Mafiascum.net

Nope.

Lol Gamma way to be an ass.

He can delete one of his bump posts anyway.

In post 272, Gamma Emerald wrote:Wow dong is not reading 10 pages lol
Also it's early in the day JarJar reads aregonna be garbage anyways

ive read 6 pages but got bored since it was all but fluff
and day being early doesnt mean u cant have good reads (nit aaying jar has but i do)

In post 306, JarJarDrinks wrote:

In post 271, Infinity 324 wrote:

In post 265, JarJarDrinks wrote:I'm not scumreading anyone for disagreeing w/ me. I'm scumreading people for having garbage reads that they shouldn't have.

So you're scumreading people for strongly disagreeing with you?

No. And as I said, I'm just pointing out scumminess where I see it.

My reads are generally good. Therefore when someone attacks my scumreads, I give them townie points. When they attack my townreads, they get scumpoints.

Yes obviously town can have bad reads. One of the points of the game is figuring out if those people are scum or bad town.

my reads of people are always spot on, but no one listens unless im universally tred. do i scumread them all for it? i dont, cause im not a wanker full of himself. btw ur reads arent good, so keep the bragging for when you are sure

In post 312, JarJarDrinks wrote:@Infinity

I don't know what else I can say 2 u that I haven't. I think you're probably town so I don't really want to continue arguing w/ you about my playstyle except to say I've been incredibly successful with it in all my previous games.

If you have anything specific you'd like to talk to me about then I'm game.

so if you thought he was scum you would keep arguing with him? dont understand, ezplain.

im phone posting until weekend so bare with me lads
i'll be reading the pages i havent read in the meantime
maybe
if im bored

In post 329, Donempire wrote:btw ur reads arent good, so keep the bragging for when you are sure

Got any specifics ones u disagree w/?

In post 329, Donempire wrote:so if you thought he was scum you would keep arguing with him? dont understand, ezplain.

What don't you understand about that?

I don't take a whole lot of issue with Something_Smart at all, actually.

I actually like Dong's posting style.
UNVOTE:

In post 291, Creature wrote:What about Dunnstral?

What about him?

In post 194, XnadrojX wrote:

In post 189, MathBlade wrote:

In post 148, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 136, MathBlade wrote:

In post 34, Dunnstral wrote:serious question; what do you plan to accomplish with that vote?

You know math isn't going to get the run-up

Why wouldn't I get the run up? Everyone should be poked and prodded. No one is immune.

VOTE: Dunnstral

Explain.

This is more than a stretch, beyond a reach, this is annoying me

You know it isn't. Pre determining which players will and won't be wagoned is scummy as fuck.

I like this post.

Spoiler: Reasoning

Acrually pursuing a topic rather than ignoring it, feel that scum would like to drop a topic if no one follows

Um no. That post is horrible and by extension so is yours

LOL Dunn can't take criticism at all.

In post 204, iraonavp wrote:

In post 102, Transcend wrote:holy fuck

ira's gonna be a slot in this game that i can't read

Don't worry, I'm town-aligned.

VOTE: Dunnstral

He seems too confident to know that Creature and Transcend are scum-aligned together this early...

Really gonna pull off this dumb act again?

In post 337, Gamma Emerald wrote:LOL Dunn can't take criticism at all.

What are you referring to

The post directly above that comment; are you really that dense?

In post 314, Gamma Emerald wrote:Reads are not alignment indicative.
How they change and what you do with them is.

In post 316, Creature wrote:Yeah, good scum doesn't exist.

Lol

In post 337, Gamma Emerald wrote:LOL Dunn can't take criticism at all.

That's not criticism

What's so funny?

In post 343, Gamma Emerald wrote:What's so funny?

In response to 341.

In post 340, Gamma Emerald wrote:The post directly above that comment; are you really that dense?

Ima side with dunn here

What's dense is the comment dunn was referencing

In post 306, JarJarDrinks wrote:

In post 271, Infinity 324 wrote:

In post 265, JarJarDrinks wrote:I'm not scumreading anyone for disagreeing w/ me. I'm scumreading people for having garbage reads that they shouldn't have.

So you're scumreading people for strongly disagreeing with you?

No. And as I said, I'm just pointing out scumminess where I see it.

My reads are generally good. Therefore when someone attacks my scumreads, I give them townie points. When they attack my townreads, they get scumpoints.

Yes obviously town can have bad reads. One of the points of the game is figuring out if those people are scum or bad town.

In post 309, JarJarDrinks wrote:

In post 275, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 263, JarJarDrinks wrote:Not crazy about XnadrojX. His posts feel like alot of faking noobiness.

In post 274, JarJarDrinks wrote:

In post 176, Transcend wrote: @jordan i have a hard time believing that was a reaction test and you were satisfied with his reaction

but i'm not voting you since i have a feeling you might be town

OK I like this post cause it was pretty much my exact thought.

If Xnad is trying to fake noob-town, he's convincing me.

Did you switch your read here or am I misunderstanding something?

Yes that's exactly what I'm saying w/ the second post.

What caused you to change your mind?

In post 317, AlpacaAlpaca wrote:

In post 226, iraonavp wrote:

In post 223, Transcend wrote:i can't read iraon i kinda think he's town but

I DEMAND HE GETS VIGGED TONIGHT

VOTE: Creature

Just backing off since he knows policy vote looks bad.

Also, more proof he is not vigilante...

Can't tell if your serious?

I am not liking Gamma, and JarJar right now but Dunn and infinity seem pretty cool

Explain the Dunn read?

In post 319, JarJarDrinks wrote:

In post 305, Something_Smart wrote:I never said it was a reaction test. Every single thing anyone says produces reactions; doesn't mean everything is a reaction test.

Total misdirection

I asked you why you made those reads knowing that they were just non-serious meta reads. YOU were the one that answered that question saying that U "got some interesting reactions". So obviously you're implying that the reads were made to gauge reactions.

In post 305, Something_Smart wrote:Answer my question, then. Why should I have mentioned it initially?

Cause if ur town, there's no good reason to hide stuff (most of the time).

And you haven't actually answered me since you're now saying it wasn't a reaction test.

They were serious. They were not STRONG. I never said I posted those reads to get reactions; the part aimed at getting reactions was only the act of not stating how strong they were.
However, I didn't hide anything, as I said that they weren't strong after people remarked on them.

In post 333, Zachstralkita wrote:I don't take a whole lot of issue with Something_Smart at all, actually.

Why is this phrased in such a way to imply that you would be expected to take issue with me?

In post 334, Gamma Emerald wrote:I actually like Dong's posting style.
UNVOTE:

Was your vote ever serious?

You really think I "pre-determined" that Math isn't getting wagoned and that's somehow scummy.

It's ok to admit you're wrong, you know.

In post 343, Gamma Emerald wrote:What's so funny?

Posts I quoted can't be real...

In post 345, Infinity 324 wrote:

In post 340, Gamma Emerald wrote:The post directly above that comment; are you really that dense?

Ima side with dunn here

What's dense is the comment dunn was referencing

I can see what is being said; scum would try to coordinate who gets wagoned.