Mafiascum.net

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:21 am**

That was very kind of you to sum up, helps alot and I see where you're coming from here. I'd like to see Seraphims response to your recollection of events to be fair though. For now I agree that Seraphim does look like potential scum.

How has he interacted with Zwet in Day One? This may help

[looking back on it later tonight]

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:33 am**

Green Crayons wrote:
Phily wrote:Doubt he admited hes scum. Your words are strongly suggestive when Seraphim could be a poor townie right now.
Fine, we'll do a...

Recap
:
action X = commenting upon night activity

Seraphim said that he's suspicious of ZEE because ZEE performed action X.
Seraphim said that action X is scummy.
Albert said that Seraphim also performed action X.
Seraphim said OH YEAH YOU'RE RIGHT, but just that ZEE is "more likely to be scum" (actual quote), as if him and ZEE are mutually exclusive from being scumbags.

1. He admits that his own action is scummy. He does not attempt to explain why he committed this action, he just let's this self-admittal hang in the air as if we're supposed to forget about it.
2. In doing this, if he were town, he would realize that town inevitably are going to commit suspicious actions. It just so happens that this action X is a scum/doctor tell.
Then
, realizing that he is (allegedly) town and made this mistake, he does not apply that potential to ZEE and reasserts ZEE's scumminess because of committing action X.
3. Also, he promotes the fact that it's an either/or situation between him and ZEE, which makes no sense unless if he already knows he isn't in the same camp as ZEE. The tell doesn't work once per game or something silly like that.

I just reviewed play that can be easily attributed to a crash course in Scum Thinking 101. Looks like a scum lynch to me.

This summary makes me look smarter than I actually am. Could you also write my biography please?

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2009 2:25 pm**

Let's make this clear: I though the scum tell in question was congratulating the doc, not commenting on night actions period. ZEE congratulated the Doc and I said that we shouldn't assume that it's the Doc. There's a difference unless you can somehow prove that the two are the same.

Also, you are ALSO guilty of committing action X, GC.

Talk about an incredibly loaded question, and one that I would be happy to answer if this was a thread in Mafia Discussion. Let's just say I would put enough thought into it so that I wouldn't attempt to kill potential doc targets.

You're insinuating that the doc protected...commenting on night actions which is apparently a scum tell.

Also, look at ZEE's reply to this post...something you haven't answered yet.

This somehow makes it seem like you know that GLaDOS was last night's target.

This is incredibly suspicious. Take a look at the posts and see what you can glean. I'm willing to bet that one of these players is scum, definitely not both though. If ZEE and GC were scum together, I really hope that ZEE would not try to point this out.

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:19 pm**

Seraphim is scum. 327 is the nail on the coffin.

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:25 pm**

Note my sig, I'll have time to finish reading then. Sorry for taking so long D:

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:52 pm**

Philly wrote:But didnt Kor only start to contradict Gorrad when I mentioned how I thought the two were buddies earlier? I think it was just a poorly timed turn on a buddy since they were getting along fine till things fell on Gorrad (to the best of my recollection)

"Start to contradict"? Oh buy you are about this close to a smack bottom. For one I can't contradict another player, that's almost physically impossible. And two if you are going to start aguing I "turned on my buddy" you damn sure better show some buddy interactions first. I don't mind people sayin thy think a Gor/Kor partnership is possible (although I would like a little clearance as to why at some point you lazy bastards XD) but if you're going to start proclaiming YOU are responcible for me doing anything you need to back that up right now or shut up. There isn't a single person on this site that can make me do anything.

I haven't really been following this Sera thing so all these new posts don't seem to say anything to me. But I'll try reading that again.

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:53 pm**

Should be "by the way" I'm too tired right now... ><

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:30 pm**

Vote Count:

6 to lynch

ZEEnon: 3 (Korlash, Gorrad, Seraphim)
Seraphim: 3 (Albert B. Rampage, Green Crayons, ZEEnon)
Gorrad: 2 (PhilyEc, Xtoxm)
Albert B. Rampage: 1 (GLaDOS)

Not Voting: 2 (Giuseppe, Jebus)

Giuseppe has requested replacement.

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:37 pm**

Three on Zee, three on Seraphim. I don't trust either of them. I trust Korlash and ABR, but not really GC, and I totally trust myself. Happy with my vote.

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 12:38 am**

A threat like that isn't going to work GC. And I am engaged and i'm not below the activity level either.

What do you mean asking me about ABR's play? Are you asking me to comment on his playstyle? It seemed kinda a pointless question.

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:16 am**

You're so engaged, you have made three useful posts (out of nine)! Thrilling. And all one-liners to boot. And they all seem disconnected to the flow of conversation. So, yes. You're "engaged," in the sense that every so often you throw this thread a bone. But it looks like you're lurking and staying just within the minimum requirements of being here, which means you're lurkerscum or lurkertown, neither of which should be tolerated.

I've asked you several things regarding Albert/your play in general, none of them you have responded to. Here, in condensed format so you won't have to filter posts:
1. You originally wanted to vote Albert, but never mentioned the reasons as to why.
2. Within the same post of wanting to vote Albert, you hammer wasser. Why?
3. You have been adamant about "scummy play style shouldn't be vote worthy." You were happy to discuss/excuse wasser's play style, your play style... but not Albert's? Why the exception?
4. Do you find Albert's play style suspicious/scummy? Would you bracket him together with you/wasser in order to support your argument "consistently scummy play style does not a scum make?"

Gorrad wrote:Three on Zee, three on Seraphim. I don't trust either of them. I trust Korlash and ABR, but not really GC, and I totally trust myself. Happy with my vote.

So you don't trust Seraphim but you trust him enough to be happy with your vote alongside his own?

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:47 am**

Green Crayons wrote:
Gorrad wrote:Three on Zee, three on Seraphim. I don't trust either of them. I trust Korlash and ABR, but not really GC, and I totally trust myself. Happy with my vote.
So you don't trust Seraphim but you trust him enough to be happy with your vote alongside his own?

I don't trust him OR ZEE. They're voting for each other, so no matter which of the two I'm voting for, I'll have someone I don't trust voting with me.

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:49 am**

Oh, fair enough. ZEE's vote didn't register.

...Well, what do you think of Korlash?

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:54 am**

Green Crayons wrote:...Well, what do you think of Korlash?

I just said I trusted him, didn't I?

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:58 am**

Yes. Yes you did. Apparently I'm not fully awake.

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:58 am**

Green Crayons wrote:Yes. Yes you did. Apparently I'm not fully awake.

It's cool.

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:59 am**

You should read before you post.

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:08 am**

It's not a matter of reading, but of retention. Just need my coffee before I should attempt to divert my attention between more than a single thing in the morning.

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 6:55 am**

I trust Korlash...

xtoxm wrote:A threat like that isn't going to work GC. And I am engaged and i'm not below the activity level either.

You're pretty much an active lurker... I mean the whole "I'm not below the activity level" kinda suggests you're watching it and making sure you stay above it just for the purposes of being able to argue you are above it. GC has pretty much already said anything I would have felt to say though...

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:48 am**

Mastin replaces Giuseppe. Thanks, and welcome to the game Mastin!

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:00 am**

Thanks. It's an honor. I browsed the first seven or so pages (specifically, I was only looking at a few people's posts, and practically ignoring everyone else), when everyone else began to catch my eye as well.

For me to actually conclude who is scummy, I believe it would be best for me to reread all the pages and see for myself what I think.

And, as a spectator to this game, I also came to some conclusions about roles in this game, but at this stage of the game, I question whether it would be a good idea to talk about them. (Mainly, it has to do with who I think would be the scum-names, and who would be the town-names) They're just a spectator's wild speculation, and it might help scum in a nameclaim and hurt town in any future name claim as well, so I'd like to hear other opinions on the matter as well.

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:24 am**

I personaly think the "mafia" would be hollows... There are three named hollows I can think of right off the bat that would fit in our flavor situation.

As far as for safeclaims, there aren't really as many as you think. There are only 7 or so names taht make any sense being in this set-up, and I would assume most if not all to be actual roles. Combine it with the two or so minor names that 'might' fit and you get a town pool of 9 with 8 likely being in the game. Of course this overlooks scum safeclaims given to them. If they were actually given names then all this is moot. I think it's best not to actually link any name to possible alignment ATM though. but if and when it comes to massclaim/individual claims in later episodes then we can start building them one at a time.

And of course there is always the fact I could be completely wrong. I mean I wasn't exactly Mr. Mafioso extrodinare in Death Note...

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:31 am**

Something I just thought of:

We've all been saying that it was a doc save, because scum would very doubtfully no kill. And I agree, in that this is the most likely scenario. But, well, I have yet to see people consider two very real possibilities.
1: We have a night-kill immune player, who was shot, and the mafia wasted their shot because of that.
2: We have a roleblocker, who roleblocked the scum who sent in the kill.

Did the thought cross anyone else's mind?

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:38 am**

It's a possibility. But the conversation veered elsewhere, for better or for worse. Do you feel that opining on potential town roles is a good thing to do on Day Two?

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:59 am**

Welcome Mastin,

Mastin wrote:1: We have a night-kill immune player, who was shot, and the mafia wasted their shot because of that.
2: We have a roleblocker, who roleblocked the scum who sent in the kill.

Did the thought cross anyone else's mind?

Some sort of bulletproof crossed my mind, perhaps a jailer did the awesome deed.

Mastin wrote:They're just a spectator's wild speculation, and it might help scum in a nameclaim and hurt town in any future name claim as well, so I'd like to hear other opinions on the matter as well.

You're right to think that stating these opinions on whos got what role (concerning town players) is indeed a bad idea, but if you have any idea of who is mafia at the moment I'd like to hear your opinion. Obviously it wont be ripped apart since you just joined so nows your chance =/

---

Agree with GC about post 327.

In reply to Korlash,
Yeah, you seem pretty grumpy there. I've not even FoS'd you have I so why the sudden jump towards defense? I merely felt your attentions on Gorrad shifted into a negative manor as a connection between you and him began to come into view. Its made me suspicious, okay? Nothing worthy of a vote obviously though it does make you eligible for a reread. If I have the same problem with your actions then I'll be sure to make a more informative post as to why I've gone from theory to sureness.

At the moment I feel a Seraphim lynch would be more practical.

Unvote

Vote Seraphim

(L-2)

Might need to hear a claim sooner rather than later.

Anyone reading this, hammering aint cool until we get some discussion and a claim. I know you've all read this big bold text so, hammering then claiming you didnt know about the lynch being so close aint gonna happen or be accepted.

(This happens in more games than it should) ¬¬

Mafiascum.net

Mini 760 - Bleach Mafia: Karakura Town - Game Over!