Mafiascum.net

In post 198, cowsloveSushirolls wrote:

In post 196, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 195, cowsloveSushirolls wrote:

In post 193, JamesTheNames wrote:Then if you aren't going to positively help town you don't mind being the Day 1 hammer right?

this is a good james post to trash on, i doubt he's being jokey here, even though there's ample reason to be

tell me about the weird history between you two

Meta and past is irrelevant. I have ample posts for you to scum read me or town read me on, and overall there are ample posts for me to develop reads.

your scumread on T3 is laced with the aroma of meta and context would make me a happy person
you can't churn out stuff like 177, 178 and act like you don't have anything to offer in the 'past' department

i already have my reads on most of the people here laid out, you having yours handy would be sick

ample ample ample ample

You're going to have to remind me when I openly claimed to scum ream T3.
Not to mention if you have to use what happened in a previous game to denounce something brought up from said game, so be it. He voted me with no justification, I don't think you actually read the full thing so I'll explain it for you.
T3 claims if someone is scummy and they usually aren't you should hammer them. They then proceed to vote me. 177 178 and 185 explain how is vote is nonsense. You'll have to tell me how that is me having something "to offer in the 'past' department".

In post 199, cowsloveSushirolls wrote:so that post top is up for grabs

despite a series of misinterpretations making them look odd, i've found that hockey looks like their normal hedgey self that i've seen in their most recent town game

UNVOTE: HockeyFan

Care to back it up with any analysis from the current game or will you just denounce it based on a 1 game sample space?

In post 176, The Bulge wrote:

In post 173, HockeyFan wrote:Its NAI cuz I dont think scum posts smth like that early into the game. Likewise, theres no reason for any VT to claim their role d1 so its not something town should do, so imo its NAI

...how is this not the same thing as 'tstbs' tho? you're saying you don't think scum would post something anti-town so early, which is the exact same thought process as tstbs.

because its full null, I also think town has 0 reason to do this. This is different than tstbs, because if u think they're "tstsbs" you SR them in some sort already which I didnt do

UNVOTE: James
This is a playstyle difference. I put a lot of stock in meta, you don't care about it so you do weird stuff.

In post 200, JamesTheNames wrote:You're going to have to remind me when I openly claimed to scum ream T3.
Not to mention if you have to use what happened in a previous game to denounce something brought up from said game, so be it. He voted me with no justification, I don't think you actually read the full thing so I'll explain it for you.
T3 claims if someone is scummy and they usually aren't you should hammer them. They then proceed to vote me. 177 178 and 185 explain how is vote is nonsense. You'll have to tell me how that is me having something "to offer in the 'past' department".

okay, sue me for interpreting like 3-4 of your posts as hostility and a buildup towards a case on T3 and therefore, an actual case
i'll apologize for that by the way (sorry) i should label my interpretations as interpretations

i'll sue you for assuming that i'm in the mood to denounce anything based on whatever you said instead of i don't know, me being left out of the loop and just wanting more from the vague things you've said so i can make a conclusion?
t3's vote is nonsense because it's 1) based on a personal conclusion based on your meta, and 2) consistent with their scum meta to make this vote, and why they're unlikely to deviate from this pattern?
surely you know something i don't that could help my understanding of above. if you don't (despite talking about meta all the time) please just tell me already lol

In post 201, JamesTheNames wrote:Care to back it up with any analysis from the current game or will you just denounce it based on a 1 game sample space?

sure i don't mind, i'll do an ISO in the coming hours
i'm unfamiliar with this site's formatting though it's gonna take some time to make it tidy

In post 173, HockeyFan wrote:I was discussing it but u came along with 140 and decided to minimize the discussion and your reasoning in what u just said is super ??. Since when does figuring out James motive for claiming VT/also his aligment result in anti-town behavior?

first i think you mean post 130

2nd i already explained it -- you don't have to move on but if you just do stay on it you might out a pr by doing so.

4th -- me saying "tstbs" was my thought process and reasoning. i gave my reasoning of it being null and can be interperted in different ways. for the third time already, from a towny perspective, it is way different than james's playstyle that im used to and seems out of the blue with it, and with the purpose of creating/sparking discussion (or even softing PR) . from a scum persepctive, this was deemed to put discussion in a way where it created discussion off topic from the OP and bring attention to the people like cows, hockey, grandpa, and bulge who all had opinions -- op then would favor in sum narratives creating pocket and disarrange town to be away from scum as much as possible.

3rd - i think if you were scum, you would have dropped the convo by now, but you seem not hesitant to drop this discussion, so im townleaning you for now as you may just be misguided town.

I counterclaimed James's jailkeeper in the one game we have played together.

In post 206, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 173, HockeyFan wrote:I was discussing it but u came along with 140 and decided to minimize the discussion and your reasoning in what u just said is super ??. Since when does figuring out James motive for claiming VT/also his aligment result in anti-town behavior?

first i think you mean post 130

2nd i already explained it -- you don't have to move on but if you just do stay on it you might out a pr by doing so.

4th -- me saying "tstbs" was my thought process and reasoning. i gave my reasoning of it being null and can be interperted in different ways. for the third time already, from a towny perspective, it is way different than james's playstyle that im used to and seems out of the blue with it, and with the purpose of creating/sparking discussion (or even softing PR) . from a scum persepctive, this was deemed to put discussion in a way where it created discussion off topic from the OP and bring attention to the people like cows, hockey, grandpa, and bulge who all had opinions -- op then would favor in sum narratives creating pocket and disarrange town to be away from scum as much as possible.

3rd - i think if you were scum, you would have dropped the convo by now, but you seem not hesitant to drop this discussion, so im townleaning you for now as you may just be misguided town.

First... Second.... Fourth??? Third??? *thinking*

In post 202, HockeyFan wrote:

In post 176, The Bulge wrote:

In post 173, HockeyFan wrote:Its NAI cuz I dont think scum posts smth like that early into the game. Likewise, theres no reason for any VT to claim their role d1 so its not something town should do, so imo its NAI

...how is this not the same thing as 'tstbs' tho? you're saying you don't think scum would post something anti-town so early, which is the exact same thought process as tstbs.

because its full null, I also think town has 0 reason to do this. This is different than tstbs, because if u think they're "tstsbs" you SR them in some sort already which I didnt do

No. That isn't what TSTBS means. It implies town not scum behavior. Also I am still confused on your reads here -- You say it's null but then you say town has 0 reason to do this which implies you scumread James, then you go on to say that you don't SR them because you thought me saying TSTBS, implies a scumread on them.

So you contradict two times.


Can you elaborate more on what you mean?

In post 202, HockeyFan wrote:because its full null, I also think town has 0 reason to do this.

i'd do it to gauge reactions, maybe increase my survivability in some circles
or as part of a mass claiming strategy in a role madness game

self voting does very similar things though, do that instead @everyone

In post 207, T3 wrote:I counterclaimed James's jailkeeper in the one game we have played together.

lol

This has entered a whole new dimension of misinterpretation.

In post 211, T3 wrote:This has entered a whole new dimension of misinterpretation.

im going to misinterpret you as town if you keep the goodpostingg up

In post 212, cowsloveSushirolls wrote:

In post 211, T3 wrote:This has entered a whole new dimension of misinterpretation.

im going to misinterpret you as town if you keep the goodpostingg up

Also I don't think that other game offsite ended so uh let's not talk about it.

T3 wrote:

In post 212, cowsloveSushirolls wrote:

In post 211, T3 wrote:This has entered a whole new dimension of misinterpretation.

Also I don't think that other game offsite ended so uh let's not talk about it.

never have, never will

In post 206, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 173, HockeyFan wrote:I was discussing it but u came along with 140 and decided to minimize the discussion and your reasoning in what u just said is super ??. Since when does figuring out James motive for claiming VT/also his aligment result in anti-town behavior?

first i think you mean post 130

2nd i already explained it -- you don't have to move on but if you just do stay on it you might out a pr by doing so.

4th -- me saying "tstbs" was my thought process and reasoning. i gave my reasoning of it being null and can be interperted in different ways. for the third time already, from a towny perspective, it is way different than james's playstyle that im used to and seems out of the blue with it, and with the purpose of creating/sparking discussion (or even softing PR) . from a scum persepctive, this was deemed to put discussion in a way where it created discussion off topic from the OP and bring attention to the people like cows, hockey, grandpa, and bulge who all had opinions -- op then would favor in sum narratives creating pocket and disarrange town to be away from scum as much as possible.

3rd - i think if you were scum, you would have dropped the convo by now, but you seem not hesitant to drop this discussion, so im townleaning you for now as you may just be misguided town.

In post 209, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 202, HockeyFan wrote:

In post 176, The Bulge wrote:

In post 173, HockeyFan wrote:Its NAI cuz I dont think scum posts smth like that early into the game. Likewise, theres no reason for any VT to claim their role d1 so its not something town should do, so imo its NAI

...how is this not the same thing as 'tstbs' tho? you're saying you don't think scum would post something anti-town so early, which is the exact same thought process as tstbs.

because its full null, I also think town has 0 reason to do this. This is different than tstbs, because if u think they're "tstsbs" you SR them in some sort already which I didnt do

No. That isn't what TSTBS means. It implies town not scum behavior. Also I am still confused on your reads here -- You say it's null but then you say town has 0 reason to do this which implies you scumread James, then you go on to say that you don't SR them because you thought me saying TSTBS, implies a scumread on them.

So you contradict two times.
Can you elaborate more on what you mean?

In post 215, HockeyFan wrote:Yea... I said town has 0 reason to say it but if u read 173, i explained in the first half of it, scum has no reason to do it either

so does that mean u null read james?

so wait...

we literally came to the same conclusion but with a different approach sorta (me, u and bulge)

and if im understanding this correctly... u liked bulge's response because u understand their logic vs mine?

im so confused

Too Town To Be Town?

In post 218, T3 wrote:Too Town To Be Town?

T3 giv me ur reads rn

also rocky giv me ur reads -- u havent said nothing useful so far

In post 219, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 218, T3 wrote:Too Town To Be Town?

T3 giv me ur reads rn

James is probably town but I can't say why.
Bulge is a tr. I'll metadive him at some point becauseI'm slightly paranoid.
You're vibes towny.
Everyone else I forgot about or is null.

Oh yeah and cows.

In post 221, T3 wrote:

In post 219, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 218, T3 wrote:Too Town To Be Town?

T3 giv me ur reads rn

James is probably town but I can't say why.
Bulge is a tr. I'll metadive him at some point becauseI'm slightly paranoid.
You're vibes towny.
Everyone else I forgot about or is null.

ffs.

u did the same shit in ur scum game

am i gonna get pocketed

WAIT

"I know your allignment and I know yours"

LOL rlly used that to say i scumslipped in our game, and then get limmed the next day lmao

allez