Mafiascum.net

In post 2537, Katyusha wrote:can we not spam

In post 2552, sheepsaysmeep wrote:

In post 2537, Katyusha wrote:can we not spam

how else to play outed scum

In post 2555, Katyusha wrote:

In post 2552, sheepsaysmeep wrote:

In post 2537, Katyusha wrote:can we not spam

how else to play outed scum

That was at everyone else

In post 2556, Katyusha wrote:Rem: Hop or Flubber or both, if not both which of fire/n_m or is monkey scum all along



Ty

In post 2463, Katyusha wrote:

In post 2450, humaneatingmonkey wrote:Kat, weigh in?

overwhelmed

friday is my free day and i fucked up some organization things so now i have to do team mafia stuff again

im paying attention i just need to actually think about the insight i give

i lean hop in hop/flubb btw still, i was watching village in the woods and some of the things hopkirk claims he did as scumhunting normally here as town were completely absent there so i kind of question hop's assertion it fits in his meta (when it wasnt even about meta in the first place, just how people generally think anyway)

In post 2564, Katyusha wrote:Mostly the “it feels like you are [doing scummy thing that you have to stretch what the person is saying to apply”] while talking to them and not voting them thing

Your questioning felt more town

In post 31, Hopkirk wrote:Why do we need solid scum motivation at this point? You sound like you're pushing against it trying to look townie.
The issue is inconsistency.
Plus we get out of RVS like he wanted.

In post 477, Katyusha wrote:

In post 31, Hopkirk wrote:

In post 30, Katyusha wrote:I was under the assumption that UCV rvs'd but then said we should try to get out of rvs as soon as possible which seems like a normal progression to me

though i guess that vote could have been serious - if it is UCV i'd actually like to hear what you think the scum motivation for that vote is

Why do we need solid scum motivation at this point? You sound like you're pushing against it trying to look townie.
The issue is inconsistency.
Plus we get out of RVS like he wanted.

What first made me consider scum!Hop this game was this post - specifically the second sentence.

Why is Hop shading me here? It was a weird line considering I was voting on the UCV wagon which meant that I was considering him as possible scum - obviously I'm not going to be pushing back against my own push, I would unvote if that were the case.

Since Hop seems like he's responding to my first sentence (UCV's progression seems normal) but is using context from the second sentence, the response feels like a non-sequitur and is ignoring the point being made. Obviously at this point I thought he could just be town misunderstanding me, but the consistency in how he continued to not see what I was talking about seems to me that there was some intention of pushing this point to an agenda, and backtracking yourself to be accountable to your mistakes would have hurt the push's potency. Obviously once it was clear that I wasn't getting lynched or scumread this game he backed off.

If he were just trying to sort me, I think he'd approach it in a more inquisitive manner. "You sound like you're pushing against it trying to look townie" is very different from "Why are you pushing against your own vote?". The latter, again, doesn't really make sense but it's at least clear in that case he's misunderstanding my intentions and can be cleared up easily.

---

I definitely agree with HEM that the Flubber read seemed out of place and white-knighty. I would think a town!Hopkirk would approach the read considering why Flubber was being pushed in the first place:

In post 55, Katyusha wrote:scumreads n_m for inaccurate meta and his UCV read is weird in light of the game’s context

Maybe Hop doesn't have the meta or context to disagree with the n_m read, which is fine, but if he felt he was town then Hop would have an explanation as to why Flubber wasn't considering sheep's meta or had a reason to disagree with sheep. "The wagon is bad" is also a perfectly fine reason to disagree with the Flubber scumreads, but as I pointed out the wagon composition at that time consisted of mostly townreads of Hop's so it's hard to give credibility to that reasoning.

The meta Hop gave is also kind of lazy. There's more to Flubber's entrance than voting onto a large wagon, and plenty of people do the same when they enter games. It's a very NAI thing to attribute to meta as well. I don't know how strong Hop's meta skills are but it still doesn't seem like a read I would use to defend against a Flubber wagon when there's more to the push to dismantle.

With a confident enough read to just write "Flubber is town.", town!Hop would probably try to explain his perspective better rather than just state it as he caught up.

---

In post 271, Hopkirk wrote:I thought you'd be more interested in HEM town.

Something about this line also felt kind of manufactured to me. I don't really think it'd be surprising if he read HEM one way or the other and from Hop's posting it's clear he didn't intend to push on him as well, so townreading HEM there seems reasonable. Yet, why would Hop thinks this deserves special attention? I would think it's more likely that scum!Hop put HEM in his townreads so that he wouldn't look overly defensive and wanted to make that clear, and that I would assume that if town!Hop felt the interaction was TvT&T he wouldn't be surprised about me finding the read normal because HEM would seem clearly town to both of us.

I also question the read's genuineness considering Hop was happy to discard it once pressure came towards HEM's way. I think that, besides basically everything Bu has pushed, this is definitely one of the more opportunistic changes in reads.

I think this and the Flubber townread are both weak points in his reads that show that they're disingenuous. Hop's townread of Flubber should have further addressed the points being given better, and his HEM read seems to reflect more on the gamestate than what someone in Hopkirk's shoes would actually feel.

---

I think without going in depth about the argument that was had earlier, these are the most important points that lead me to feeling confident about scum!Hop.

Essentially, we can see that he's reading the thread from a different perspective that isn't inquisitive, provided a poor defense for Flubber when he was first being wagonned, and has reads that seem unnatural.

Flubbernugget wrote:Kat, my current understanding of your hopkirk scumread is a whiteknight of me and his egregious misunderstandings. I think both points are kinda blah.

If explaining why they're scum motivated better doesn't help clear that up or make the points better, then could you give your reasoning for listing him as your 3rd scumread?

After a short break I'm going to break down why HEM is town.