Mafiascum.net

Posted: **Thu Jan 23, 2014 10:02 pm**

Something I need to point out to the new players: people defending other people does

not

mean they are scumbuddies. Scumbuddies mostly avoid each other as to not draw attention to them.

I don't really understand all the scumreads ika has been getting. I might say I'm annoyed by his posting but it does feel genuine.

I don't particularly like LMB's entrance, just restating the case that emerald did before. Do give that buttload of evidence, though.

Posted: **Thu Jan 23, 2014 11:52 pm**

In post 201, TierShift wrote:Something I need to point out to the new players: people defending other people does
not
mean they are scumbuddies. Scumbuddies mostly avoid each other as to not draw attention to them.

The first sentence is correct. The second sentence is not correct. Different scum play differently. Trying to make a general statement about how scum plays can lead to you falling into the trap of "scum play this way so this is a sign that they're town" when really that's a scumtell for that person.

Trying to make scumpair calls before a flip is just not a good idea though. You've got no guaranteed information and trying to see those connections before you do can lead to severe bias with your reads.

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 1:18 am**

Hardcore defending at the start of day 1 usually means they are not scumbuddies, though.

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 1:19 am**

I suppose.

Note to self: hardcore defend scumbuddy d1 when in game with tiershift.

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 1:33 am**

Heh. It's actually pretty hard to genuinely defend a scumbuddy, whose scummy things you can see and need to avoid and then make it seem like you didn't.

So, who are you gonna defend starting now?

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 2:27 am**

In post 135, TierShift wrote:
About my bjc read, I'm not sure about him. He puts in effort, but he's just sheeping everything that comes along. Give me some more time here.

For now, I don't have strong scumreads.

So, have both statements changed since you made this post? Updated read on me? Any scumreads or at least a stronger read than before?

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 2:31 am**

In post 205, TierShift wrote:Heh. It's actually pretty hard to genuinely defend a scumbuddy, whose scummy things you can see and need to avoid and then make it seem like you didn't.

So, who are you gonna defend starting now?

Since I'm not scum, I don't really need to do this now do I?

I'll stick with how I've been playing, thanks. While we're here, though, can you point out to me what about ika's posting seems genuine to you?

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 2:35 am**

In post 198, RayFrost wrote:bjc, unless you have seen ika's playstyle as scum as well, you have no real meta based argument to defend him with.

It's like going to a magic show and saying "I've seen the heads side of this coin, so the other side must be tails" and ignoring the possibility of a coin with heads on both sides. (Specifically a magic show because in normal society a coin usually has heads and tails whereas magic shows tend to have trickery).

I haven't seen him in a game before, but I've been in his situation before. It just seems genuine to me, and ATM he doesn't seem like the best case to try to make here.

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:01 am**

... bump

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:10 pm**

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:11 pm**

In post 105, ika wrote:Right now im conflicted between Abbott and you. Both of you are claissifed as the higher teir in this game. So i feel like you were trying to stop your train. But at the same accord, your train picked up speed quite quickly for silly reasoning. But others did have an idea.

I figure between abbott and you right now. One of you are scum and the ohter is town. Or this is an elaborate ploy of cross bussing. However i dont think you would take it to that level of play in a newbie game.

We may have plenty of time but right now my 2 primary fos are you and abbott with a smaller one on bjc for big buddying with me. However i will wait a bit and see what others have to say.

I think that the forming a dichotomy between Abbott and I so early is the dangerous sort of reasoning; there is e possibility that both of us just didn't mesh easily this game for no apparent reason. Why do you find me scummy? Why do you find Abbott scummy?

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:14 pm**

In post 115, AbboTT wrote:LOL at Nacho's dramatic reaction to his wagon. Wow. Man, I love a good IC wagon. You know, "the bigger they are" and all of that.

I honestly didn't have any read on nacho until he threw a fit and clutched onto his little OMGUS baby blanket for protection.

It's either scum or ego. Undecided at the moment.

That being said, pressure on me is totally fair right now. I get it. This game is moving a little faster than my last few. I just need to adjust.

"Clutched his little OMGUS baby blanket to protection". What does that mean, exactly? I called you out for calling my vote OMGUS which, at that stage, is a weak accusation. If you disagree with this statement, feel free to refute it. I don't understand how me suspecting you equals scum or "ego" (ego because I'm pushing a serious case this early, or...?).

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:16 pm**

In post 117, AbboTT wrote:@Nacho: I don't have a handle on your playstyle yet. Would you help me understand something? You seem to be the type of player who drops a lot of unsupported reads (So-and-so is scum. So-and-so is incredibly town).

Are these your genuine reads or are you just sharing your gut reactions or current thoughts based on their most recent content?

I am usually very wary of people who declare things with certainty this early in the game. There are but a few people who _know_ who is scum and who is town. Those people are scum. Since townies have no real incentive to lie, that sort of bold posturing puts me off.

They are genuine reads and generally not baseless. I've seen ika scum. I've seen ika town. I don't believe distinguishing between the two is difficult. Other reads are not as strong, but they are still leanings.

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:17 pm**

In post 118, AbboTT wrote:In nacho's 95 he scolds me for supposedly demanding content from him and then, in the same post, invites ika to call him out if he isn't paying enough attention to the game.

Curious.

I don't think that an extraordinary amount of content will be produced at this stage of the game.
It is fair to call me out if you see me posting elsewhere but not here, because that would be scummy.

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:18 pm**

In post 119, AbboTT wrote:Hahaha. And then, in 98, he attacks me for the same thing again _and_ rewrites history here:
nachotownie wrote:Then Abbott goes on not even to dip his toe in the pool of drama and instead throws some nonsense useless questions at ika and pushes me for "OMGUS". If Abbott were town, he would be happier to delve into that drama, parse reads from it, but NOPE. This is the mark of scum.
Either he doesn't understand my game at all or he is BSing here, hoping nobody will bother to check him. I commented on the drama and them immediately began investigating it.

What drama did you comment on?

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:20 pm**

In post 123, AbboTT wrote:How the heck did I OMGUS him? Lol... I started this. I am the one pressuring him, remember? Maybe we need to take a step back to page one for a moment.

As for your second paragraph, no. Maybe that's where the other votes are coming from, but that's not my motivation.

You pushed me because "IC wagon" and "OMGUS". I was the first to put actual pressure on.

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:22 pm**

In post 212, Nachomamma8 wrote:I called you out for calling my vote OMGUS which, at that stage, is a weak accusation.

Of course it's a weak accusation! OMGUS is always kind of a weak accusation, don't you think? Especially when you're smack dab in the middle of RVS.

You didn't call me out at the time, either. You simply offered a single emoticon with no commentary. I complained about it by remarking that your single emoticon wasn't helpful. Then you claimed I was "demanding content" from you. In reality, I was just stating what I saw. Yes, calling your vote OMGUS was weak. You could have started a discussion by saying something along those lines. Instead you gave me an emoticon. That stage of the game is all about sharing reactions and thoughts. You weren't sharing. It's as simple as that.

p-edit: Put pressure on who?

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:23 pm**

In post 131, AbboTT wrote:No, the credibility is used up when it turns out you were wrong. The old story of the boy who cried wolf. That's all I'm saying.

Forceful is good. Confidence is fine if you really believe what you're saying. It's over-confidence that bugs me. Pretending like you _know_ something when in reality you just have a suspicion or a hunch.

Remember this started as a conversation about Nacho and his posts early in the game where he made snap decisions and presented them as fact. If I recall correctly he even directed one at you. "You probably shouldn't vote for town"

Content-less posturing.

Credibility is shot when I'm forceful about a read and that read turns out wrong, yes. So either I'm A) town with good reasoning for ika as town, or B) scum who believes there's a good case to make for ika town. Either way, there's a case for ika as town.

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:25 pm**

In post 217, AbboTT wrote:
In post 212, Nachomamma8 wrote:I called you out for calling my vote OMGUS which, at that stage, is a weak accusation.
Of course it's a weak accusation! OMGUS is always kind of a weak accusation, don't you think? Especially when you're smack dab in the middle of RVS.

You didn't call me out at the time, either. You simply offered a single emoticon with no commentary. I complained about it by remarking that your single emoticon wasn't helpful. Then you claimed I was "demanding content" from you. In reality, I was just stating what I saw. Yes, calling your vote OMGUS was weak. You could have started a discussion by saying something along those lines. Instead you gave me an emoticon. That stage of the game is all about sharing reactions and thoughts. You weren't sharing. It's as simple as that.

p-edit: Put pressure on who?

The commentary with that emoticon was "this accusation is dumb, you're probably not serious I hope". You then acted like you expected a serious response to a weak accusation, which is what made me suspicious of you in the first place. Maybe I didn't do everything that I could in order to facilitate discussion at that point in time, but that doesn't matter much considering empty discussion gets both parties 6 more pages in and absolutely nowhere.

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:27 pm**

In post 218, Nachomamma8 wrote:So either I'm A) town with good reasoning for ika as town, or B) scum who believes there's a good case to make for ika town. Either way, there's a case for ika as town.

C) town who is working off a gut reaction and has no good reason
D) town who has just picked someone at random to townread in hopes of starting discussion
E) scum who is bussing
D) scum who is distancing

Please don't present something as a A-B scenario when it could be any number of outcomes.

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:28 pm**

In post 219, Nachomamma8 wrote:The commentary with that emoticon was "this accusation is dumb, you're probably not serious I hope".

That's fair and expected. But I don't know you and I can't read your mind. That's all I'm saying.

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:28 pm**

I'm telling you that C and D aren't true.
E and F dont make sense.

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:29 pm**

In post 221, AbboTT wrote:
In post 219, Nachomamma8 wrote:The commentary with that emoticon was "this accusation is dumb, you're probably not serious I hope".
That's fair and expected. But I don't know you and I can't read your mind. That's all I'm saying.

You can't read my mind.
But you expected me to put to words my reaction and you found it scummy that I didn't? Even though you weren't expecting a substantial reaction from me anyways?

Posted: **Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:30 pm**

In post 165, emeraldemon wrote:The thing about ika comes down to this: is the carelessness a town tell? Moving votes around, semi-random reads thrown about. It doesn't feel careful the way you might expect scum to be careful. But maybe he's just looking for a lynch to get behind without putting too much effort in. No honest scumhunting feel either. Maybe too glib?
@nacho
I didn't see any finished games from ika on this site. Do you know his meta from somewhere else?

bjc's vote and explanation in 104 is weaksauce on waffles. Also his trajectory on ika rings false to me: in 60 he says he's wary (after I accuse him of buddying), 84 says "I can't say he's confirmed townie" which means nothing. In 108 answering ika's question about strongest townread he says "Ugh, probably ika. lol." Where is this coming from?

I dunno, but for now it's enough to
VOTE: bjc

@RayFrost
I'd like to hear your opinion about bjc please.

Yes, I do.

Mafiascum.net

Newbie 1471: Italian Ice (Game Over!)