Mafiascum.net

In post 274, Garmr wrote: That's it your doing it again trying to cut the conversation short by to appeal to third parties. Your temperament is slightly different when you are the one getting pressured. If you are pressuring and in the dominant position your fine with 1v1 and continuing the argument on a personal level. But when I'm dominant and pressuring you try to cut it short and appeal to others instead of engaging in personal debate. Which makes me feel this is the right path of pushing

I'm trying to spare everyone having to listen to you and me make the same points over and over again because I don't think we're going to get anywhere. You have your opinion about what happened and I have mine.

I happen to have faith that town will get this right, so I don't need to keep justifying myself to you.

In post 275, bji wrote:

In post 274, Garmr wrote: That's it your doing it again trying to cut the conversation short by to appeal to third parties. Your temperament is slightly different when you are the one getting pressured. If you are pressuring and in the dominant position your fine with 1v1 and continuing the argument on a personal level. But when I'm dominant and pressuring you try to cut it short and appeal to others instead of engaging in personal debate. Which makes me feel this is the right path of pushing

I'm trying to spare everyone having to listen to you and me make the same points over and over again because I don't think we're going to get anywhere. You have your opinion about what happened and I have mine.

I happen to have faith that town will get this right, so I don't need to keep justifying myself to you.

Seems like a way to try and avoid criticism.

proddodge

became unexpectedly busy recently

i'll try to get my head around this game once im home thanks

In post 265, bji wrote:

In post 257, Sashaddin wrote:3- We got to a L-1 for a very short time. Usually L-1 provokes a lot of discussions and idea, but it didn't last this time.

Garmr took the hammer off me pretty quickly. I think Garmr has been playing long enough to know that a hammer was not going to happen there. All of the players who had expressed any scum leaning on me were already on my wagon. The only players who hadn't expressed any real opinion were the lurker twins Reaper and Flubber.

So given that Garmr has me as one of his top, if not as his top, scum read, why do you think he'd remove the hammer from me?

i mean, i agree with you that a hammer there was *unlikely*, but i don't have much issue with the fact that he unvoted on like page7 or whatever in order to completely remove the possibility; having the day end with someone lolhammering would not be super helpful to the overall health of the game

==

In post 267, bji wrote:So the chance of getting more info out of your top scum read, of getting reactions and interactions between your top scum read at L-1 and other players in the game, is not worth the very low chance of a scum self-hammer (which you'll have to explain to me how that could possibly be a bad thing at this point in the game) or a yolo town quick hammer of your top scum read?

do you think garmr is scummy for having this opinion wrt the proper way to play L-1?

==

In post 267, bji wrote:Sure seems like you're posturing as if I am your top scum read but in fact you know that I'm not scum

so you can't actually bring yourself to care about my being hammered.

I'm just another townie in your eyes, and you have so many more to kill anyway before you can win the game.

i mean the fact that he unvoted to me indicates that he cares about whether or not you're hammered
and like if he's scum there why doesn't he just keep the l-1 on in order to facilitate a possible yolo-hammer and/or quickhammer?

tbh the main suspicion i have with him unvoting is if he's scum with you

==

ok i read 269 like three times but i think i'm too tired to process it so i'll pick up from there in the morning

In post 278, skitter30 wrote: i mean, i agree with you that a hammer there was *unlikely*, but i don't have much issue with the fact that he unvoted on like page7 or whatever in order to completely remove the possibility; having the day end with someone lolhammering would not be super helpful to the overall health of the game

OK I wrote a huge wall in response to your post here but I deleted it. Nobody wants to read that, it's just not helping.

I like to think my points were clear already in my discussion with Garmr. I'm going to bore everyone if I restate them.

To answer the spirit of your questions though -- is this my third weak case? Yes it is. I will say again that all cases at this point in the game are weak. Every single thing that happens has both a scum and town justification and they are nearly impossible to tell apart. Everyone who tries to make a case will have this fact used by both town and scum to tear the case down. It's how this game always works.

However, I will continue to try to make interesting things happen. I genuinely believe that at some point will happen that will allow an actual strong case to be built up out of fragments of evidence in all of these weak cases. The fragments may not come from any of my interactions here in which case I sincerely apologize for wasting people's time. But I gotta try ...

I'll say quite frankly that as far as the smell test goes, Garmr passes it. I just don't see him being scum here. His actions and reactions feel very town to me. I reserve the right to change my mind later though, if some compelling connection comes up between things that have already happened and things yet to happen that make a good case to call him scum.

I feel the same way about Sash. I felt that way about Clemency at first but something about his turtling concerns me a bit. It feels more like a scum motivation of not wanting to be the focus of attention so early than town genuinely not wanting to play just because he got some early heat. Again, it's just the faintest whiff. But it's there.

Raya I am still deciding about and I still have a scum lean on her. My theory of one active scum and one lurking scum just feels right to me right now. I am hoping that we can quickly sniff this new guy out if he really is a scum.

The others ... I am too tired to think about right now. It's late and I need to go to bed.

Yeah that was a wall too but it is smaller than my deleted one, I swear!

sometimes life just be that way

In post 269, bji wrote:I'd just like to point out to everyone what just happened here so that town can be crystal clear on this:

I asked Sashaddin for his opinion of something that Garmr had done, and Garmr jumped out of the woodwork to defend himself against a question not even asked of him. He didn't wait to see what Sash had to say -- one would think that would be interesting detail that Garmr might want to know right? I mean Garmr would want to know that if he actually needed this "information" that is so important to him that he can't keep the hammer on me for fear of losing out on it ... but information about another player's viewpoint on his own play ... nope, he can't be bothered to wait to get it. He'd rather jump in and proactively defend himself.

Someone help me out here ... does Garmr actually want information or doesn't he?

this feels a little disingenuous to me; i'm not sure if removing the possibility of a lolhammer is at all the same thing as responding to a question asked about you to someone else (nor do i particularly have a problem with the fact that he responded before sash could? like it would have been nice if he did but like i don't think it's scummy or bad that he didn't)

==

In post 279, bji wrote:I'll say quite frankly that as far as the smell test goes, Garmr passes it. I just don't see him being scum here. His actions and reactions feel very town to me. I reserve the right to change my mind later though, if some compelling connection comes up between things that have already happened and things yet to happen

that make a good case to call him scum.

ngl this sounds a little bit like you're looking out for things that you can use to case him
like your'e framing this as: 'if i find things that i can case him over i might change my mind'
vs 'i reserve the right to change my read if i think he's scummy later'

i think it's specifically the fact that you're using phrases like 'case' and 'call him scum' -> like you don't think or believe he's scum (which is how townies push a scumcase), but rather you're calling him scum (which is how scum push a scum case since they know they aren't actually scum, but must still call them that to get that mislynch through)

i'm not entirely sure how well i explained that last bit; if i didn't make sense lmk and i'll try to explain it again

also tex not positng is +scum imo

In post 282, skitter30 wrote:

In post 269, bji wrote:I'd just like to point out to everyone what just happened here so that town can be crystal clear on this:

I asked Sashaddin for his opinion of something that Garmr had done, and Garmr jumped out of the woodwork to defend himself against a question not even asked of him. He didn't wait to see what Sash had to say -- one would think that would be interesting detail that Garmr might want to know right? I mean Garmr would want to know that if he actually needed this "information" that is so important to him that he can't keep the hammer on me for fear of losing out on it ... but information about another player's viewpoint on his own play ... nope, he can't be bothered to wait to get it. He'd rather jump in and proactively defend himself.

Someone help me out here ... does Garmr actually want information or doesn't he?

this feels a little disingenuous to me; i'm not sure if removing the possibility of a lolhammer is at all the same thing as responding to a question asked about you to someone else (nor do i particularly have a problem with the fact that he responded before sash could? like it would have been nice if he did but like i don't think it's scummy or bad that he didn't)

I'm doing the same thing everyone else is doing. I'm noting inconsistencies even when they are marginal.

That being said, I really and genuinely do think there is an inconsistency in approach to the game in first quickly taking a player off L-1 with the explanation that an unlikely quickhammer is undesirable because it means a lost chance of getting information, and later not letting questions that could provide information stand, and furthermore, not doing anything active to try to get information after ending the L-1. Is it just town inconsistency or could there be real scum motivation there? I was kinda hoping to trump the case up and get people talking about it to see what people thought, but that's mostly been defeated by my arguing with Garmr about it and subsequently explaining my reasoning instead of just letting it stand to see responses. I should be more patient and let the responses come in.

In post 279, bji wrote:I'll say quite frankly that as far as the smell test goes, Garmr passes it. I just don't see him being scum here. His actions and reactions feel very town to me. I reserve the right to change my mind later though, if some compelling connection comes up between things that have already happened and things yet to happen

that make a good case to call him scum.

ngl this sounds a little bit like you're looking out for things that you can use to case him
like your'e framing this as: 'if i find things that i can case him over i might change my mind'
vs 'i reserve the right to change my read if i think he's scummy later'

It is "I reserve the right to change my read if I think he's scummy later". I shouldn't even have to write that disclaimer since it should be patently obvious to everyone that that true for everyone at all points in the game, but with the way people have been nitpicking my play style I feel like I had to say it.

i think it's specifically the fact that you're using phrases like 'case' and 'call him scum' -> like you don't think or believe he's scum (which is how townies push a scumcase), but rather you're calling him scum (which is how scum push a scum case since they know they aren't actually scum, but must still call them that to get that mislynch through)

I don't think he's scum right now. But that doesn't mean that he isn't or that I won't change my mind later. I don't know how else to say it.

I have never found a scum in a game of Mafia by nitpicking word choices like that, for what it's worth. I've noticed posting patterns and caught scum that way; I've noticed a difference in attitude from certain players towards certain aspects of the game than others and found scum that way; I've seen inconsistencies between actual votes versus earlier statements about players and found scum that way; and I've found scum just by being lucky. But I've never found scum by looking at word choices. If you can find scum that way, then more power to you. But I think it's pretty weak sauce personally.

Argument reads not-TvS

In post 286, Irrelephant11 wrote:Argument reads not-TvS

Can you unpack that for me?

You’re both too angry
Either planned theater or genuine on both ends

UNVOTE: Raya
VOTE: Texdoeshalo

This slot needs to come up with some content fast. I have no problem lynching this slot based on all the reasons I gave already.

I'm with bji on this one. I personally prefer to see that guy lynched than modkilled, per 228. Poor reason to lynch but better than the contrary.
VOTE: TexdoesHalo

We need the lurkers to come out!!

sorry i'm trying to not die from sleep deprivation so i'm using this weekend to recover
there's a lot of walls and i really don't have the energy to read them

VOTE: TexdoesHalo

Was unsure of Flubber and Tex hasn't done anything to ease mind.

In post 290, Lady Angel wrote:Votecount 1.6:

Bji: 3 (Clemency, Sashaddin, bji) L-2
Texdoeshalo: 1 (bji)

bji was voting twice here. Trump was right about voter fraud!

(Sorry about the inactivity. Things got busy. I'll be here to post at some point tomorrow)

In post 295, Sashaddin wrote:

In post 290, Lady Angel wrote:Votecount 1.6:

Bji: 3 (Clemency, Sashaddin, bji) L-2
Texdoeshalo: 1 (bji)

bji was voting twice here. Trump was right about voter fraud!

Reaper who is town