Mafiascum.net

Because CoA was scum and in the absense of other evidence I think those contributing to a red lynch should be given the benefit of the doubt. Sure scum will bus but overall scum need town to be lynched and not scum to win.

In post 2712, Yachting n Socializing wrote:No its not, see the bolded. That is not confirmation bias.

It's confirmation bias because you looked for things that make sense as coming from scum but you never analyzed whether those things would also make sense as coming from town.

In post 2725, YellowSnow wrote:Because CoA was scum and in the absense of other evidence I think those contributing to a red lynch should be given the benefit of the doubt. Sure scum will bus but overall scum need town to be lynched and not scum to win.

CoA was traitor and it's likely scum didn't know this...

In post 2725, YellowSnow wrote:Because CoA was scum and in the absense of other evidence I think those contributing to a red lynch should be given the benefit of the doubt. Sure scum will bus but overall scum need town to be lynched and not scum to win.

I thought I read somewhere that scum don't know who the traitor is?

And if there's one slot that's expendible, it's the traitor.

It's called crumbing.

I don't think scum would purposefully lynch the traitor unless necessary.

This is all WIFOM to be honest and I think vote analysis gives us a better chance of victory.

Do you see a crumb, or anything that could potentially be a crumb?

In post 2726, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 2712, Yachting n Socializing wrote:No its not, see the bolded. That is not confirmation bias.

It's confirmation bias because you looked for things that make sense as coming from scum but you never analyzed whether those things would also make sense as coming from town.

That's not true though.

In post 2728, Ankamius wrote:

In post 2725, YellowSnow wrote:Because CoA was scum and in the absense of other evidence I think those contributing to a red lynch should be given the benefit of the doubt. Sure scum will bus but overall scum need town to be lynched and not scum to win.

I thought I read somewhere that scum don't know who the traitor is?

And if there's one slot that's expendible, it's the traitor.

In normal games scum do not know who their traitor is, correct.

In post 2732, Yachting n Socializing wrote:That's not true though.

I see almost no analysis of the likelihood that RC would do the things he did as town...

In post 2730, YellowSnow wrote:It's called crumbing.

I don't think scum would purposefully lynch the traitor unless necessary.

This is all WIFOM to be honest and I think vote analysis gives us a better chance of victory.

Do people still crumb in 2019?

Yes.

In post 2734, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 2732, Yachting n Socializing wrote:That's not true though.

I see almost no analysis of the likelihood that RC would do the things he did as town...

I don't get what you mean

Especially if you're a traitor.

In post 2729, Something_Smart wrote:VOTE: Morality

No, they are soft cleared.

In post 2737, Yachting n Socializing wrote:

In post 2734, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 2732, Yachting n Socializing wrote:That's not true though.

I see almost no analysis of the likelihood that RC would do the things he did as town...

I don't get what you mean

What I mean is, you took a lot of things that RC did and said "he would do this as scum, and this is why." That's not enough for a convincing case, because there are plenty of things that people do as scum but also as town, and sometimes even for different reasons. What you also need to do is say "he WOULDN'T do this as town, and this is why."

In post 2739, Yachting n Socializing wrote:

In post 2729, Something_Smart wrote:VOTE: Morality

No, they are soft cleared.

OK.

VOTE: Boats n Hoes

You don't seriously think that a cop would check a guy who claimed to be either ascetic or miller...?

I can't remember the last time I saw a crumb be anything but a wifommy distraction

I think it was like... five years ago.

Good traitors don't need to crumb, the last time I was scum with a traitor, they pushed me in a way that made me realize who the traitor was within a couple days of the game starting. There's enough quality players here that I think it would be pretty simple to fake something similar if any of them are scum

Or do you mean by RCE.

Either way... he claimed ascetic...

In post 2740, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 2737, Yachting n Socializing wrote:

In post 2734, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 2732, Yachting n Socializing wrote:That's not true though.

I see almost no analysis of the likelihood that RC would do the things he did as town...

I don't get what you mean

What I mean is, you took a lot of things that RC did and said "he would do this as scum, and this is why." That's not enough for a convincing case, because there are plenty of things that people do as scum but also as town, and sometimes even for different reasons. What you also need to do is say "he WOULDN'T do this as town, and this is why."

So you lack reading comprehension. Got it.

In post 2743, Ankamius wrote:I can't remember the last time I saw a crumb be anything but a wifommy distraction

I think it was like... five years ago.

Good traitors don't need to crumb, the last time I was scum with a traitor, they pushed me in a way that made me realize who the traitor was within a couple days of the game starting. There's enough quality players here that I think it would be pretty simple to fake something similar if any of them are scum

Traitor crumbs can definitely backfire yeah, but for some roles crumbing is hugely beneficial... like RCE's...

Well if she was lynched day 1 she was't a very good traitor. It doesn't mean she didn't try to crumb.

In post 2742, Something_Smart wrote:You don't seriously think that a cop would check a guy who claimed to be either ascetic or miller...?

He CLEARLY checked me. He wasn’t around early game and didn’t know about it. I already expletives and showed exactly why this happened.

And RCE didn’t believe my ascetic, which was fine. It wasn’t true.