Mafiascum.net

Activity, lovely. Also a vague but still an explanation from Empking. Also lovely.
UNVOTE:

In post 14, Shadi1337 wrote:My name is Shadi so I'm scum.

In post 297, Yates wrote: This is not how you introduce yourself to a new playerset. Now you know.

Why not? I'm breaking the ice with a joke. Am I not allowed to crack a little joke in RVS?

In post 14, Shadi1337 wrote:I would like to know why Yates says "you know why" but I assume it's an intern joke

In post 297, Yates wrote: And now you know not to insert yourself into an inside joke - especially during RVS.

Why not?

In post 89, Shadi1337 wrote:Whose idea was it to protect noobs in this game in the first place?

In post 297, Yates wrote: Thanks for letting us know you are not a noob. We will be expecting a higher level of play from you from here on out. Now we know that when you make these mistakes in the future they are by design and should be used in determining your level of scumminess.

Fair do's, I couldn't wish for more.

In post 126, Shadi1337 wrote:I'm saying that I'm not making an attempt to wagon on you, but if a wagon was to happen I wouldn't jump off from it

In post 297, Yates wrote: And now that we have determined you are not a noob you understand why this post is scummy, right?

Kinda. I was trying to push Rach off from from defending me as I was confused why she was doing it

In post 132, Shadi1337 wrote:

In post 131, Selkies wrote:Unfortunate that you're now going to be lynched for it isn't it

I rather be lynched for it than being given pity.

In post 297, Yates wrote: And since you're not a noob you understand why this would be a terrible post if you were actually Town, right?

No.

In post 156, Shadi1337 wrote:you guys are too busy tunneling me instead of lurkers.

In post 297, Yates wrote: And since you aren't a noob you understand why trying to kill your wagon by directing people towards lurkers is scummy as hell, right?

The less information you have from someone the more of a target they are, the more you know someone the closer to the truth you can get. Therefore I cannot help but target lurkers. It's true that scum could be the overly active ones but also the least active ones to not screw up and get lynched. It's important for a townie to look town but it's more important for a wolf to look town. As a villager has to do more e.g scumhunt.

In post 277, Shadi1337 wrote:Also, don't do the last vote on him, give him a little time to explain maybe a day. This is just for him to realise he's on thin ice.

In post 297, Yates wrote: And since you're not a noob you understand why putting someone you don't want lynched at L-1 is scummy as hell as well, right?

No, I believe I explained that pretty well. People work much better under pressure. I'm guilty as charged if that's scummy, coz look; Empking spoke!!! If my "scum buddy" would react to the L-1 I was forced to go on him because of my disclaimer.

In post 297, Yates wrote: The good news here is if Shadi flips scum, Empking is likely Town.

Well, not sure if I should comment on this one. Just prepare for disappointment

In post 297, Yates wrote: At this point I'm deciding between Selkies and Shadi. I'll wait for their responses to this post before making my final determination.

Fair enough. I'm likin' your read post, btw. Much more effort than what you have previously done in this game.

It's good to see you posting, yates. I've been developing some paranoia about you.

When I made post 186 I had done zero meta research on you. I hoped to get back something experiential about you if other players have played games with you. And I'd hoped to get some sort of reaction from you. Which I did.

FuDuzn, orcinus does have you in his scum pile. Me, not so much.

- fery

In post 300, Shadi1337 wrote:No.

You don't understand why if you were Town your statement that you'd rather be lynched than saved for being a noob is anti-Town? Fine. I'll explain. Your first job, as Town, is to survive [over-generalization but true from the 500 foot perspective]. Incidentally, this is why I don't believe in the "survivalistic" tell. By surviving, you are keeping the numbers in Town's favor. So if you are Town, it shouldn't matter why someone thinks you are Town as long as they are reading you as Town.

In post 300, Shadi1337 wrote:The less information you have from someone the more of a target they are, the more you know someone the closer to the truth you can get.

The less information you have from someone, the less information you have after their flip. You simply don't lynch lurkers on day 1. I'm not going to get into all the numerous reasons a Townie will be less active on day 1 but believe me when I say there are far more reasons for a Townie to be less active on Day 1 than a scum. This is especially true in a game where there is no strong leadership and no polarizing activity on the table yet.

In post 300, Shadi1337 wrote:People work much better under pressure

Pressure is L-2 with a threat to put someone at L-1. Putting someone at L-1 and then stating "but don't hammer" is the same as saying "go ahead and hammer" because you created that opportunity. This looks to me like scum setting up a mislynch to L-1 and hoping a Townie will just jump on and hammer either by accident or through flawed logic. Sets up the next day nicely as you grill the hammer about why THEY quick lynched. If you put someone at L-1 you better be equally prepared to be the hammer. Your "excuse" will not protect you. Frankly, if the lynch had gone through and he flipped Town I would have focused on you more than the hammer.

In post 300, Shadi1337 wrote:Well, not sure if I should comment on this one. Just prepare for disappointment

Are you saying I have it wrong and Empking is your buddy? I WOULD be disappointed.

In post 300, Shadi1337 wrote:I'm likin' your read post, btw

That's because it was a good post. Buddying me does not buy you Town points. Ditto for this post:

In post 301, Selkies wrote:It's good to see you posting, yates.

I'm going to vote for one of you. Tell me why it shouldn't be you OR why it should be the other guy. It looks like FuDuz will be sheeping me so consider my vote like a double vote. Go.

You'll have to give me more than one post as a reason to vote us, Yates. I've told you my reasons for making it.

- f

In post 303, fferyllt wrote:You'll have to give me more than one post as a reason to vote us, Yates. I've told you my reasons for making it.

- f

dammit

In post 303, fferyllt wrote:You'll have to give me more than one post as a reason to vote us, Yates. I've told you my reasons for making it.

What if I don't believe your stated reason? You claim:

In post 301, Selkies wrote:When I made post 186 I had done zero meta research on you.

Fair enough. I could buy that. But if that's the case, did you not see my post 231?

In post 231, Yates wrote:

In post 186, Selkies wrote:Yate's post kinda made me think he could be unmotivated scum.

There are a few people in here that can verify I am anything but unmotivated as scum.

Because if you did see post 231, you clearly weren't interested in fact checking prior to making post 283.

In post 283, Selkies wrote:Yates/Fudu/Shadi/Torcinator <-here lie good lynches

Was there anything besides lurking that had made me scum between 231 and 283? I think you can see why I would be reluctant to accept that excuse at face value.

Additionally, I pointed out some of the other problems I'm having with your slot including how you arrived at the suspect list I just quoted. Can you expand on how Fudu, Shadi, and Torc remain in your primary suspect pool? Am I still in that list?

Post 283 was my partner's. We're not seeing eye to eye reads-wise at the moment.

For me, your post 231 left a good impression - I just wanted more from you. And that reached a pretty high pitch of concern over the 24 or so hours prior to your recent posts.

I mostly like Shadi's analytical posts and his tactical approach to the game. Torcinator is coming off painfully n00b and it usually takes me a while to sort toltal n00btown from total n00bscum.

Empking's very low-content posting style bothers me. I think he's going to be difficult to get a handle on.

So, my own players of most concern at the moment are Empking, Rach,and Mac. Not trying to order them. FuDuzn belongs in there as well, because I do trust my partner's scumdar when mine is silent, and FuDuzn pinged it.

Nice to see Yates posting.

BTW I will say that Selkies is a hydra of TWO hyperactive posters so the amount of posts they have is not enough to make a case on them.

So what do you think of the rest of the players? Or do you have a read on them yet?

In post 306, Selkies wrote:Post 283 was my partner's. We're not seeing eye to eye reads-wise at the moment.

This whole hydra thing is gonna drive me crazy. I feel like you shouldn't post anything that you both don't agree on. Otherwise, I feel it may be used as an excuse to retract things you have said.

In post 300, Shadi1337 wrote:No.

In post 302, Yates wrote: You don't understand why if you were Town your statement that you'd rather be lynched than saved for being a noob is anti-Town? Fine. I'll explain. Your first job, as Town, is to survive [over-generalization but true from the 500 foot perspective]. Incidentally, this is why I don't believe in the "survivalistic" tell. By surviving, you are keeping the numbers in Town's favor. So if you are Town, it shouldn't matter why someone thinks you are Town as long as they are reading you as Town.

People have different opportunities and I believe they are all valid, my friend.

As a townie you are obliged to stay alive because unlike everyone else you're the only one who's confirmed town and therefore already doing your job by preventin' parity. However, if there are no leads then what are you supposed to do? Indeed, scumhunt. Tunnel, throw a barrage of attacks onto players; preferably people who have slipped or haven't talked a lot. So you can get to the roots of why that's the case

As scum you are also obliged to stay alive to prevent villagers from staying alive and reaching parity. However, a scum's main job would obviously be to be his pro town self IN ORDER TO STAY ALIVE.

So, we agree that no matter what you are, your wincon is to stay alive? So how is it more scummy to not care about dying as scum than villager? Sorry, I believe this logic is flawed.

In post 300, Shadi1337 wrote:The less information you have from someone the more of a target they are, the more you know someone the closer to the truth you can get.

In post 302, Yates wrote: The less information you have from someone, the less information you have after their flip. You simply don't lynch lurkers on day 1. I'm not going to get into all the numerous reasons a Townie will be less active on day 1 but believe me when I say there are far more reasons for a Townie to be less active on Day 1 than a scum. This is especially true in a game where there is no strong leadership and no polarizing activity on the table yet.

Point taken, the more information you have on a target the more you get out of the flip but that doesn't erase my past arguments. Instead of keepin' the lurkers lurking and giving them the chance to hit off cheaply why not get rid of them early on in the game? Or do you suggest that only happens after R2 if you're still clueless there?

In post 300, Shadi1337 wrote:People work much better under pressure

In post 302, Yates wrote: Pressure is L-2 with a threat to put someone at L-1. Putting someone at L-1 and then stating "but don't hammer" is the same as saying "go ahead and hammer" because you created that opportunity. This looks to me like scum setting up a mislynch to L-1 and hoping a Townie will just jump on and hammer either by accident or through flawed logic. Sets up the next day nicely as you grill the hammer about why THEY quick lynched. If you put someone at L-1 you better be equally prepared to be the hammer. Your "excuse" will not protect you. Frankly, if the lynch had gone through and he flipped Town I would have focused on you more than the hammer.

That's fair enough, I guess we differ in priorities then. I would have made a huge walls of attacks on the user who did it. It was a trap, and I made it deadly obvious that it'd be stupid to hammer. I'm sorry I don't see the pressuring level of L-2 the same as L-1 it's much more intense.

In post 300, Shadi1337 wrote:Well, not sure if I should comment on this one. Just prepare for disappointment

In post 302, Yates wrote: Are you saying I have it wrong and Empking is your buddy? I WOULD be disappointed.

No, you'd be disappointed in the result of lynching me. Saying that is obvious and needless to say hence the "I'm not sure if I should comment".

In post 300, Shadi1337 wrote:I'm likin' your read post, btw

In post 302, Yates wrote: That's because it was a good post. Buddying me does not buy you Town points. Ditto for this post:

In post 301, Selkies wrote:It's good to see you posting, yates.

... I was just giving you a thumbs up for actually being active unlike before. An active game is much funnier and you get a lot more reads. It's what you're providin'; I'm not trying to buddy you.

In post 302, Yates wrote: I'm going to vote for one of you. Tell me why it shouldn't be you OR why it should be the other guy. It looks like FuDuz will be sheeping me so consider my vote like a double vote. Go.

I don't think I'm a much worse or better candidate than Seal, he's doing pretty well. I'm not sure what to say here really, sorry. At least not any more than what other people have already stated about him, includin' yourself.

In post 308, Aafter wrote:

In post 306, Selkies wrote:Post 283 was my partner's. We're not seeing eye to eye reads-wise at the moment.

This whole hydra thing is gonna drive me crazy. I feel like you shouldn't post anything that you both don't agree on. Otherwise, I feel it may be used as an excuse to retract things you have said.

I prefer honesty about our disagreements, especially when the disagreements are relevant to the game's landscape. We approach the game differently, and I think town should know when we're compromising on an action and when we're in agreement.

- f

@ Post 309

Opportunities --> priorities.

In post 307, RachMarie wrote:Nice to see Yates posting.

BTW I will say that Selkies is a hydra of TWO hyperactive posters so the amount of posts they have is not enough to make a case on them.

So what do you think of the rest of the players? Or do you have a read on them yet?

100 posts over a week is pretty low volume for us, but it feels like there is so little to work with every time I can come into the game.

orcinus doesn't feel as uneasy about Mac as I do, btw. And we're not likely to vote you because it would mostly be a vote for policy reasons and I'm all but allergic to policy votes. I don't think orcinus wants to settle for a policy vote either.

I have one...maybe two middling-strong town reads in this game. orcinus doesn't share them. I don't think he has any good town reads, but maybe that's changed.

Hydras as a pain in the buns imo, but I am ever so slightly warming up to them

And Yates, why do you assume I am just going to sheep you?

In post 313, FuDuzn wrote:why do you assume I am just going to sheep you?

You want to vote Shadi or Selkies. I want to vote Shadi or Selkies. With our votes combined, perhaps we can elicit the pressure Shadi is so sure is going to shake the scum loose.

Ah ok gotcha, just thrown off a bit by your vernacular.

Sorry about my inactivity, I'm hosting my first game offsite.

I must say, this is the first time I've ever acted scummy. Even when I was scum for the first time, I was very pro-town.

Hell, when I was a first-time SK, I was read as most likely to be town.

self-meta??? You are not helping the case here torc.

I was just pointing out that this is very unusual.

My thoughts for today before I disappear for a couple hours:

I really need to get into the mindset of "innocent until proven guilty", I'm playing quite the opposite. It's rough. I feel like I'm reading way too far into posts.

My vote on Torcinator still stands. I don't like the cut of his jib.

As for Empking, I don't feel like there's enough to go on. 7 posts. And he didn't seem to care much that he was voted to L-1. Reads townie.

I don't like Shadi's bandwagon vote on Empking.

In post 311, Shadi1337 wrote:@ Post 309

Opportunities --> priorities.

I don't want to misrepresent this post so hopefully you can come back and explain it. Are you trying to say "Opportunities and then priorities"? If so, was your vote on Empking opportunistic?
That's what I got from it so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Actually, no. I don't like the cut of his jib but it doesn't warrant a vote at the moment.

UNVOTE:

In post 320, Aafter wrote:My thoughts for today before I disappear for a couple hours:

I really need to get into the mindset of "innocent until proven guilty", I'm playing quite the opposite. It's rough. I feel like I'm reading way too far into posts.

My vote on Torcinator still stands. I don't like the cut of his jib.

As for Empking, I don't feel like there's enough to go on. 7 posts. And he didn't seem to care much that he was voted to L-1. Reads townie.

I don't like Shadi's bandwagon vote on Empking.

In post 311, Shadi1337 wrote:@ Post 309

Opportunities --> priorities.

I don't want to misrepresent this post so hopefully you can come back and explain it. Are you trying to say "Opportunities and then priorities"? If so, was your vote on Empking opportunistic?
That's what I got from it so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Nah I meant swap the words, I typed opportunities instead of priorities.

Gotcha.