Mafiascum.net

In post 2212, Gamma Emerald wrote:But like, what sort of wolfy people should we put into the duel? Should we put in two people who seem similar or two that are different levels of wolfy (lurkscum, deepwolf, powerwolf are the main categories I can come up with)?

we should put the wolfiest into the duel? and probably give the gun to the less wolfy of the two??

what do you currently think

the benefit we got may be?

In post 1015, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 645, SirCakez wrote:

In post 419, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 206, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 203, SirCakez wrote:

In post 186, Prism wrote:

In post 184, SirCakez wrote:VOTE: prism based on page six

Be more specific. If you are right, you can do better than this.

the way you're acting makes me feel uneasy it's very...unnatural
but also if it's a Kingmaker somehow I'd feel good about you having it in the case you are town

What if it is kingmaker and they are scum?
Your reasoning doesn't add up here

VOTE: Sircakez

they only have so much control over it
if they exe someone who town doesn't generally agree needs death it still looks like shit

that said I see where you're coming from re; it not adding up for you

I'm not sure that you do?

It doesn't add up because you go from them being scum to them being town depending on what the chair does, with no in between.

@peta

Still based on this feeling off to me

In post 2223, Gamma Emerald wrote:So beware that probably.

i will state again that today should be played very very slowly and noone should be putting anyone to e-1 et cetera

In post 2224, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 2217, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 2215, unwnd wrote:I'm reading Cakez' ISO now and about 10-15 posts in I think he's scum

What are the rest of you doing lol

I also think he is scum

To be clear, I voted Gamma to E-1 when that vote was pretty much locked in. Gamma asked to be eliminated within an hour, and two people declared intent right after my vote.

Then we spent an extra 3 days actually doing the thing

How does that involve Cakez

In post 2216, Ydrasse wrote:i had no real opinion on the wagons and voted gamma to make dueling wagons

Early ISO you were giving minor jabs towards him 'his tone is stiff' 'being weird his votes' etc. with lead into a vote. Did they change and you decided to vote him anyways? What do you think of Peta playing hardball with you? I think Peta is someone is a opportunistic person and would use your own misgivings against you as scum. Do I think Peta is scum? Not sure but I'm not really gauging how you feel about everyone accusing you.

In post 2213, Dunnstral wrote:Is relitigate some kind of buzzword that doesn't mean anything now?

My reads for today is what Ulyana just said in 2202, which I kind of hinted that that is where I was leaning, but wondering why other people thought otherwise

so who are the two scumz you want to get in?

In post 2215, unwnd wrote:I'm reading Cakez' ISO now and about 10-15 posts in I think he's scum

What are the rest of you doing lol

uh i strongly disagree with u

I don't know, and that isn't related to whether I'm "relitigating" stuff or not, so I'm not sure I want to follow you smoothly changing the topic of discussion

In post 2216, Ydrasse wrote:i had no real opinion on the wagons and voted gamma to make dueling wagons

- still hate teh gamma e1 vote
- i was under the impression u were strongly scumreading gamma, no? that's what you were telling me before

I'm in my business suit today Ydra

No funny jokeys from me

(At least not now)

In post 2228, Gamma Emerald wrote:

In post 2224, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 2217, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 2215, unwnd wrote:I'm reading Cakez' ISO now and about 10-15 posts in I think he's scum

What are the rest of you doing lol

I also think he is scum

To be clear, I voted Gamma to E-1 when that vote was pretty much locked in. Gamma asked to be eliminated within an hour, and two people declared intent right after my vote.

Then we spent an extra 3 days actually doing the thing

How does that involve Cakez

I'm just preemptively explaining why I wasn't voting cakez at the end of day since unwnd replaced in and was asking about it.

In post 2220, Ydrasse wrote:trying 2 gauge peta's headspace that's about it

thnx

In post 2215, unwnd wrote:I'm reading Cakez' ISO now and about 10-15 posts in I think he's scum

What are the rest of you doing lol

hi unwnd! how much have you played with cakez?

In post 2231, skitter30 wrote:

In post 2215, unwnd wrote:I'm reading Cakez' ISO now and about 10-15 posts in I think he's scum

What are the rest of you doing lol

uh i strongly disagree with u

Elaborate? His early ISO just from skim had a ton of landmines. My readrate on Cakez is pretty decent as well. He spent a lot of time being in that mode of 'ugh need to catch up' where he makes idle comments while not really interfering with what's going on.

In post 2232, Dunnstral wrote:I don't know, and that isn't related to whether I'm "relitigating" stuff or not, so I'm not sure I want to follow you smoothly changing the topic of discussion

the two things are directly related: i'm critiquing that all you seem to be talking about is this setup stuff when you can be talking abt game-relevant and helpful things like who we should be having duel today

and why don't you know, and when do you think you will? that's kinda my point, like why don't you have reads and when will you

In post 2225, ulyana wrote:

In post 2212, Gamma Emerald wrote:But like, what sort of wolfy people should we put into the duel? Should we put in two people who seem similar or two that are different levels of wolfy (lurkscum, deepwolf, powerwolf are the main categories I can come up with)?

we should put the wolfiest into the duel? and probably give the gun to the less wolfy of the two??

what do you currently think

the benefit we got may be?

I feel like it’d be very subtle, maybe it’s a thing we’d never know a change if we weren’t told one existed. The best bet to me is some sort of change in the conditions of the duel? The description of the event says that at least one will not survive, maybe the reward is a mutually assured destruction option?

In post 2237, Infinity 324 wrote:

In post 2215, unwnd wrote:I'm reading Cakez' ISO now and about 10-15 posts in I think he's scum

What are the rest of you doing lol

hi unwnd! how much have you played with cakez?

Many, I can list them if you want but he knows

I outright buried him in Mena's open under an alt, I am not to be trifled with

In post 2238, unwnd wrote:Elaborate? His early ISO just from skim had a ton of landmines. My readrate on Cakez is pretty decent as well. He spent a lot of time being in that mode of 'ugh need to catch up' where he makes idle comments while not really interfering with what's going on.

weird he always feels like this to me

In post 2226, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 1015, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 645, SirCakez wrote:

In post 419, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 206, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 203, SirCakez wrote:

In post 186, Prism wrote:

In post 184, SirCakez wrote:VOTE: prism based on page six

Be more specific. If you are right, you can do better than this.

the way you're acting makes me feel uneasy it's very...unnatural
but also if it's a Kingmaker somehow I'd feel good about you having it in the case you are town

What if it is kingmaker and they are scum?
Your reasoning doesn't add up here

VOTE: Sircakez

they only have so much control over it
if they exe someone who town doesn't generally agree needs death it still looks like shit

that said I see where you're coming from re; it not adding up for you

I'm not sure that you do?

It doesn't add up because you go from them being scum to them being town depending on what the chair does, with no in between.

@peta

Still based on this feeling off to me

that is actually a funny-ish statement to make espcially knowing the outcome of the event in hindsight. not that other people didn't guess the twist, but

I think it will be more clear whether we've received a benefit when we know more about the event.

In post 2238, unwnd wrote:

In post 2231, skitter30 wrote:

In post 2215, unwnd wrote:I'm reading Cakez' ISO now and about 10-15 posts in I think he's scum

What are the rest of you doing lol

uh i strongly disagree with u

Elaborate? His early ISO just from skim had a ton of landmines. My readrate on Cakez is pretty decent as well. He spent a lot of time being in that mode of 'ugh need to catch up'

where he makes idle comments while not really interfering with what's going on

.

not sure what the landmines are, but i thought he was p good tonally early on
i remember liking how open he was abt he little he wanted to catch up - i think scum who doesn't want to play scum at least tries to mask that 'ugh i don't want to be here feeling'
also i'm not sure the bolded is scum-indicative for him particularly

In post 2242, Infinity 324 wrote:

In post 2238, unwnd wrote:Elaborate? His early ISO just from skim had a ton of landmines. My readrate on Cakez is pretty decent as well. He spent a lot of time being in that mode of 'ugh need to catch up' where he makes idle comments while not really interfering with what's going on.

weird he always feels like this to me

I think he's becoming more self-aware, but there's a certain requirement I look for. Yes Cakez is always somewhat behind, but I think his usage of 'this sucks' and 'this doesn't black and white scenario picking is more fitting of his scum behavior where he can't fake a read progression.

In post 2242, Infinity 324 wrote:

In post 2238, unwnd wrote:Elaborate? His early ISO just from skim had a ton of landmines. My readrate on Cakez is pretty decent as well. He spent a lot of time being in that mode of 'ugh need to catch up' where he makes idle comments while not really interfering with what's going on.

weird he always feels like this to me

yeah this
like i'm not sure how you're distinguishing between 'cakez doing what he often does' and 'cakez scum'

i think cakez being behind on the game is null given he was MLed for it in a mini normal, just doesn't have as much time to post

In post 2244, Dunnstral wrote:I think it will be more clear whether we've received a benefit when we know more about the event.

Unless knowing that the second person voted in "starts with the gun" is the benefit?