Mafiascum.net

In post 324, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 322, GrandpaMo wrote:because u havent done jackshit in the game + u should know my meta lol

and should know im acting my town!grandpa

let me hear those farfetched bs reasons once again

And boom just like that I'm now 100% convinced you're Scum.

how? i always speak like this lolol

u keep just saying im scum im scum for specific quotes, but never explain why. you have literally never addressed any of the points i gave in our interaction. you yet once again never decided to say anything. but im still giving u the benfit of the doubt

There is no world, absolutely no world, where actual town would need to self meta that hard. You can't think of anything else apart from, insulting someone's playing, self meta, and insulting again? I don't know why you're on such a high horse but people are trying to enjoy this game there's no need to be unpleasant.

In post 327, JamesTheNames wrote:There is no world, absolutely no world, where actual town would need to self meta that hard. You can't think of anything else apart from, insulting someone's playing, self meta, and insulting again? I don't know why you're on such a high horse but people are trying to enjoy this game there's no need to be unpleasant.

I'm never insulting another players playstyle. VFP just hasn't done much contribution and that is FACTS. Look at there other games and you will see a different playstyle... Them contributing and giving bare minimum reasons. You don't see any reasons / lots of contribution just stating statements.

Now you are using this to manipulate the situation... to guilt trip possible town. If you can't handle the truth, then I don't know -- I get frustrated once people scumread me for no reason and don't scum read someone who has flailed and been heavily scumcased on.

VFP doesn't even have to self meta.

I just say using meta is a guidance. That's all.

In post 319, JamesTheNames wrote:Give me a moment and I'll post an actual response.

James, can we expect to see this any time soon, or do you feel like the the VFP/Grandpa interaction has offered up sufficient excuse to dodge again?

Anyways, I have work and I come back around 4 pm EST, I better expect a good response.

In post 329, Val89 wrote:

In post 319, JamesTheNames wrote:Give me a moment and I'll post an actual response.

James, can we expect to see this any time soon, or do you feel like the the VFP/Grandpa interaction has offered up sufficient excuse to dodge again?

Give them time. It is a lot of digest. The interaction wit me + alstro's reasonings, etc...

In post 321, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 318, VFP wrote:I was just going to sheep NorwegianboyEE.
But I think Grampa is actually just scum here.

what

can u giv reasons? or nah

297 and 299
Felt scummy and just reminded me of you from the last game you were scum.

In post 322, GrandpaMo wrote:because u havent done jackshit in the game + u should know my meta lol

and should know im acting my town!grandpa

let me hear those farfetched bs reasons once again

Is this in response to me?

@Grandpa; no offense, but I feel the smart move here would just be to shut up here until VFP does give you something to actually respond to.

Scum may well use this as a distraction, and you don't want to play into their hands. If VFP is seriously scum hunting, I am sure more will follow.

In post 322, GrandpaMo wrote:let me hear those farfetched bs reasons once again

Since this was at me.
Can you explain this part?
Where have I had farfetched bullshit reasons on anyone?

Also, I've never played with town you, Grampa? Other than a game I replaced into where you were dead.
Why should I know this is town you?

Addressing questions as briefly and un-vaguely as possible:
202:
I thought GrandpaMo was being much scummier so I switched. My point still stands that you should focus one person at a time. If anybody wants to come and change my mind on that feel free, I'm still new after all.

252
If I had to say at gun point, probably Val89 or TF3, considering the really unnatural pocketing you did, it also doesn't have to be for reasons of: "let me pocket you so we can hammer James". It could just be used for later on. Regarding you're 219, surely the opposite is true also? Just because they agree with you doesn't make them town, even more reason which you've provided yourself as to how nonsense your early town cred giving to Val89 was. That's the only interaction I've seen including you which could harbour a scum pair. I don't get why you'd actually pocket a scum team though, or assign town cred to a scum partner over something like that. For TF3, 288 makes 0 sense to me, there is no chance this game is exactly the same as the previous one you were in, you had your points and opinions then you discredited them really randomly. Ergo probably T3.

They were all the direct questions with ? marks. I'll get onto the claims now.

^ if I missed a direct direct Q tell me the post number and I'll respond to it.

@James
I generally think it’s a good idea to have reads on as many slots as possible. But focusing on one slot (i,e the slot you find the most scummiest or want to sort the most) is fine and recommended. Rather than potentially overthinking and coming up with crazy theories that might be completely off the rails.

Especially on day 1.

Self-reminder to check that game VFP and Grandpa is talking about whenever i get on the computer.

202
Just because it worked doesn't mean it was valid. If you got to a hammer or lose and chose someone to vote because their name had an 8 in it and you think 8 is unlucky, and it just so happens to hit scum, doesn't mean going off of the number in their name is valid.

210
Completely disingenuous, you know that's not why.

239
I can't read Zyla's mind: 184 is different than mine, there's the formal comment for my not-so-formal comment just prior.

240
Pocketing from 145 has been adressed.
Stop with the self meta.
The whole being inactive for a night has been dealt with.

254
Adressed.

275
Adressed.

Everything else as far as I can tell, is asking for me to respond, commenting on my lack of reponse, or it's answered in this or the earlier post.

I apologise for the lack of posting, I'd like to post more and I'm going to try to.

In post 342, JamesTheNames wrote:If you got to a hammer or lose and chose someone to vote because their name had an 8 in it and you think 8 is unlucky, and it just so happens to hit scum, doesn't mean going off of the number in their name is valid.

That might be true, but picking someone to vote because their name has an 8 in it ISN'T meta. You know what meta is, because you use it correctly elsewhere, so why are you trying to slip this non-argument past us?

What about the number 7?

In post 342, JamesTheNames wrote:I can't read Zyla's mind: 184 is different than mine, there's the formal comment for my not-so-formal comment just prior.

I don't understand the "formal comment" bit, but #184 is a long time AFTER #145, when you first say you and Zyla have different reasons.

In post 319, JamesTheNames wrote:Zyla seemed more like a vibe read or trying for a 1v1. At least that's what I felt about it when I read Zyla's posts.

Clear this up for me now, please: If these are the reasons you thought Zyla was scumreading Grandpa, tell me . What did Zyla say or do that made you think that post #145?

In post 344, VFP wrote:What about the number 7?

You know what meta is too, VFP. Voting someone because any 'number in name' is an example of non-serious RVS justification, not Meta.

I am curious why you think your question was helpful.

7 just seems more serious than 8 to me.

VFP and Norwee are lean town.

This is a page bottom.