Mafiascum.net

pagetop

oh didnt realize that there was a response in it

no, that's a bad conclusion - I agree 4 is NAI but that doesn't mean UCV feels the same way and based on UCV's philosophy it's possible he saw something scummy

pedit: i think he was in kidney mafia and remember him being obvtown so i dont know if im really convinced

we all own page tops communism etc

pedit: fuck u too php

Hopkirk was intelligent last time I played with him. Is Hopkirk secretly Sergtacos?

i agree that the last hop post in that sequence feels out of place

NOT THAT SERGTACOS ISNT INTELLIGENT. I MEAN THE NON SEQUITUR PART. LOL

lolrip

@mod you have the power to edit player-claimed pagetops into VCs, right? lol

@sheeps: it’s irrelevant what alignment UCV is here. If it’s serious he’d be null. If he wasn’t serious he’d be null. The wagon was a standard RVS wagon.

In post 237, humaneatingmonkey wrote:let's stop talking about ucv because it doesn't mean anything

i got confused with hopkirk because he insinuated that I disliked UC. then I said that even if I liked UC it's not grounds to vote elsewhere. then he said he thought I liked UC. and then he's back saying i dislike UC. then he says UC is null for him (he said this is for me too) and that he said I thought he disliked UC.

this is 100% eric andre level non sequitur that derailed the actual event happening here: Hopkirk has been constantly misrepresenting events, in addition to my vote reason. And then sheep defending him with little cause for it. this is noteworthy and that we should be taking this more seriously.

This is not true.
205- I said you disliked UC, thinking you’d said that.
In 209 you said you didn’t like UC.
In 219, after a quick ISO, I realized you didn’t have a read on UC, and asked why you disliked him since you said it in 209.
220- I clarified that I’d look back and seen you didn’t express a read on him. This was 30 seconds after 219 and meant to be part of it.
223- I explicitly said this wasn’t @you. I posted it in response to Kat and you seemed to assume it was part of our conversation for some reason.

I never said I thought you liked UC. Quote this.
I didn't say UC is null for you because he is to me. I said he's probably null for you rather than a scumread of yours since you hadn't mentioned him.
Are you saying that in 209 you weren't saying you disliked UC.

In post 256, humaneatingmonkey wrote:@mod you have the power to edit player-claimed pagetops into VCs, right? lol

yeah but doing so's really annoying because mod isos are really useful for reading back and also replacements

like snarky always edits VCs into pagetops and it's really annoying lmfao - ive never even been in her games but it makes them harder to follow

also hop next time can you remember to mark your text differently when you post in a quote?

pedit: hm

In post 209, humaneatingmonkey wrote:I dont like how you think i should have voted you there. i dont like how you're branding my play cautious here when that's not even what's happening. i dont like how you think sheeping is something unlikeable. and i don't like how you think me not liking UC is somehow grounds to not place my vote elsewhere

hop uh

this isnt a statement of disliking UC, he's just talking about your thought process in 205

@243/Monkey

137- no content
138- Joins Flubber wagon
140/142- no content
167- no content, restates dislike of Flubber
178-9- no content
180- no content except that you don’t scumread Serg
193- Wants hammer
194- question without content. Asks if someone else scumreads me
195- no content. No actual reads expressed other than Flubber as of here. Seems cautious
203- Votes me

Seems cautious to me.

The phrases aren’t out of context. You haven’t shown why they apply/why you’re sure I had Flubber as basically conf-town.

Hopkirk wrote:I never said I thought you liked UC. Quote this.

Here:

Hopkirk wrote:Are you saying that in 209 you weren't saying you disliked UC.

Yes. I wasn't saying that. I was noting that me not liking UC isn't really something that should keep me from voting elsewhere — because you said you disliked that.

I really dislike this ucv conversation and it needs to be dropped. it's fluff and nothing about it will generate anything AI. that's why it's convenient to be talked about.

a: UC thought it was scummy. So? Does that make him town or scum?
b: UC thought it wasn't scummy and was just RVSing. So? Does that make him town or scum?
c. UC thought it wasn't scummy but wasn't RVSing. So? Does that make him town or scum? No, just an idiot.

In 246 this
‘By equal offering and inference I mean that since I explicitly state 4 is NAI, you can conclude I think 7 is equally NAI.
The conversation is about me trying to sort you, and I assume vice versa, yeah.’
Should not be in the spoiler. I screwed tags up.

In post 251, Katyusha wrote:oh didnt realize that there was a response in it

no, that's a bad conclusion - I agree 4 is NAI but that doesn't mean UCV feels the same way and based on UCV's philosophy it's possible he saw something scummy

pedit: i think he was in kidney mafia and remember him being obvtown so i dont know if im really convinced

we all own page tops communism etc

pedit: fuck u too php

This is in response to what I read UC as. What his reads were were not relevant.
In Kidney half my posts were complaints about the number of posts.

In post 259, Katyusha wrote:

In post 209, humaneatingmonkey wrote:I dont like how you think i should have voted you there. i dont like how you're branding my play cautious here when that's not even what's happening. i dont like how you think sheeping is something unlikeable. and i don't like how you think me not liking UC is somehow grounds to not place my vote elsewhere

hop uh

this isnt a statement of disliking UC, he's just talking about your thought process in 205

That could explain a lot of the last few pages.

In post 260, Hopkirk wrote:@243/Monkey

137- no content
138- Joins Flubber wagon
140/142- no content
167- no content, restates dislike of Flubber
178-9- no content
180- no content except that you don’t scumread Serg
193- Wants hammer
194- question without content. Asks if someone else scumreads me
195- no content. No actual reads expressed other than Flubber as of here. Seems cautious
203- Votes me

Seems cautious to me.

The phrases aren’t out of context. You haven’t shown why they apply/why you’re sure I had Flubber as basically conf-town.

this belongs to spin city 2017. here's truth city 2018:

137 - being exasperated about having to read 6 page of fluff
138- Joining this Flubb wagon
140 - me saying that i dont want flubb to feel slighted

167- me stating my want of a flubb wagon and asking flubb for some insight hoping for it to be more AI
178- me noting that i want to decrease the margin for people to come in and lolhammer
179 - me asking flubb for some insight hoping for it to be more AI
180- me stating that i dont like sergtacos and then putting that in front of flubb for his consumption
193- Wants hammer
194- me wanting to know if kat thinks flubb was not worth the L-1 is not being cautious. also that if she thinks hopkirk was a better lynch, wondering why she didn't vote for that in the first place
195- no content.
203- Voting hopkirk

my friend, i was hoping that my vote on you would be productive. i am so happy it was.

By cautious I mean only voting on people who have other votes first and not producing content to support those votes.

Anyway, right now I'm thinking something like:
Town: NM, Flubber, HeM, Katyu, Moz
Neutral: UC, Seph, Sheep
Scum: BuJaber, Serg, and maybe Intern

In post 260, Hopkirk wrote:The phrases aren’t out of context. You haven’t shown why they apply/why you’re sure I had Flubber as basically conf-town.

Because everything in your ISO is mostly UC, and flatly telling everyone that Flubb was town without doing some grilling or scrutinizing that read first.

In post 262, Hopkirk wrote:This is in response to what I read UC as. What his reads were were not relevant.

??

hop can you

take a few steps back and just try to reread everything because now that you got called out for it i still feel like we're in different planes of existence and hem seeing it too makes me think it's not a mutual or me issue

ucv's alignment is irrelevant here and i dont think ive ever asked you what you thought it was. we started having a conversation because you didn't seem to like the question i asked about ucv possibly scumreading intern, and i went and justified why i thought it was relevant. then we kind of went into a few non-sequiturs and i didn't really pick up on how off they felt until i asked if you were being deliberate about it. i was then asking if you saw the possibility that it was serious to clarify my intent and then from there it seemed that we might have different takes on what constitutes a serious vote so i dropped it

pedit: still would like to know why flubber's town, and also why sheep is null and intern is scummy? rest i can see from your pov

i wish you have waited for the flubb thingy to be done before acting scummy because I sincerely wanted more from that whole flubb wagon. now everybody's gonna react to flubb differently than how I tried to anticipate they would

no i think he's here. just in a different POV because of that different alignment

In post 269, humaneatingmonkey wrote:no i think he's here. just in a different POV because of that different alignment

i mean i think the same thing so far but i'd honestly feel kind of shitty if i mislynched someone over a misunderstanding

past history says this is a typically accurate tell and usually it becomes more clear what's actually going on when you ask someone what's actually going on in their head - that's how you know it's a misunderstanding from alignment or not

In post 267, Katyusha wrote:

In post 262, Hopkirk wrote:This is in response to what I read UC as. What his reads were were not relevant.

??

hop can you

take a few steps back and just try to reread everything because now that you got called out for it i still feel like we're in different planes of existence and hem seeing it too makes me think it's not a mutual or me issue

ucv's alignment is irrelevant here and i dont think ive ever asked you what you thought it was. we started having a conversation because you didn't seem to like the question i asked about ucv possibly scumreading intern, and i went and justified why i thought it was relevant. then we kind of went into a few non-sequiturs and i didn't really pick up on how off they felt until i asked if you were being deliberate about it. i was then asking if you saw the possibility that it was serious to clarify my intent and then from there it seemed that we might have different takes on what constitutes a serious vote so i dropped it

pedit: still would like to know why flubber's town, and also why sheep is null and intern is scummy? rest i can see from your pov

I thought you'd be more interested in HEM town. Anyway, Flubber is town because the wagon was bad. Sheep is neutral because there's good and bad. Intern I want to interact with before I talk about.

I'll go through our conversation from my pov in next post.

In post 268, humaneatingmonkey wrote:i wish you have waited for the flubb thingy to be done before acting scummy because I sincerely wanted more from that whole flubb wagon. now everybody's gonna react to flubb differently than how I tried to anticipate they would

I'd have liked if UC got to L-1, but we couldn't have that either.

In post 270, Katyusha wrote:

In post 269, humaneatingmonkey wrote:no i think he's here. just in a different POV because of that different alignment

i mean i think the same thing so far but i'd honestly feel kind of shitty if i mislynched someone over a misunderstanding

past history says this is a typically accurate tell and usually it becomes more clear what's actually going on when you ask someone what's actually going on in their head - that's how you know it's a misunderstanding from alignment or not

you are so town you might get NK'd

In post 271, Hopkirk wrote:Anyway, Flubber is town because the wagon was bad.

In post 175, northsidegal wrote:Flubbernugget (6): sheepsaysmeep, Sergtacos, Katyusha, Not_Mafia, Internecine, humaneatingmonkey

3 townreads, a null read, and 2 possible scum doesn't seem like "bad" composition, especially considering from the game's context I would think the townreads here are stronger than the scumreads?

and HEM is kind of obvtown now so you townreading his push on you makes sense to me, especially since you havent called him out for misrepping you or anything

when you're done with explaining your pov i'd like to know the bad of sheep because i only see good

humaneatingmonkey wrote:

In post 270, Katyusha wrote:

In post 269, humaneatingmonkey wrote:no i think he's here. just in a different POV because of that different alignment

i mean i think the same thing so far but i'd honestly feel kind of shitty if i mislynched someone over a misunderstanding

past history says this is a typically accurate tell and usually it becomes more clear what's actually going on when you ask someone what's actually going on in their head - that's how you know it's a misunderstanding from alignment or not

you are so town you might get NK'd

believe it or not that'd be a first!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

oh. then are you scum now? because i should be scumreading you, right?