaim in the first post isn't alignment-indicative because he does it basically every game). So a 50% accuracy rate isn't that bad (given that only about a quarter of players are scum), although there isn't much data from my personal experience. (I can't remember where I first heard about the tell in question.)

In post 175, callforjudgement wrote:

In post 26, ItalianoVD wrote:

In post 20, Not_Mafia wrote:VOTE: Not_Mafia

Do it someone. Sheep him.

I just got reminded of this while ISOing N_M.

@ItalianoVD, are you townreading N_M?

In post 180, Frogsterking wrote:VOTE: Nosferatu

I'm not buying the sobriety excuse because I'm town and posting anyway right now. Nosferatu's post seems a little lurky and overconcerned. Like he thinks he can get away with it for an ML or two.

COJ seems overly concerned with Not_Mafia. I feel like he would be able to think more critically if he stopped mentioning Not_Mafia.

COJ and Not_Mafia nominated themselves for town leader and town "anti-town" and seem well suited for their roles respectively.

WaltertheDunce10 seems like he likes Twitter or LinkedIn or both.

In post 183, ItalianoVD wrote:

In post 174, callforjudgement wrote:Optimal strategy for scum would generally be to lurk (and thus give nothing away), except that intentionally lurking tends to look scummy in its own right. So the next best option, and one that happens ridiculously often in practice, is making posts that don't do or mean anything to make it look like you aren't lurking; you get the benefits of lurking and dodge some of the disadvantages.

Okay. And what about the other side of the coin? It’s not from scum but from the play style of said player?

In post 174, callforjudgement wrote:I've been maintaining that this is a real tell for years (e.g. here). Actual results have been mixed; I've seen three joke scum claims, and one of them was from scum (from Firebringer here), but one of them was from Not_Mafia (for whom a scumclaim in the first post isn't alignment-indicative because he does it basically every game). So a 50% accuracy rate isn't that bad (given that only about a quarter of players are scum), although there isn't much data from my personal experience. (I can't remember where I first heard about the tell in question.)

I disagree. I’ve seen it happen more from villagers and village power role players than from scum, not to say scum doesn’t do it, but I’ve seen it more the other way. (not on this site, but the other site I am a part of).

But in this case of SJReaver, a newb: 1) Do you really feel she would be more likely to do it and 2) Do you think her scum team would comfortably allow her to do it?

In post 184, ItalianoVD wrote:

In post 175, callforjudgement wrote:

In post 26, ItalianoVD wrote:

In post 20, Not_Mafia wrote:VOTE: Not_Mafia

Do it someone. Sheep him. :twisted:

I just got reminded of this while ISOing N_M.

@ItalianoVD, are you townreading N_M?

I don’t know really. Not_mafia’s reputation precedes him from what I’ve hear. :) I really wanted to see who would jump on him. That no one did, I’m not sure what to think. Do you have a better read and/or feel of him?

In post 149, Not_Mafia wrote:
Scum was still caught day 1

In post 159, RCEnigma wrote:Number by names is post count as of the vote count.

In post 162, WaltertheDunce10 wrote:That post by frog seems really weird considering the fact that it was his second post all game. Something to keep an eye on.
N_m do you have any thoughts on the playerbase other than you are proud of the fact you caught scum D1.

In post 165, Raya36 wrote:The interaction between Reaver and Walter at 31 felt weird or awkward maybe. Almost felt like maybe Walter was going for a push but then backed off when Reaver responded. I got the same feeling from 67.

callforjudgement's huge post 50 was a lot. I don't townread it but don't necessarily scum read it either. I just think it's something scum could do to try to take the credit of getting us out of rvs which is what seemed to be happening (55). After reading more it feels like he's either town tryharding or scum trying way too hard to be 'obvtown'. Time will tell.

I kinda like Banana for town. Just as an early gut read.


VOTE: callforjudgement

In post 168, WaltertheDunce10 wrote:hmm
I see where you come from on that.
I think he is a town lean for me because of his more recent posts like 142 and 147.

In post 48, WaltertheDunce10 wrote:5.
No.
Here I developed some even better questions!
1. Is it okay to put rotting produce into an uncooked stead as a filler?
What is the cinderblock you would like most as a pet?
Are pineapples good on pizzas?

In post 50, callforjudgement wrote:As usual, much of what's been posted so far isn't alignment-indicative, but there are a few people who are possible to get (weak) reads on, even this early.

The first player who caught my attention was SJReaver (newbie greeting tell in #13), but they've done it before as town (Newbie 2020). #13 still does seem a little off compared to SJReaver's usual first posts, but that might not be surprising for someone who usually replaces. #22 also strikes me as a bit strange, given that it's worded as a statement to nobody in particular. I can understand being angry with NM for quickhammering in a game in a past (he's historically done it quite a lot), but #13 isn't anger, and it isn't engaging with the person in question, or stating a read, or anything. It's just a statement, and I have no idea why it was made.

My biggest concern, though, is with RCEnigma. #36 and #37 look like the sort of posts made by someone who is trying to be hard to read, for whatever reason. #36 is just a straight-up "help a newbie" post; such posts are generally good for the game, but townies tend to answer them as a side thought while doing something else, whereas scum tend to realise "ooh, this is something I can answer without giving anything away" and just answer them, betraying the fact that they aren't really thinking about the game more generally. #37 is an incredibly guarded answer to RQS questions, and the first time I've seen such questions actually produce alignment-indicative answers.

VOTE: RCEnigma

In post 15, ItalianoVD wrote:1. What is your mafia experience?
2. What is your play style strength(s)? Weakness(es)? Do you know?
3. In your opinion, what is the most important thing to look for while scumhunting? While townreading?

1. I used to play more than I do nowadays, and mostly in small games (newbies, Micros, and replacing in late to larger games when the playerlist has become smaller). That's primarily due to a lack of time; I think it's important to avoid joining a game if you might have to replace out. That said, I am fairly experienced.
2. I'm good at looking town early on in games (even when I'm scum). However, I sometimes struggle with that later on; if I haven't established myself as locktown (or been nightkilled) within the first few days, people start getting paranoid of me. My scumhunting is somewhat spotty; sometimes i can catch entire scumteams (this happens more often than chance would predict), but sometimes I can be utterly wrong all game. Even when I do catch scum, it is frequently the case that my reason for the scum read can't possibly have been correct (I'm probably right for the wrong reasons more often than I'm right for the right reasons). I'm also a very experienced setup reviewer, and can often establish someone as 100% town because the setup wouldn't otherwise be balanced (so far I have a perfect record with this sort of read, although the conditions for it don't come up all that often).
3. Assuming we're talking about reading people from their dayplay, there isn't a real difference between scumhunting and townhunting; you just look at players and try to read them. In both cases, the best results I've had in terms of conscious reads have been from trying to figure out what someone is thinking and following their thought process (e.g. when Not_Mafia actually pays attention to the game and puts in effort, he's fairly easy to read this way).

In post 39, Gamma Emerald wrote:Also, VOTE: CFJ, I hope your play matches up to your role and setup design skills

Huh, have you never seen me play? We've been in enough games together, after all; was I the moderator every single time it happened?

In post 55, callforjudgement wrote:

In post 54, Frogsterking wrote:Heyyy page 3.

RVS VOTE: callforjudgement as a call for peace

OK, I don't like this. Not specifically because the RVS vote was on me, but because you made an RVS vote in the first place, and labelled it as one.

The whole point of RVS is to get the game started; initially we have no information, a little later we do have information because people have started posting. So the whole point is to do things that people can react to, to do things that let your alignment shine through, to try to pressure people into making mistakes.

If you post an RVS vote labelled as an RVS vote, then:

• People will know that there's no read basis behind your vote, = you aren't trying to get your vote target voted out, = it doesn't apply any pressure;
  
• You're making yourself hard to read, because the post could just as easily be made by any alignment;
  
• In addition to muddying the waters about your alignment, you're neither forming reads nor pushing reads. So you aren't doing any of the three things a townie should be doing.

If you're town, this isn't good enough. We're at page 3, there's already alignment-indicative content being posted (and potentially alignment-indicative lack of content), and this should be fairly obvious to anyone reading the thread (I even pointed it out in my previous post!) Your post would be one thing if you planned to read the thread after making it, and immediately corrected the vote to something real. But you didn't say you were going to do that, and it's been 10 minutes since you posted it (easily enough time to read 54 posts). This isn't good enough. Please read through the thread and try to look for reads, don't try to continue RVS once it's already ended.

In post 91, SJReaver wrote:

In post 89, ItalianoVD wrote:I’m out for tonight though. Will catch up and see what happening tomorrow.

Oh, thanks for giving us a post just to tell us you're not going to post anymore tonight. This totally adds to the gamestate and doesn't pad your post count.

Strange that I've never seen you post something so irrelevant on D1 before.

Wonder where you picked up the hab...

In post 75, Raya36 wrote:More from me tomorrow

Oh.

Hey guys! Hey guys! Hey guys!

Did you know that you can pull up a log of all of other people's posts and search for specific words? Try that with ItalianVD and search for the word 'tomorrow'

((spoiler alert: he's never talked about how he's going to catch up/read more/post more tomorrow before))

In post 96, geraintm wrote:

In post 46, RCEnigma wrote:By the end of page 3 I will have caught 1 scum.

Proceed.

Nope. By the end of day 1 no one will have caught scum. Never happened before, it isnt going to change here

In post 102, SJReaver wrote:

In post 89, ItalianoVD wrote:I’m out for tonight though. Will catch up and see what happening tomorrow.

^ Continued to visit the site on and off for two hours after I accused them of being scum. Didn't post anything in a public channel though.

In post 150, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 62, callforjudgement wrote:(PEDIT: re #58)

Why do you care about whether we're cultured, as opposed to whether we're scum? This is a Mafia game, not a classics exam. (Also, #4 doesn't have a single correct answer; Assyria no longer exists and its capital changed over time.)

There's only one town-indicative reason I can think of to make a post like #44, and if it were the actual reason, I'd expect you to have mentioned it.

As for your previous comment: I know I post a lot of text sometimes, but I'm trying to convince people to play in a more town-sided way. In the current metagame, town wins quite easily when townies put in effort, scum win quite easily when they don't. There are a lot of players out there (some of them in this game; hi Not_Mafia!) who are good players when they put their minds to it, but more commonly just end up passively floating through the game and eventually making everyone impossible to read.

I therefore see trying to persuade people to get their brains into gear as important, as I'm unlikely to win otherwise.

PEDIT re #59: I believe we're out of RVS as soon as anyone posts anything that can be scumhunted from. We were out of RVS

before

my two posts, not

because of

them. That's why I didn't cast a random vote, and why I don't expect any more random voting in this game.

(added bold)

The bolded comment was intended to be a town slip (as was the post pretty much) but I'm here to make the case it's actually NAI.

If judgement is unable to persuade people to get their brains in gear he's unlikely to win as town or mafia, because he's unable to persuade people. He even said "...as

I'm

unlikely to win otherwise", as though he's scum and the cognitive dissonance of saying "town is unlikely to win otherwise" was too great.

In post 153, BananaCucho wrote:Likeable = scummy

Now I've heard it all