Mafiascum.net

Hi all. I'm here. I was wondering when the game was gonna start, I signed in to find out it started almost 24 hours ago! Sorry for not checking in sooner! Time flies when you sleep 12 hours after staying up for 30 hours and wake up with a hangover because of a long drinking session! Lolz.

Anyways, sorry for fluff, this is my 2nd Mafia game on this site and about 20th or something Mafia game altogether.

Indeed, as the IC said, we're in the Random Voting Stage.

I'm gonna vote for "nalsco" for [insert reason here]

VOTE: nalsco

I go to bed in 2 hours folks, so just a heads up. I'll be posting again first thing in the morning

In post 18, Transcend wrote:iirc, they got nominated for a scummy by titus b/c they played so well

Transcend, what was the intention or point you were trying to made when you wrote this post?

@WeCanSimplyBeOurselves: What do you think about Morning Tweet? Is she someone to be extra paranoid about because she's apparently a really good scum player who got nominated for a scummy on her first game? Or do you think we should treat her like any other player?

Like any other player, it's not enough info to go on.

I'd be more likely to be suspicious of them from sharing so much detail about a past game, as if to confuse us, rather than for the specific info shared, tbh. Like why so much info? Rather than what it was.

As good a vote as any at this stage. I do think overthinking anyone at this stage is more likely to do harm than good. Best to keep our minds open to everyone.

Hope that helps

While it's true that spamming walls of text or feeding in random factoids every other post would indeed be pretty anti-town, I do not think Morning Tweet's information had been that overwhelming. Do you find their information confusing? What part don't you understand?

As good a vote as any at this stage. I do think overthinking anyone at this stage is more likely to do harm than good. Best to keep our minds open to everyone.

I like this.

Nah I'm not confused about anything they said per say... it's mainly more that I dunno why they mentioned their last game... like, as a general rule I think it's best to not talk about past games without a good reason. I mentioned myself, for example, that I'd played one other game here and about 20 other games elsewhere but I'm not going to talk those games.

Yeah I think keeping our minds open is definitely best at this stage.

Hmm, on my post where i said I was going to bed in two hours it looks like I made that post a lot later than I thought I did. I go to bed in just under an hour's time from now. It's 1:01 A.M. GMT here, I got to bet at 2.AM.

In post 32, WeCanSimplyBeOurselves wrote:Nah I'm not confused about anything they said per say... it's mainly more that I dunno why they mentioned

about

their last game... like, as a general rule I think it's best to not talk about past games without a good reason.

Do you think there was scum motivation behind mentioning that I had received my first vote?

In post 28, Accountant wrote:

In post 18, Transcend wrote:iirc, they got nominated for a scummy by titus b/c they played so well

Transcend, what was the intention or point you were trying to made when you wrote this post?

@WeCanSimplyBeOurselves: What do you think about Morning Tweet? Is she someone to be extra paranoid about because she's apparently a really good scum player who got nominated for a scummy on her first game? Or do you think we should treat her like any other player?

To alert everyone she's a good scum.

Wcsbo top tr

Mt / acc lean town.

More when home from work.

Norska null, leaning gut scum

Charloux prob scum

VOTE: Charloux

And yes, i tend to get reads really quickly.

In post 33, Morning Tweet wrote:

In post 32, WeCanSimplyBeOurselves wrote:Nah I'm not confused about anything they said per say... it's mainly more that I dunno why they mentioned

about

their last game... like, as a general rule I think it's best to not talk about past games without a good reason.

Do you think there was scum motivation behind mentioning that I had received my first vote?

I have no idea. Probably not. The chances are that anyone in particular is town because the majority as town.

Best to keep ours eyes open to everyone.

In post 34, Transcend wrote:

In post 28, Accountant wrote:

In post 18, Transcend wrote:iirc, they got nominated for a scummy by titus b/c they played so well

Transcend, what was the intention or point you were trying to made when you wrote this post?

@WeCanSimplyBeOurselves: What do you think about Morning Tweet? Is she someone to be extra paranoid about because she's apparently a really good scum player who got nominated for a scummy on her first game? Or do you think we should treat her like any other player?

To alert everyone she's a good scum.

If she's town alerting everyone that if she were scum she'd be good at being scum doesn't benefit town.

In post 36, Transcend wrote:Norska null, leaning gut scum

Charloux prob scum

I think there's a pill for that.

What makes you think Char is probably scum? He's only made two posts, both in the RVS. He has a questionable grasp on evolution, but other than that, he hasn't been any more off-topic or diversionary than anyone else.

Acc seems to be the most active in scumhunting and progressing the game, which is making me lean town. For someone who apologised for fluff in their first post, WeCanSimplyBeOurselves seems to have a fair amount of fluff in later posts, which is giving me a slight scumlean. However, I'll leave my vote on thatsit until they show up. Everyone else, I'm pretty neutral on. Slightly scumread on Morning.

I'm a lot fluffier than most when it comes to talking about when I'm gonna be away and when I have to go and my sleep times and stuff. I'd feel rude if I didn't mention when I was leaving and why.

Goodnight all.

Nah I'm not confused about anything they said per say... it's mainly more that I dunno why they mentioned about their last game... like, as a general rule I think it's best to not talk about past games without a good reason.

Mafia is a game about understanding and analyzing people. The aim of the game is to look at someone's posting and reverse-engineer it to figure out what sort of person they are like. From there, we can decide if they would be more likely to act like this as town or scum.

One good source of information about a person is their past games, so it makes sense to look at someone's previous play to get a better understanding of them as a person, with the knowledge of what their alignment was that game. While we should be careful to avoid slavishly relying on only that information, there's no doubt that it can be a very useful scumhunting tool if used appropriately.

@Transcend: By getting reads "really quickly", do you mean that im the sense of "on page 2" or "in just a quick skim, without the need for deeper analysis"?

@norska gut

@acc latter

What makes you think Char is probably scum? He's only made two posts, both in the RVS. He has a questionable grasp on evolution, but other than that, he hasn't been any more off-topic or diversionary than anyone else.

This post makes two assumptions:

1) That an RVS post can't be indicative of scumminess.

2) That Transcend's reason for scumreading Charloux is due to Charloux being off-topic or diversionary.

Is it possible to explain why you made these assumptions, and the reasoning behind them?

In post 43, Transcend wrote:@norska gut

@acc latter

I have an issue with this. You are presumably scumreading Charloux off the basis of her two posts(and I think I have an inkling about why). However, you posted after them without any mention of Charloux at all. This signals to me that you read the posts but didn't find them significant. In fact, you didn't mention any reads at all.

However, after a short break in posting, you came back and told us that so-and-so were town, and Charloux were scum. This signals to me that you did pick this up as a gut read on a skim, but rather on a re-read.

Can you explain this discrepancy?

In post 44, Accountant wrote:

What makes you think Char is probably scum? He's only made two posts, both in the RVS. He has a questionable grasp on evolution, but other than that, he hasn't been any more off-topic or diversionary than anyone else.

This post makes two assumptions:

1) That an RVS post can't be indicative of scumminess.

2) That Transcend's reason for scumreading Charloux is due to Charloux being off-topic or diversionary.

Is it possible to explain why you made these assumptions, and the reasoning behind them?

I'd love to.

1) I agree that RVS could indicate alignment, but (to me) Char's tone is no different to anyone else's. Without any posts outside of RVS to compare with, I can't see how Transcend got such a strong read from two RVS posts.

2) With so little substance from Char, I can't see what else it could be. Char's two posts collectively offer only a vote to lynch, a post about monkeys, and a seemingly joking plea for peace. Not knowing his alignment, I don't know if there was a larger plan behind his vote for MonkeyKebab, but it seems to me that he chose him purely to make a wordplay on his name. Its the same reason why I voted for thatsit.

@Transcend: you said Char was probably scum. Probably is a kinda strong word for a gut feeling, don't you think?

I'm not trying to defend Char in any way. I personally have no idea what alignment he is. I just wanted to understand why Transcend was scumreading him.

I see.

In post 45, Accountant wrote:

In post 43, Transcend wrote:@norska gut

@acc latter

I have an issue with this. You are presumably scumreading Charloux off the basis of her two posts(and I think I have an inkling about why). However, you posted after them without any mention of Charloux at all. This signals to me that you read the posts but didn't find them significant. In fact, you didn't mention any reads at all.

However, after a short break in posting, you came back and told us that so-and-so were town, and Charloux were scum. This signals to me that you did

not

pick this up as a gut read on a skim, but rather on a re-read.

Can you explain this discrepancy?

yeah i made all my reads after rereading, i didn't try to alignment read anyone until now.

and obviously i'm most likely not gonna death tunnel this guy, just put a vote on something that catches my eye.

Good morning all.

In post 42, Accountant wrote: Mafia is a game about understanding and analyzing people. The aim of the game is to look at someone's posting and reverse-engineer it to figure out what sort of person they are like. From there, we can decide if they would be more likely to act like this as town or scum.

One good source of information about a person is their past games, so it makes sense to look at someone's previous play to get a better understanding of them as a person, with the knowledge of what their alignment was that game. While we should be careful to avoid slavishly relying on only that information, there's no doubt that it can be a very useful scumhunting tool if used appropriately.

I agree that looking at someone's previous play is a good way to do that... but when it's coming directly from the player themselves and all we have is their word to go by then we can only really trust them if they already happen to be town--which kind of makes it redundantly NAI.