Mafiascum.net

Matt is more VI than scum imho. But he is terrible.

You'll notice I haven't actually called you scummy. Paranoid much?

No, of course you haven't. Outright retaliating with "I'm not scummy, you are!" would be blatant OMGUS. Instead, you're using the slightly more subtle tactic of discrediting me.

I'm discrediting you?
Might it have occurrd to you that maybe I'm curious about your experiences with me, seeing as I only have a limited memory of you?

PLEASE FORGIVE ME O GREAT ONES
I asked the wrong question. Here it is for reals, answer it and you'll probably never hear about it again:
How would you describe my usual scum play? Good, bad, flipfloppy, etc? How good/bad would be uncharacteristicslly good/bad?

what is VI?

I don't really think scum try to "discredit" people.
Or at least that's something I've never consciously sought to make happen as scum.


VI stands for 'village idiot.'
It's basically a term for players who can't follow reason or fail to understand basics of the game.

Did you ever my question about me appearing townier upon reread?

That hardly seems fair, what I've seen so far is a bunch of overanalyzing from a bunch of guys who seem like they know each other's metas from previous games. I don't bring any of that into this game so I'm letting you guys have at it.

Yeah you seem sane. I just think calling a vote for pressure a "pressure vote" kind of defeats the purpose.
Also what prompted the Triangle = GF comment?

SK I don't think I ever answered your question.
I'm not sure I'll even remember what it was if I go back and look, unfortunately.
But yeah, being told by somebody I respect that I'm wrong does bias me toward seeing things their way.
Somewhere along the way I also looked at your meta. Except I didn't. What?
People asking about why you're reading them as town are also usually town, though scummeta may cover that now.

I just read a lot of Sleepykrew ISOs. Could only find hats for scummeta though.
Still think he's probably town. 3AM llama is often crazy though.

Soda: You acknowledged Yates seems a bit on the scummy side. Is it so far fetched that one of the people who had been voting for me and I both noticed that? Besides, you're currently voting for me after some people switched from a vote on you to a vote on me.

Wow, Triangle. You are pushing pretty hard for no reason and with no evidence. Wait - I put a hyphen in my post. Oh! And an ellipses... Those are surely scum tells. Now I see your rationale.

You'll notice that I didn't have a vote on the board [other than no lynch] expressly because I didn't feel as though there was any evidence to substantiate a vote. I'm not even bothered by people calling me scum or potential scum or scummy or whatever they want. That's how a discovery phase works. While I acknowledge that I'm not a fan of the sarcasm or tone of FoN or Sleepy's posts, I at least understand what they are trying to do. In fact, I believe that their pressure may have borne fruit in exposing YOU.



Suspicious to me at present:
1. Triangle - Looks like you are trying to exploit a general distrust of Yates as seemingly the 2nd or 3rd option for players [190, 215, 224+225, 229+230, 237]. Plus, voting for a noob is the easy way out. No one is going to defend someone they don't know or particularly care for/about.
2. kondi2424 - random lynch vote with no explanation in 252

Less than suspicious to me at present:
1. Grimmjow - I agree with pretty much everything he says in post 253. A reluctance to random vote on Day 1 is not an immediate indicator of scum. To the contrary, it seems to indicate a reluctance to vote poorly. This is a position I at least understand. As indicated above, I also agree with his assessment of kondi. I can't even blame him for not liking my initial posts. I haven't had anything of substance to say until this post.
2. Implosion - Handled my "noob post" well in 176.
3. Sleepy - Handled my "cattle prod" well in 190.

Iffy:
Right now I'm iffy on Pine. Posts 195, 197 and 199, for example, show irrational flip-flopping. While that isn't an immediate incrimination because I did bait him a bit, it gives me cause for concern. At the very least, it gives me reason to pay a little extra attention to his posts and behavior.

^OMGUS against Triangle.

Pine. My question. One last time. Please.

Yates, Sodaread?
Why DID you use hyphens?

↑ Yates wrote:Wow, Triangle. You are pushing pretty hard for no reason and with no evidence. Wait - I put a hyphen in my post. Oh! And an ellipses... Those are surely scum tells. Now I see your rationale.

You'll notice that I didn't have a vote on the board [other than no lynch] expressly because I didn't feel as though there was any evidence to substantiate a vote. I'm not even bothered by people calling me scum or potential scum or scummy or whatever they want. That's how a discovery phase works. While I acknowledge that I'm not a fan of the sarcasm or tone of FoN or Sleepy's posts, I at least understand what they are trying to do. In fact, I believe that their pressure may have borne fruit in exposing YOU.

Vote: Triangle

Suspicious to me at present:
1. Triangle - Looks like you are trying to exploit a general distrust of Yates as seemingly the 2nd or 3rd option for players [190, 215, 224+225, 229+230, 237]. Plus, voting for a noob is the easy way out. No one is going to defend someone they don't know or particularly care for/about.
2. kondi2424 - random lynch vote with no explanation in 252

Less than suspicious to me at present:
1. Grimmjow - I agree with pretty much everything he says in post 253. A reluctance to random vote on Day 1 is not an immediate indicator of scum. To the contrary, it seems to indicate a reluctance to vote poorly. This is a position I at least understand. As indicated above, I also agree with his assessment of kondi. I can't even blame him for not liking my initial posts. I haven't had anything of substance to say until this post.
2. Implosion - Handled my "noob post" well in 176.
3. Sleepy - Handled my "cattle prod" well in 190.

Iffy:
Right now I'm iffy on Pine. Posts 195, 197 and 199, for example, show irrational flip-flopping. While that isn't an immediate incrimination because I did bait him a bit, it gives me cause for concern. At the very least, it gives me reason to pay a little extra attention to his posts and behavior.

is there a reason you didn't say a damn word about me

I currently have no read on Soda or Reck.

Do you have any actual townreads?

I am far too hungover for this game right now. I will get back into the game later this evening.

Thanks for the post. More uselessness.

↑ SleepyKrew wrote:Do you have any actual townreads?

There's no one I have identified as "absolutely positively" townie. I think that will require investigation information or confirmed scum hunting success. My "less than suspicious" list would be the people I would investigate later [after checking on more suspicious characters] if I had a cop/investigator role.

A good half of the "town" has yet to contribute anything substantive at this early juncture in the game.

Alright. One last question:
Why'd you wait so long to post content?

↑ Yates wrote:

↑ SleepyKrew wrote:Do you have any actual townreads?

There's no one I have identified as "absolutely positively" townie. I think that will require investigation information or confirmed scum hunting success. My "less than suspicious" list would be the people I would investigate later [after checking on more suspicious characters] if I had a cop/investigator role.

A good half of the "town" has yet to contribute anything substantive at this early juncture in the game.

you do realize town makes up a majority of the game so saying you have varying degrees of scumreads but no townreads is a terrible way of doing this

However Yates is probably town for post 296 alone

Yeah, Yates has worked his way to townland.