Mafiascum.net

A hammer without a claim is one of the few policy lynches I can get behind, yeah.

PEDIT: God dammit, Mutley.

lol trol lol troll

What exactly were you hoping to accomplish, mutley?

ok Mutley's town.

Anyway, I can agree to deckards request for now.

UNVOTE: deckard

lol did Mutley scare you or what. Do you honestly think someone would hammer without a claim?

In post 355, Sakura Hana wrote:Do you honestly think someone would hammer without a claim?

It's happened before, it'll happen again.

With that being said, I 100%, absolutely, positively knew that Mutley was trolling at the t...oh fuck it who am I kidding

Sadly can't sleep.

Sakuras last few posts really make me question my read on her (She'd know there's a vig and daytalk as scum and not sure she's the type to play dumb on purpose about setup specifics). Deckards "Don't hammer until I have something up" despite nothing following through on it feels very much like him waiting for scum partners to come online and discuss what he should do to get out of this situation ie. What he should fake-claim and who he should push on ect.

Mutleys reaction-test trolly hammer makes him even more obvtown and like Sakura pointing that out in Post 353.

I have to admit, since you appeared this game has turned more interesting and thanks to it I'm starting to get some reads, before with all that number theory and driver's tell stuff i just kept feeling out of the loop.

Mutley's obv town. (that fake hammer for reaction testing)
Yesterday, town. (Willing to take the bet, scum would know they would lose the bet)
TMT maybe town (why would you want to confirm a town by meta if you were scum?)
Elyse neutral (not null, but my read on her has jumped around).
Deckard most probably scum.

Can't get a decent read from Syvure, and everyone else is null.

Not necessarily about the vig.

Fakeclaims? In THIS setup? Super-risky. You can realclaim, or claim the other role though.

EBWOP: I meant Siveure not Syvure (lol dat typo)

In post 361, Siveure DtTrikyp wrote:Not necessarily about the vig.

Scum would have gone through all of the roles and which they should / shouldn't attempt to draft-take, vig would have been included in that (Either N3 vig or 1-shot vig). As for fake-claims there's claiming alternative role, claim their real role, claiming a partner role, claiming the alternative of a partners role, claiming a randoms role to rolefish. There's heaps of options which is why I think he's vanished waiting for advice.

Sure.

Would they do it methodically to their partners or more of "Hey let's go for X role."

Besides, we're 15 pages in. Very possible to forget about something like that.

wall incoming

In post 150, Smudger wrote:As for his reaction, taking into context, is that a reason for a vote?

on day one that early, yes

In post 160, Your Troubles Will Cease wrote:

In post 153, Smudger wrote: So the two people who have introduced opposing number theories to us are town? theories that basically I find confusing and of no use other than to make me look at everyone at the top of the draft pick and the persons holding number 1 and possibly number 4?

thanks that is a great comfort.

Getting bad feels from this. We're not here to make you feel comfortable. And two people with opposing ideas can both be Town, no matter how confusing you find the ideas.

(for convenience, my user is usually shortened to Troubles, by the way.)

this is a blatant misrep. the comfort statement is sarcasm, and he never says or even implies that because they have opposing ideas one must be scum. he is saying that the number theories themselves can be used to draw attention away from actual scumhunting and make a person who is talking about them look more town because of the amount they seem to be contributing. i would vote troubles here but i need to make sure he isn't at L-1 or something so i will wait until the end of my post.

In post 168, Xdaamno wrote:Hey folks. Apologies for the lack of posting.


Alabaska's politeness makes him an interesting read. Any recent previous games you can link me to, Al?

sorry my sabbatical makes that kind of difficult. also, i don't think i used to be this polite playing mafia three-four years ago.

In post 168, Xdaamno wrote:

In post 110, pieceofpecanpie wrote:So you lied?

Are you planning to keep this up all game?

Leading question.

i too have a slight scum read on pecanpie, but i don't think this is a leading question at all given the circumstances of the post. it sounded more like a pissed off question to me

In post 170, Mutleyddmc wrote:Because I'm voting my scum read. There was no need to cover every player if you have null reads on everyone. Could have just said yer I find these people null but here are my town reads. As you didn't actually give anyone a scum read, just a null leaning scum, not ever a pure leaning scum. Seem contrived and just wanted it to make it seem as if you were anaylsing without actually putting anything real out there.

are you really criticizing someone for contributing

In post 172, Mutleyddmc wrote:Yes but there was little point to it to tell us basically you have 0 scum reads and a few town reads

thank goodness for this blatant misrep, just do a few more of these so you are in lynching consideration please (also loving that deckard's vote triggered OMGUS in mutley that almost resembled content)

In post 176, Jennifer wrote:

Stryker

: Siveure DtTrikyp, pieceofpecanpie, Cade, Your Troubles Will Cease (L-4)

interestingly enough, i have slight-to-heavy scumreads on all of these people.

In post 177, Your Troubles Will Cease wrote:

In post 174, Xdaamno wrote:Btw, just some take-it-or-leave-it advice for town players: It seems there's little point discussing your scumreads with the people you have scumreads on, because if they're scum, they'll try and subvert you.

I disagree. This is a surefire way to increase the likelihood of tunnelling. For me, scumhunting is a continual process and the best way to refine and solidify reads is direct conversation. If you shut your ears when your scumreads defend themselves then you'll never have a reason to move your vote. So, for me, that's a definite leave-it.

You do have a point in other circumstances though: if your second scumread starts defending your first scumread, take it with a pinch of salt.

what? he doesn't say shut your ears to their arguments, he says don't get into an extended argument (which would probably increase tunneling chances in my opinion). misrep #2

In post 179, pieceofpecanpie wrote:

In post 168, Xdaamno wrote:VOTE: pieceofpecanpie

*raises eyebrows*

In post 168, Xdaamno wrote:for the following reasons:

this response to the first case against you plays directly into how i would expect you to react if you were scum. now i have a decision to make on who to vote for by the end of this post...

In post 182, Belisarius wrote:

In post 179, pieceofpecanpie wrote:

I wouldn't laugh too hard. Xdaamno's methodology reminds me of Mark McClish. I'm hoping to have more in that same vein (albeit on other players) tomorrow. Tonight, work permitting, but I doubt it will the way things have been going.

who is mark mcclish?

In post 187, Belisarius wrote:Every other time I've mentioned the Driver method, I've been queried on it, so I'll just answer the question before it's asked : The Driver method refers to using an aggregate of the methods taught by Janine "The Lyin' Tamer" Driver, which is something I've only been familiar with for about a week. I expect one of the ongoing games I've used it in to be completed before this one is, so I'll link to that if I'm still alive when the time comes.

i cannot fathom for the life of me why you would not explain in a brief synopsis here what a driver tell is other than telling us to google it. i think that is anti-town. what if you understand something differently than someone reading the shit on google? what if they find the wrong thing? what if it is complex and difficult to understand without a summary? what if they can't find it (like smudger)? why in the world would you do this??? it makes your post basically meaningless to me. i can't even take any context from the word driver, since it appears to be named after someone.

people if you are going to use a system like this, it is basic forum etiquette to explain it properly instead of hoping other people can find it themselves. most people who are lazy will just ignore your post and assume you are contributing, which is pretty handy for scum.

In post 194, Belisarius wrote:

In post 191, TMTOLBTWNTOF wrote:One problem with your post, Beli, is nowhere in the post do you explain what a driver tell is, and what tells you claim to have found.

Actually I did, at the beginning where I explained what the Driver method is. This gives you enough information to google Janine Driver, learn about the method, and draw your own conclusions instead of relying exclusively on someone (me) who has just started using it.

major issue here. i want to know how interpret the driver method, because you are using it. if you misunderstand it in some way, or alter it in a way you think is meaningless but isn't, i'm left in the dust as to how to interpret your post.

i'm unsure about whether this is scummy or not, since the way bel is posting this makes me feel like he would to it regardless of alignment, but this has effectively derailed all discussion at this point due to his unwillingness to simply summarize his method, and i consider it more anti-town than mutley, to give a barometer.

In post 201, Smudger wrote:

Xdaamno

slight scum read, but based on lack of content than much else. Although this rather off handed comment here regarding town has my interest

In post 195, Xdaamno wrote:

Yes it would. That information is already available to you.

Yeah man, that's true, but I don't really have the time... haha. I would usually think that's up to you, since otherwise you've presented the town with entirely nonfunctional information which 'might' be able to be turned into something useful? Also, wanna speak a bit more about the methodology?

this should not be a scumread at all. we should not be expected to do research and guess how he is applying a method. the burden of explication is on the person using the theory, not the others in the game

In post 209, Mutleyddmc wrote:Well I don't know how he's adapted it to suit his purposes. However I believe from what I've read that it wouldn't translate well to the Internet. Plus the method they use aren't that great as lots them I do for fun.

Eg the yes or no answer shit. I never give a yes or no answer in real life cos I like to wind people up

bel, this post will probably prevent almost everyone from researching your method. and it is from mutley of all people.

if mutley and bel are scum, this is ingenious, but i don't think that is the case.

In post 214, Siveure DtTrikyp wrote:You know, the whole stryker thing is a pointless waste of time, as

"Last visited:Wed Jun 26, 2013 5:18 pm"

Yeaaah.

Waitaminute that's two days after his last post... Hrmm, I think he really should be replaced by now.

And dangit I've been way too focused on stryker argh.

nice pseudo-content there buddy. we don't need anyone to tell us stryker isn't posting, we've noticed.

In post 215, Belisarius wrote:So, direct responses done, the summary of what I'm doing with the Driver analysis is to pick apart everyone's diction and compare it to a list of things dishonest people say as compiled by a bunch of American cops (Driver was ATF, McClish was (maybe still is?) a US Marshal, both polled their colleagues for additional tells) and observe how that diction changes over time. Hence, posting all of my notes at this phase of the game would skew the results since the scum would know exactly what to stop doing long before any reliable results could be obtained.

see, now that wasn't so hard, was it? also, since it is based on diction, i don't see why people are discounting it because it was originally applied in real life. i think similar rules might apply here, although it doesn't sound like anything i would use myself.

In post 220, Siveure DtTrikyp wrote:UNVOTE: stryker

bored with this vote and nothing coming from it.

VOTE: smudger

Extreeeme gut.

you are doing everything you can to keep me voting you, aren't you?

In post 223, Sakura Hana wrote:Wait what, so Smudger finds me null because of lack of content yet finds Xdaamo scummy for the same reason?
VOTE: Smudger

way to not read his actual post and assume someone else is correct in talking about it. freedom left part of it out of his quote.

In post 236, Yesterday wrote:

2)

I find this post by YTWC insanely town, I don't think scum would say "can I quote the PM I sent" at all since it'd be a lie given that from what I've seen scum submit their guesses inside a QT (My memory might be wrong on that but that's what I remember from Team Mafia) and his reasoning behind picking #1 is as above what I think town would have rather than scum, explanation again in this post is also town. So yeah similar to Siv would bet he's town for sure.

i like your post, but this snippet draws some major red flags. the pm thing should be a nulltell, since scum could very well know that quoting pms is not allowed and said something like this to evoke this response. i'd say that is more likely, actually, since not quoting pms is probably the most well-known rule on the entire site. i'm surprised this is a "strong town read". in fact, most of your reads outside of sakura tend to be based almost wholly on one or two posts someone makes instead of their whole body of work. i find that weird, especially since you people are town (something i hate, btw, but a lot of townies do it so meh)

In post 254, Elyse wrote:I'll just post my thoughts as I read.

In post 24, Stryker wrote:

In post 3, Jennifer wrote:

DRAFT ORDER:

Siveure DtTrikyp: 9002

Why would we take you seriously?

Why would town not risk to take #1 and try to go for a useful town pr or deny a powerful scum pr?

I don't like this. It doesn't point to him being either alignment. He would want a PR as both town and scum.

In post 29, Your Troubles Will Cease wrote:Am I allowed to quote what I sent to the moderator here?
Because I picked 1 to deny any scum who thought they were being clever. I figured the risk of scum getting first pick is too great.

Really don't like this, but I think he's town because of it.

this seems like a contradiction. picking for a power role is a nulltell, but then a towntell? maybe i am misreading this. can you clarify, Elyse?

In post 254, Elyse wrote:

In post 168, Xdaamno wrote:Hey folks. Apologies for the lack of posting.

Alabaska's politeness makes him an interesting read. Any recent previous games you can link me to, Al?

VOTE: pieceofpecanpie
for the following reasons:

In post 65, pieceofpecanpie wrote:

In post 63, Belisarius wrote:Sure, if there's a reason for it besides "picking at random from amongst the top five"

If there's no actual reason, it's still RVS.

I have an actual reason for voting Stryker.

Some rudimentary PoE is only part of that.

Nobody genuinely uses PoE this early. It's plausible for town to make up reasons, but scum are more likely to.

In post 58, pieceofpecanpie wrote:Alabaska actually raises a decent point. Choosing a number over 9000 doesn't clear you. Yeah, it doesn't implicate you either, like Siv pointed out in #54, but the defensiveness is interesting.

"actually raises a decent point" is mild scummy language.

In post 110, pieceofpecanpie wrote:So you lied?

Are you planning to keep this up all game?

Leading question.

I completely disagree with this. Did you just ignore everything else he did that made him look town?

i know this isn't directed at me, but even if a person looks town in a lot of posts, a few posts that i find scummy can unravel all of that. you have to remember scum is trying their best to look town, so i don't think it is a stretch to vote someone who has a lot of town posts based on a few that really ping your scumdar.

In post 259, Sakura Hana wrote:

In post 257, Siveure DtTrikyp wrote:Smudger/sakura/deckard is a little weird just b/c 4/5/6.

Because I'm town (not like me saying it will make you guys believe it but w/e).
I was already disengaged from this game and now i feel even less motivated to do anything because i have a feeling everything i say will just make my hole just deeper so i might as well not say anything and die in peace, I already tried when I was scum once and it didn't work, now anything I do will just be fakescumhunting or mudslinging or just deflecting or w/e so yeah, just kill me, and good luck Town.

VOTE: Sakura Hana

In post 267, Xdaamno wrote:Just nipping in to say...

In post 254, Elyse wrote:Why would we take you seriously?

In post 254, Elyse wrote:I don't know what to make of Mutley's (...) nonsense.

In post 254, Elyse wrote:(...)I HATE all player reads lists

Try and keep it chill, the game is just for entertainment

what the hell is the point of this post? one of these is even a misquote, as ppp points out later on. this doesn't jive at all with the rest of Xdaamno's posts, but i also have no idea why scum Xdaamno would post this either. this is probably the strangest post in the entire game; i have no idea what to make of it.

In post 268, pieceofpecanpie wrote:Wow!

First quote isn't even Elyse's words.

Second quote is dressed up to look worse.

Third quote is completely out of context.

VOTE: Xdaamno

That kind of selective smearing just reeks.

no comment on Sakura? hmmm...

In post 271, Yesterday wrote:I really like Elyse's replace in post - seems to be on a similar wavelength to me on a lot of things and the focus on the "can I quote the PM" thing feels really town

just because someone agrees with you doesn't mean they are town. be careful not to fall into this trap.

that being said, why do you two like the pm quoting? what makes that town?? why couldn't scum pick 1 and then be eager to quote the pm to seem townie? i don't see how asking to quote a pm would say anything about alignment whatsoever, yet both of you think it is the towntell to end all towntells. i mean, i could have pm'd the mod "i pick 4 because i think scum will only pick below that likely boy am i town for trying to keep them from getting prs!!!" and be scum and then asked to quote it; hell i could even fakequote a pm. of course, that is against site rules, but we are assuming in this case troubles didn't know that (although i find that weird since it is one of the first site-wide rules i picked up on). can you guys elaborate on this?

In post 283, Yesterday wrote:I think I just hit the jackpot, sorry if this seems messy but notice this:

Playerlist:

Belisarius
Mutleyddmc
Smudger
Your Troubles Will Cease

Sakura Hana

Siveure DtTrikyp
pieceofpecanpie
Alabaska J
*Xdaamno Moon
TMTOLBTWNTOF
Elyse Crimml
Deckard
*Cade
Yesterday Stryker

And Deckards reads list order in Post 159:

Belisarius
Mutleyddmc
Smudger
Your Troubles Will Cease
Siveure DtTrikyp
pieceofpecanpie
Alabaska J
Xdaamno
TMTOLBTWNTOF
Crimml
Cade
Stryker

Sakura Hana

---

He's left his scum partner until last to state a read on while doing everyone else in the OP's order.

aren't there three scum in this game though? that's what the wiki page says. why one and not the other?

In post 302, Yesterday wrote:It's not at all, I'm third on the order and I'll essentially say it; I have a PR that's rather strong meaning doctor being on me is super important.

anyway, Sakura seems more like scum to me than Deckard to be honest, also Mutley had already voted deckard so i don't know why people freaked out. i'd rather lynch Sakura since she's being blatantly anti-town in giving up. Deckard may have also been in another game/left the website open so the whole following-the-daychat thing is a little fishy to me. also i would expect scum to pretend not to know about something the minute it is proposed, that's just the right play. i also am not as confident about the scumslip with deckard (i would probably use conditional phrasing as well seeing as not everyone knows my alignment). i would be willing to lynch deckard though just to get the game going since the case against him certainly has its merits and a large portion of the town seems to think he is scum

You face palm after I critize some one for contribution. Tell me how deckards fake reads are contributing. He had no real reads. Only null leaning something. That's fake contrived reads

I can't believe anyone fell for that. Pretty sure deckard prob did and has contributed as to why he hasn't come back in yet.

Oh and I do love a hammer without a claim sometimes it's fun. Only when I'm on the mood though

Ok, am on my phone and was reading the threads saw this threads activity and logged in. So having now caught up with the thread and you all seem to have been busy over the last few hours. First and foremost it is interesting to see that Sakura has done a 360 on the giving up lunch me attitude, in particular as the connection between Declard and her has grown, Well that is what it seems to me.

The case against Deckard looks conclusive and in particular Yesterday's picks on the list and timing issues are, IMO, spot on they cannot be faulted. Yesterday any reason you keep calling Deckard Decklan? Small point and of no real consequence,

VOTE: Deckard

Alabaska, re: Post 365 1) I don't think the PM thing is a null-tell in the slightest, while it's fairly known to be 'against the rules' it's not a tactic I think scum would use since in most rooms people would dismiss the comment and not make much of it whereas it's a very natural line of thought from town, as is picking 1 as an attempt to prevent scum getting a PR and sure it's possible scum could have done that to get town-read but it's a suboptimal strategy since it essentially guarantees they won't get a strong PR and the trade-off of not having a PR while giving the town another PR isn't worth "Being able to say I picked 1 to stop scum" in the slightest. 2) While I've linked only a few posts for most players they're not the only posts that make me think they're town at all, merely the strongest examples, linking and explaining each individual case is too time consuming and unneeded if they're not likely to get mslynched - if a strong town-read of mine was getting voted on the other hand then yes I'd explain it in massive detail. 3) I disagree with the "Lots of town posts unravelled by one scummy post" since while scums aim is to "Seem town" it's not easy to do naturally therefore it's easier to town-hunt than scumhunt (Since you'll find some scummy-townies but you'll often not find very-townie-scum) which is why I rely a lot more on my town-reads. 4) I know that 'someone agreeing with me doesn't automatically make them town' but someone in the exact same wavelength as me and thought process is generally a town-tell, perhaps not the strongest one in the world but it's certainly a good sign.

In post 365, Alabaska J wrote: Deckard may have also been in another game/left the website open so the whole following-the-daychat thing is a little fishy to me. also i would expect scum to pretend not to know about something the minute it is proposed, that's just the right play. i also am not as confident about the scumslip with deckard (i would probably use conditional phrasing as well seeing as not everyone knows my alignment). i would be willing to lynch deckard though just to get the game going since the case against him certainly has its merits and a large portion of the town seems to think he is scum

He's not in another game, checked. And 'leaving the website open' doesn't explain getting the prod, reading the thread and commenting in 9 minutes. It's essentially confirmed he was following the thread without posting (Fact that he was online 30th of june and posted on the 28th proves as much) and since then he's gone into 'appear offline' so he's lurking around the thread but not posting, that fits scum with daytalk perfectly.

^ And that puts him back to L-1.

PEDIT: Smudger's vote.

Now taken some sleeping pills, will be knocked out soon. Please for the love of god though if there's a doctor on me tonight.

In post 368, Smudger wrote:Yesterday any reason you keep calling Deckard Decklan? Small point and of no real consequence,

I'm terrible with names. Really terrible. I used to call Amrun Amrum for about a year before I was mocked and started correcting it.

Since people seem to be misconstruing it:

In post 2, Jennifer wrote: * Do NOT quote or discuss any private communications by the Mod.

This is vague in terms of if I can quote anything I said. It's plain to see that I can't quote anything the Mod said, but I wanted clarification as to if I could quote anything I said.

@Alabaska
I think picking 1 is a nulltell, but Troubles is town because of the PM thing. I think Yesterday explained that in detail so I won't go through it again.

I think you're giving people too much credit. I don't think Troubles faked the PM thing and I'm doubtful that Sakura faked not knowing about daytalk. That one is bugging me a little, since her complete turnaround in attitude is unnerving.

You say doing that would be optimal scum play, but remember, scum don't always play optimally.

@Smudger
I just remembered you asked me that question about posting reads lists.

When someone asks for my reads, I only give ones I am confident in. For example, in this game I would say Deckard/Sakura scum, Yesterday/Troubles town. I might be wrong about giving full reads lists. It might be a good thing. Personally, I don't think it is. It's all a matter of opinion to be honest.

In post 365, Alabaska J wrote:

In post 214, Siveure DtTrikyp wrote:You know, the whole stryker thing is a pointless waste of time, as

"Last visited:Wed Jun 26, 2013 5:18 pm"

Yeaaah.

Waitaminute that's two days after his last post... Hrmm, I think he really should be replaced by now.

And dangit I've been way too focused on stryker argh.

nice pseudo-content there buddy. we don't need anyone to tell us stryker isn't posting, we've noticed.

Given that everyone was still voting him it really doesn't look like people noticed.

In post 220, Siveure DtTrikyp wrote:UNVOTE: stryker

bored with this vote and nothing coming from it.

VOTE: smudger

Extreeeme gut.

you are doing everything you can to keep me voting you, aren't you?

Okay. What? We basically had a rvs-worthy case last way longer than it should have because the guy flaked. I realized there wasn't anything coming from it unless you take stuff like that over what the replacement does which is stupid so I swapped my vote as soon as it became apparent he was definitely getting replaced.

anyway, Sakura seems more like scum to me than Deckard to be honest, also Mutley had already voted deckard so i don't know why people freaked out. i'd rather lynch Sakura since she's being blatantly anti-town in giving up. Deckard may have also been in another game/left the website open so the whole following-the-daychat thing is a little fishy to me. also i would expect scum to pretend not to know about something the minute it is proposed, that's just the right play. i also am not as confident about the scumslip with deckard (i would probably use conditional phrasing as well seeing as not everyone knows my alignment). i would be willing to lynch deckard though just to get the game going since the case against him certainly has its merits and a large portion of the town seems to think he is scum

Haaangon a moment... I was about to agree with this but me being a sheep says "alabaska is scum b/c he's trying to deflect the lynch off his partner."

We should totally lynch deckard. And a cop should investigate alabaska or sakura... idk if sakura is that good an idea b/c she's given up.

PEdit: I think YTWC is town for the reasoning of why he picked one.