Mafiascum.net

Me pointing to what is literally swag's case on me is not deflecting on what is swag's case on me.

As for your Kaboose action observations: (shrug)

As for your GC action observations: it wasn't that I didn't want to be recruited, it was that . My vote on Kaboose was reluctant. Oh well.

↑ davesaz wrote:I also see plenty where GC could be distancing from Mala.

loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool

In addition to this:

↑ Heartless wrote:The Kaboose paper trail goes right back to Titus; the associative tells are emanations of events occurring from the fallout of Post 996 and Post 1073.

The reads evolution on Kaboose throughout the game makes less sense as a natural progression and more sense as putting up the Phalanx once the serious attacks loomed. The first thing Titus posts about Kaboose is found in Post 1002 when she notes how Kaboose wasn't voting even though he was scum reading elle. From then on, though, she grabbed onto Post 1051 and never let go even though the reaction wasn't particularly town. For funsies, we even get a little revisionist history in Post 1074 when we hear Kaboose's ISO is "dripping with town motivation to crack the game," doubling down on a read that had evidence of showing cracks in the foundation.

She then has the incredibly strained angle in Post 1104 in the wake of Swag's obviously fake claim. Even if you

didn't

think the claim was obviously fake, the argument about how the mason claim should be lynched before the claimed guilty is terrible and doesn't hold up to even the mildest application of logic. We've been getting pushback from Titus every step of the way on the Kaboose read. I can just rattle off posts: Post 1053, Post 1074, Post 1180, Post 1521, Post 1603, and Post 1612. There's also the last moment move to try to get us to rejoin the Green Crayons wagon in Post 1689 by taking this strained "GC is scum if Kaboose is scum... or not" angle.

It's also apparent from how she talks about Anti that she's playing to his apparent meta experience with her. Anti will listen to me, though, so she's out of luck there.

Which is heads and tails more detailed than what I took away from Kaboose/Titus interactions, there's the fact that Titus employed the Karl Rove strategy. The "attacking someone else for what you're weak on" strategy.

I stated why I found Kaboose scummy in Post 1520. Titus immediately defends Kaboose in Post 1521. Not really alignment indicative one way or the other (scum never defend buddies v. scum defend buddies to throw off suspicion), but Titus's "Kaboose is just like me!" justification doesn't sit right. Titus's defense of Kaboose here is in alignment with her general defense as noted by Heartless in the quote above.

But moving on.

It's unmistakable that Heartless is, to a large degree, driving this game. So, yesterday, when Heartless says that she won't vote for my #2 scum (Ranger) but would vote my #3 scum (Kaboose) that Heartless had been pushing all day, I responded with switching from #2 scum (Ranger) to #1 scum (Mala) in Post 1677. Titus takes this opportunity to vote and criticize me for refusing to vote my #3 scum (Kaboose) in Post 1679, Post 1681, and Post 1683. (Titus has continued this shitty line of reasoning into today, if you care to review D3.)

So what's wrong with Titus criticizing me for moving from Ranger to Mala instead of from Ranger to Kaboose? (Well, "wrong" in the sense of "potential Kaboose-buddy," as opposed to the horribad leaps of logic you have to take.) Two things.

1. The fact that Titus had been reading Kaboose as town all day, and had been defending him all day. Now here was her opportunity to criticize someone for doing what she had failed to do: vote Kaboose (the Karl Rove strategy).

2. Moreover, without knowledge of Kaboose's alignment, . Titus votes me on the assumption that Kaboose is scum before the town should know that Kaboose is scum. Note what this baseless (unless if Titus is scum) assumption allows Titus to do: vote GC, instead of Kaboose, when GC's allegedly scummy action is dependent upon Kaboose being of a scum alignment. Compounding the weirdness of this suspicion is the fact that Titus is now assuming that Kaboose is scum - contrary to her stated position all game - simply on the basis that another player chose to vote their #1 scum over their #3 scum. It makes no goddamned sense unless if Titus was already operating with the knowledge that Kaboose is scum.

^^^ Yes, I accept my begrudging vote of Kaboose makes me look like a potential scum buddy.

Oh well, shit happens.

My best defense is that I was the second to vote him after Heartless putting out the call, when there was the potential that people wouldn't vote Kaboose and might have actually joined the Mala wagon. (Hah. Ha. Ha.)

Testing \10char

Oh yay, somehow my IP address got blacklisted yesterday, so I was unable to post for a while. I am back.

↑ Whatisswag wrote:Ok I just solved the game using wagon analysis, mason analysis and scum analysis.

Kaboose, Green Crayons and

Lone ranger is town, cptpicard is town, dave is town, I am town, Grib is town, Heartless is town

Mala, titus, elle are the possible left candidates for the final scum.

So I believe it is Kaboose, Green Crayons and elle.

VOTE: Kaboose

it was quite nice playing in this game.

↑ Whatisswag wrote:I bet my lynch on the fact that there is at least one scum within Kaboose and Green.

↑ Whatisswag wrote:Actually it should be kaboose, green crayons and mala. I think that is kind of more suitable.

↑ Whatisswag wrote:It is probably Kaboose+ Green + (Mala/elle)

I believe that there are two scum out of this four.

↑ Whatisswag wrote:Grib is too different from what I know of him. I dont know how to read Grib.

So is it Kaboose, Green, Mala?

Go Go Go.

I find out by Green's ISO, that he is actually rather consistent with his reads. VOTE: Malakittens

↑ Whatisswag wrote:I find out by Green's ISO, that he is actually rather consistent with his reads.

This is not a town tell. I'm going to be reviewing both Green Crayons and Titus this morning.

Wait...Dave is in this game?

@Swag, consistency is not a scumtell. I am very consistent as either alignment.

**Lack of consistency

↑ Whatisswag wrote:I find out by Green's ISO, that he is actually rather consistent with his reads. VOTE: Malakittens

Were the things I posted at all related to the reason you said "just read his ISO"?

Would also like to see if Heartless found the same things or not.

/swallows bitter pill

jingle, you're wrong

tth is right

I'm beginning to think that, yes.

Please, gentlemen, go on. I want to hear where this conversation is going.

WRT to Titus, of course. Also, wrt flirting with me, but I've known that for a while

Anyways, back to reading. You guys keep working while I'm gone, and I'll come back and pass judgement on you and all of your lands.

(Also I'm still unopposed to policy lynching swag. In case anybody can get him to L-1)

Grib is probably town. Like, very probably town. His reaction to the fakehammer is exactly what me town would do. He's getting put in the "I don't have to think about this anymore" pile with Heartless. Oh, also I've been hardtownreading you guys for the entire dayphase, based both on the mason thread and on my own reads. I've just been being a mysterious asshole because it makes me giggle.

Titus's positioning wrt the fakeguilty is really awkward. Titus, do you still believe your assertion that people who fake guilties follow the behaviors in

↑ Titus wrote:

↑ Heartless wrote:

↑ Titus wrote:

↑ Heartless wrote:

↑ Titus wrote:Really, you need a citation that scum just don't announce "I'm SCUM!!!".. and they avoid content.

yes b/c i've seen fake guilties by town and swag actually fits the profile quite nicely

I don't think he does at all. They actually produce content and work with others by answering questions. They also make sure that the claim actually looks plausible. If I can shoot a claim down in five seconds, its tissue paper yo! I can't see crumbs to save my life.

lol no they don't

they do it out of either 1) some misguided notion that things need "shaking up" or 2) they need to shove their scum read down everyone's throat for their own good

Usually there's an indication of 1. ika is notorious for "shaking things up". I've seen the profile. He picks someone who isn't discussed, not a mislynch he's tried to push.

2. That's the profile of someone who actually produces content and has failed to persuade.

What is wrt?

I am tabling Swag atm. I don't seescum faking a guilty on their partner. So Swag is a bowl of dissonance I would rathernot mess with until later.

What do you think of Dave's reappearance Jingle?

↑ davesaz wrote:Heartless, Swag: The posts that GC pointed to look like misdirection to me. I looked at things Kaboose said about GC. In particular, I looked at the progression of 323 (K hasn't noticed GC), 447 (no opinion), 756 (defends), 763 (K defends GC, over Mala).

Also we have GC not wanting to be recruited in 802/807, and in 1711 seems to be voting Kaboose against his will, possible bus. Then we have the deflection in 1842 posted above.

Are these the same observations? Please post pointers to the things you're seeing.

I also see plenty where GC could be distancing from Mala.

i looked at this again and it's all kind of circumstantial. and if you repeat the exercise w/ riddleton/titus slot and mala you find equally sketch stuff. i think what you're seeing dave is an artifact of kaboose just being scum. of course kaboose has an artifical reads progression: he's scum.

wrt = with respect to / with regard to

@heartless: already found the Mala stuff, didn't look at Riddle/Titus.

Sorry for the long absence, guys. I'll try to get back into this game on Tuesday at the latest.

Let it be known that w/r/t this game my brain is basically mush.

↑ Grib wrote:Let it be known that w/r/t this game my brain is basically mush.

vote titus