Mafiascum.net

In post 1804, Skullduggery wrote:

In post 1791, Nero Cain wrote:There's no way that Malcolm forced those players to vote for Goat and I honestly think its fucking retarded that you, Skull and Mac? think that he did.

That's not why I'm voting for Malcolm.

Malcolm had made it clear that Mutley/Krab and Goat were two of his top Scum reads. He had also made it clear that he intended to kill Goat during the night. If it looked like Mutley was going to get lynched, why would he switch his vote to Goat at the last minute -- especially since he was supposedly planning to just kill Goat himself? Why not just lynch one and kill the other? What is the Town motivation behind that last-minute vote switch? I don't see it. I suspect that Malcolm is lying. That's why I'm voting for him right now.

This very closely mirrors Despo's post. I mean, I just don't see Malcolm as the biggest contributor to NL. I'm also thinkin' that his vig claim was bullocks, but even if it was a real claim there's reasons that a kill may have failed so I'm not a big fan of this "you said you'd do this and it didn't happen. die liar scum!!" thinking.

In post 1806, Amethyst Actor wrote:It wouldn't be the first time Nacho pussied on a scum read, and I don't think he's done that as town.

So you are implying that Malcolm is scum?

In post 1807, The Goat wrote:Regarding Malcolm, 1712 about sums it up. I kept getting the impression that he was rolefishing.

You'll have to explain how you get rolefishing.

In post 1825, Nero Cain wrote:You'll have to explain how you get rolefishing.

In post 1564, xMALCOLMx wrote:

In post 1504, The Goat wrote:I like that...as of this past Friday...you've actually stated cases for why people are scum, instead of just criticizing others. But I really wanted to bold the above. You know...in case I end up dead.

Why? Do you assume that as scum we would nightkill you?

So Malcolm unvotes Mutley. Darthe, Petapan and ESQ all vote Goat. Jebus, angel and fuzzy all don't vote. You then "blame" Malcolm for the no lynch. Both ESQ and Peta claim they didn't vote Mutly 'cause they misunderstood when the deadline was. I then ask you why Malcolm should be held accountable for the actions of 3 other players.

And this

Mutley was at 10 votes and almost certain to be hammered, until Malcolm unvoted to vote Goat, who had 2 votes on him at the time. So instead of it being mutley 10, Goat 2 with eight chances to hammer mutley, it was mutley 9, Goat 3 and then mutley, darthe, esquire, and peta all voted Goat when there was literally no chance of that lynch ever going through

doesn't seem like a valid reason for why they (darthe, peta, esq) did what they did.

I said "I will be voting in the group of 8 people who either didn't vote or voted Goat at the end of the day today."

but you also said "But Malcolm should die first because he's the one who gave everyone an opportunity to vote Goat without having to explain why they didn't hammer mutley." So it looks like you are talking out of both sides of your mouth.

I mean, obviously this is something you believe in. What if we were to lynch Malcolm today and he flips town? Do you really want me to believe that you'll just drop it and move on? But then I'd question how much you actually believed in this. So on one hand you aren't chain lynching from the list but on the other hand your willing to drop it?

Its scumhunting and my opinion. You give a list of 8 players, call them all scummy, push for a lynch on the "leader". I question your motivation and your more or less "just trust me, I'm town!!! This is not chain lynching." Do you trust me? If you don't why do you think I should trust you?

I don't like a single one of ESQ, Peta, Darthe, Fuzzy or Jebus, all of whom (save Darthe) were in my lynch/scummy list in 1119 yesterday. I do think its a good possibility that there's a scummer or two in that list of 5. I think the crux of the problem is that I don't see Malcolm as the biggest offender as you seem to imply. It also makes me wary b/c I think its likely that there's a scum in ESQ, peta, darthe and you trying to lynch away from those three is fishy to me.

What do you think of Peta's and ESQ's reason that they didn't vote Mutley?

Mara: Can I get your reads on Goat, Despo and petapan please?

In post 1827, Nero Cain wrote:So Malcolm unvotes Mutley. Darthe, Petapan and ESQ all vote Goat. Jebus, angel and fuzzy all don't vote. You then "blame" Malcolm for the no lynch. Both ESQ and Peta claim they didn't vote Mutly 'cause they misunderstood when the deadline was. I then ask you why Malcolm should be held accountable for the actions of 3 other players.

And this

Mutley was at 10 votes and almost certain to be hammered, until Malcolm unvoted to vote Goat, who had 2 votes on him at the time. So instead of it being mutley 10, Goat 2 with eight chances to hammer mutley, it was mutley 9, Goat 3 and then mutley, darthe, esquire, and peta all voted Goat when there was literally no chance of that lynch ever going through

doesn't seem like a valid reason for why they (darthe, peta, esq) did what they did.

You are continually misinterpreting my argument, no matter how many times I try to rephrase it.

I said "I will be voting in the group of 8 people who either didn't vote or voted Goat at the end of the day today."

but you also said "But Malcolm should die first because he's the one who gave everyone an opportunity to vote Goat without having to explain why they didn't hammer mutley." So it looks like you are talking out of both sides of your mouth.

I mean, obviously this is something you believe in. What if we were to lynch Malcolm today and he flips town? Do you really want me to believe that you'll just drop it and move on? But then I'd question how much you actually believed in this. So on one hand you aren't chain lynching from the list but on the other hand your willing to drop it? [/quote]

That I'll just drop what? I have three separate lines of thinking going right now: mutley is scum, Malcolm is scum, and there is almost definitely scum in the other 7 people who allowed the NL to occur.

Its scumhunting and my opinion. You give a list of 8 players, call them all scummy, push for a lynch on the "leader". I question your motivation and your more or less

"just trust me, I'm town!!! This is not chain lynching."

Do you trust me? If you don't why do you think I should trust you?

Seriously what the hell? I never said anything resembling the bolded, I expressed confusion as to how you could simultaneously agree that the 8 players who allowed the NL to occur are scummy, but call it a chain-lynching scheme when I say it. Why do you keep saying I said things that I didn't say while simultaneously...

I don't like a single one of ESQ, Peta, Darthe, Fuzzy or Jebus, all of whom (save Darthe) were in my lynch/scummy list in 1119 yesterday. I do think its a good possibility that there's a scummer or two in that list of 5. I think the crux of the problem is that I don't see Malcolm as the biggest offender as you seem to imply. It also makes me wary b/c I think its likely that there's a scum in ESQ, peta, darthe and you trying to lynch away from those three is fishy to me.

What do you think of Peta's and ESQ's reason that they didn't vote Mutley?

Asking me questions that I've already given the answer to?

In post 1772, Desperado wrote:It's really unfortunate that all of you are going to be able to chalk this up to mod error, because it's true. Esquire noted the error on the 14th, Nexus acknowledged it on the 15th, and then never changed it in his vote count. Oh well.

The only conclusions I can draw are you a) aren't actually reading my posts, or b) pretending that you aren't reading them for some other purpose. So which is it?

If he flips town we are killing Despo.

In post 1825, Nero Cain wrote:

In post 1806, Amethyst Actor wrote:It wouldn't be the first time Nacho pussied on a scum read, and I don't think he's done that as town.

So you are implying that Malcolm is scum?

Dad thinks mom misspoke but I'm not sure.

I just read through everything and I'm inclinded to lean towards Despo scum... I want to hear from Malcom first however.

In post 1830, Nero Cain wrote:

vote:Malcolm

If he flips town we are killing Despo.

If he flips scum do we get to kill you instead?

If they want.

Why would we lynch someone that's on the wagon of the person we want lynched?

'cause Despo is scum you dork.

In post 1834, MonkeyMan576 wrote:Why would we lynch someone that's on the wagon of the person we want lynched?

Because he only joined the wagon grudgingly, after trying (and failing) to defend Malcolm? Look at how many times I had to say "that isn't what I said" or how many times he asked me a question that I had already given the answer to before he asked it. He was not engaging my case on Malcolm in good faith, even though Malcolm falls in to, and in my opinion is the scummiest of, the group of 8 that Nero has said we should be looking at it today.

Essentially he's saying "yeah Malcolm is scummy but it wasn't his fault and what about all these other people that let it happen, where was the town motivation there?" as if I disagree with him and didn't already say that myself. He just doesn't like us specifically lynching Malcolm over esquire, peta, and others because our assertion that malcolm is most responsible for the NL is "a load of bull (citation needed)" when, in my opinion, Malcolm is CLEARLY the most at fault for the NL when you consider that the Doctor hydra voted Mutley Malcolm never unvotes, Mutley never has a reason to get off his own wagon after campaigning for his lynch, Demencha hammers mutley and this conversation never happens.

If Malcolm flips SHIELD scum like I expect he will, then Nero and Mutley are both excellent candidates for his partners.

Malcolm's actions gave whoever that player/those players are an opportunity to also not vote Mutley without having to explain why they didn't hammer him. So he's scummy for unvoting in the first place, and he's also scummy because, as we both agree that there is scum in the other 7 people who voted Goat/didn't vote, he allowed whoever that is to get away with it as well.

No he didn't. Once Malcolm unvoted Mut was at 9 votes. 2 of Darthe, petapan, ESQ could have easily hammered him. The no lynch is just as much their fault too. Your "well its more Malcolm's fault" is retarded.

He never "allowed" anything.

I have three separate lines of thinking going right now: mutley is scum, Malcolm is scum, and there is almost definitely scum in the other 7 people who allowed the NL to occur.

So I accuse you of wanting to chain lynch, you tell me no but regardless of Malcolm' flip you'll still want to lynch in those 7 players. How exactly is that not chain lynching?

Seriously what the hell? I never said anything resembling the bolded, I expressed confusion as to how you could simultaneously agree that the 8 players who allowed the NL to occur are scummy, but call it a chain-lynching scheme when I say it. Why do you keep saying I said things that I didn't say while simultaneously...

Scum are liars. They aren't going to say what they really mean but I guess that it is multiball so scum legit hunt the other team. You were all, "lets lynch Malcolm" I assume that once Malcolm flips then you'll want to lynch from the other 7 players. So from my perspective it does look a heck of a lot like chain lynching. Telling me that its not is basically asking me to that you are telling the truth.

Look at how many times I had to say "that isn't what I said"

look more "trust what I say" type posts.

I DON'T think Malcolm is very scummy. I'm only agreeing that "yeah, ok, their unvote was kinda boneheaded"

In post 1836, Desperado wrote:If Malcolm flips SHIELD scum like I expect he will, then Nero and Mutley are both excellent candidates for his partners.

and Despo claims Heyman mafia

In post 1837, Nero Cain wrote:

Malcolm's actions gave whoever that player/those players are an opportunity to also not vote Mutley without having to explain why they didn't hammer him. So he's scummy for unvoting in the first place, and he's also scummy because, as we both agree that there is scum in the other 7 people who voted Goat/didn't vote, he allowed whoever that is to get away with it as well.

No he didn't. Once Malcolm unvoted Mut was at 9 votes. 2 of Darthe, petapan, ESQ could have easily hammered him. The no lynch is just as much their fault too. Your "well its more Malcolm's fault" is retarded.

He never "allowed" anything.

You completely ignored the fact that Malcolm + mutley unvoted less than an hour before Doctor put Mutley back on L-2. Their unvotes are directly responsible for the NL, and I'm obviously not going to hold mutley's vote against him (he's scum for other reasons), so Malcolm is the vote.

I have three separate lines of thinking going right now: mutley is scum, Malcolm is scum, and there is almost definitely scum in the other 7 people who allowed the NL to occur.

So I accuse you of wanting to chain lynch, you tell me no but regardless of Malcolm' flip you'll still want to lynch in those 7 players. How exactly is that not chain lynching?

Weren't you just arguing that Malcolm is less scummy than all of those players? If Malcolm were to flip town, you wouldn't be looking at the other people who played a role in the NL anymore? Or what?

My point is that my original quote was that "I will be looking at these 8 players today" and you called that a chain lynching scheme, even though you agreed with me. This happened before the quote you just provided. Explain that please.

Seriously what the hell? I never said anything resembling the bolded, I expressed confusion as to how you could simultaneously agree that the 8 players who allowed the NL to occur are scummy, but call it a chain-lynching scheme when I say it. Why do you keep saying I said things that I didn't say while simultaneously...

Scum are liars. They aren't going to say what they really mean but I guess that it is multiball so scum

CAN

legit hunt the other team. You were all, "lets lynch Malcolm" I assume that once Malcolm flips then you'll want to lynch from the other 7 players. So from my perspective it does look a heck of a lot like chain lynching. Telling me that its not is basically asking me to

TRUST

that you are telling the truth.

And your perspective is not necessarily reality. I specifically said I would be looking at those players and you took it upon yourself to cry wolf and put some words in my mouth.

Look at how many times I had to say "that isn't what I said"

look more "trust what I say" type posts.

...What that quote have to do with me asking anyone to trust me? You have repeatedly misrepresented my argument and asked me questions that already had answers in the posts that you quoted and, presumably, had read, in any attempt to discredit my argument...until you couldn't find any traction on anything and eventually voted with me with some lame "if he's town we are lynching Desp" caveat

I DON'T think Malcolm is very scummy. I'm only agreeing that "yeah, ok, their unvote was kinda boneheaded"

So you're going to fencesit then. How could you possibly agree that his unvote was boneheaded but not find it scummy when, had he not done it, Your position is not consistent.

In post 1836, Desperado wrote:If Malcolm flips SHIELD scum like I expect he will, then Nero and Mutley are both excellent candidates for his partners.

[/quote][/quote]

LOL

In post 1822, Amethyst Actor wrote:

In post 1806, Amethyst Actor wrote:VOTE: Mutt

and I don't think that's a good reason to vote Malcom. It wouldn't be the first time Nacho pussied on a scum read, and I don't think he's done that as town.

let's get this shit right here though, I would totally be down to lynch Sven. not entirely sure about Goat

Mom, please tell me you meant that you don't think Nacho's done that as scum... Because this post looks so bad there...

However I do agree with Mom's Vote. And will not move it so that's where things stand.

Also Mutt, that's why we think you two are scum together...

Uhh... Yea, that's what I meant

and I don't think that's a good reason to vote Malcom. It wouldn't be the first time Nacho pussied on a scum read, and I don't think he's done that as scum.

Nacho=town was running through my mind so...

In post 1828, Nero Cain wrote:Mara: Can I get your reads on Goat, Despo and petapan please?

Scum, null... leaning town, townish in that order... why? oh, you're probs town too Nero


but why would you only kill Desp if Nacho/Kise flip town?

Goat is weak scum though

In post 1837, Nero Cain wrote:

Malcolm's actions gave whoever that player/those players are an opportunity to also not vote Mutley without having to explain why they didn't hammer him. So he's scummy for unvoting in the first place, and he's also scummy because, as we both agree that there is scum in the other 7 people who voted Goat/didn't vote, he allowed whoever that is to get away with it as well.

No he didn't. Once Malcolm unvoted Mut was at 9 votes. 2 of Darthe, petapan, ESQ could have easily hammered him. The no lynch is just as much their fault too. Your "well its more Malcolm's fault" is retarded.

He never "allowed" anything.

I have three separate lines of thinking going right now: mutley is scum, Malcolm is scum, and there is almost definitely scum in the other 7 people who allowed the NL to occur.

So I accuse you of wanting to chain lynch, you tell me no but regardless of Malcolm' flip you'll still want to lynch in those 7 players. How exactly is that not chain lynching?

Seriously what the hell? I never said anything resembling the bolded, I expressed confusion as to how you could simultaneously agree that the 8 players who allowed the NL to occur are scummy, but call it a chain-lynching scheme when I say it. Why do you keep saying I said things that I didn't say while simultaneously...

Scum are liars. They aren't going to say what they really mean but I guess that it is multiball so scum

CAN

legit hunt the other team. You were all, "lets lynch Malcolm" I assume that once Malcolm flips then you'll want to lynch from the other 7 players. So from my perspective it does look a heck of a lot like chain lynching. Telling me that its not is basically asking me to

TRUST

that you are telling the truth.

Look at how many times I had to say "that isn't what I said"

look more "trust what I say" type posts.

I DON'T think Malcolm is very scummy. I'm only agreeing that "yeah, ok, their unvote was kinda boneheaded"

In post 1836, Desperado wrote:If Malcolm flips SHIELD scum like I expect he will, then Nero and Mutley are both excellent candidates for his partners.

and Despo claims Heyman mafia

vote:Despo

I'm starting to understand you. You tunnel REALLY hard, and make pejorative leaps in logic when you're sure you're right.

In post 1810, Ravenpaw wrote:Why didn't you vote Arc, I was online for the deadline and I saw you online as well so why no vote?

Just out of curiosity, did you happen to see TheEsquire online at that time too? He said that he was online right at the deadline, so if you saw him, we'd at least know that he was telling the truth about that.

In post 1821, Ravenpaw wrote:

In post 1819, MonkeyMan576 wrote:It's suspicious that you are 1) Attacking Arc so hard 2) Not voting for her 3) Not on the major wagon.

1) Lol, this is (I think) the first thing I've said to Arc all game:

Why didn't you vote Arc, I was online for the deadline and I saw you online as well so why no vote?

And you call that

attacking so hard

? Really? Really?? Really???
2) Have I even said I find Arc scummy? No, I haven't, I have just asked her a question.
3) My top scum read is Mutley so that's where I will vote (for now).

Cut it out, Monkeyman. Ferretlover is the worst player in this game, so why are you trying to take that distinction from him? So selfish.

In post 1825, Nero Cain wrote:This very closely mirrors Despo's post. I mean, I just don't see Malcolm as the biggest contributor to NL. I'm also thinkin' that his vig claim was bullocks, but even if it was a real claim there's reasons that a kill may have failed so I'm not a big fan of this "you said you'd do this and it didn't happen. die liar scum!!" thinking.

You make it sound like my vote is set in stone and I'm dead set on lynching Malcolm today. That is not the case. I don't want to say anything more than that until Malcolm decides to grace us with his presence and give us his side of the story.

In post 1825, Nero Cain wrote:I'm also thinkin' that his vig claim was bullocks

In post 1837, Nero Cain wrote:I DON'T think Malcolm is very scummy.

Under what circumstances is it not scummy to pretend to be a Vig?

Under the circumstances that I'd be a hypocrite since I've done the whole fake vig thing before. But you're right, we should hear from Malcolm.

In post 1843, Nero Cain wrote:Under the circumstances that I'd be a hypocrite since I've done the whole fake vig thing before. But you're right, we should hear from Malcolm.

This be wat I'm saying.

I'd also like to hear a little from Esquire and AA.

Nero, you've got me wondering about Darthe, TheEsquire, and Petapan now. Found something odd in Petapan's ISO.

In post 872, petapan wrote:krab bucket's reaction to the fake dayvig was crap and i'd have no problems voting them but they're getting replaced anyway so voting them does nothing for me right now

In post 984, petapan wrote:anyway in general since this is nearing a deadline lynch i'm going to say i'm more squicked by krab's reaction to the fake daykill than gcbc's potential motivations for it - i've seen scum pull the trick before to rolefish but the hyperbolic outrage is a thing i find scum tend to do

actually

you know what bothers me?

it's the fact that he immediately got outraged at the cops BEFORE any response from svenskt or waiting on a result. he just raged, immediately, and voted them. like he was prepared for sven flipping town.

i really hate lynching without a claim but i might be pushing myself over the edge here

In post 1137, petapan wrote:like i thought krabs' reaction was shit but now i'm doing a complete 180 that's how scatterbrained i tend to be

In post 1726, petapan wrote:MUTLEY YOU LISTEN TO ME

NEVER GIVE UP

IF YOU GIVE UP YOU CAN NEVER BE PART OF THE CENATION

UNVOTE:

VOTE: THE GOAT

I DON'T HAVE A READ ON THIS GUY BUT I DON'T WANT TO VOTE MUTTLEY TODAY

Weird. First you thought Krab was Scum, then you did a complete 180 seemingly out of nowhere for no apparent reason. Then you'd rather vote for Goat at the end of the day even though you don't even have a read on him?

Explain yourself.

In post 1724, TheEsquire wrote:who seem to be people's biggest candidates for a lynch today,

This caught my eye, is fake. I'm going to do another reread into Esquire in a moment but I've had a sort of scummy read on him for most of the game and I'd love to dive deeper.

In post 1749, Desperado wrote:I'm putting the NL on him.

Mutley's town as shit, not going to lynch him. I'm not all that concerned about no lynching when the scumteams are hunting each other; it's a lot better than lynching town.

In post 1765, Skullduggery wrote:Where is Malcolm's kill? Maybe it never existed because he's lying out his teeth.

I never claimed Vigilante. I was talking shit about killing him during the night because his response was weird as shit, as I said before.

Monkey and Pedapan have both been playing like they're cracked out of their skulls. Hard to get a read.

In post 1846, xMALCOLMx wrote:Mutley's town as shit

So this is a hydra problem? Because Kise's scumread on Mutley was as consistent as it gets.

In post 1846, xMALCOLMx wrote:I'm not all that concerned about no lynching when the scumteams are hunting each other; it's a lot better than lynching town.

And can you go into more detail about this? My experience with large themes (and multiball) is basically nil, and frankly you owning the NL like this right out of the gate is townie as fuck IMO, and not what I expected you to do at all.



What do you see in Mutley that Kise obviously doesn't?