Mafiascum.net

In post 308, Kirari Momobami wrote:

In post 296, HoldenGolden wrote:

In post 293, Kirari Momobami wrote:Yeah crap this is probably holden+1, best chance peaches

Disappointing, I like town holden

You are welcome to expand the main idea of this post.

You've called me scum twice now without actually providing a rational. Makes me sad. Sad GoldenHolden is sad. But I'm HoldenGolden so I just smile.

Also have we played before? I dont think we have, so how do you know town vs scum me?

We've played I just can't remember which account I was on, maybe wagonomics?

In post 342, Kirari Momobami wrote:(expired on 2020-04-13 02:44:17) until peaches prod

this is my poe, it's this or pushing holden I guess

In post 359, 3bounty wrote:From now on I don't answer questions. Since it's ok for Alo not to it should be ok for everyone.

In post 358, humaneatingmonkey wrote:Holden, let's double-team this guy

In post 361, HoldenGolden wrote:

In post 359, 3bounty wrote:From now on I don't answer questions. Since it's ok for Alo not to it should be ok for everyone.

What?

But he is asking for the double standard you did where you said Alor is town once for it, and scum now for doing it? This currently has nothing to do with Alo, but with the double standard.

In post 349, 3bounty wrote:

In post 346, Aloratom wrote:

In post 344, 3bounty wrote:@Alo I answered that question, but for someone who actually ignores questions to scum read for that, is the most hypocritical thing I've seen on site so far.

Can you point me to where you answered it?

Yes I can. Can you point out to me where you answered peaches?

In post 350, humaneatingmonkey wrote:What's the vote count? Did Alo really put 3bounty at L-1?

In post 365, Aloratom wrote:

In post 349, 3bounty wrote:

In post 346, Aloratom wrote:

In post 344, 3bounty wrote:@Alo I answered that question, but for someone who actually ignores questions to scum read for that, is the most hypocritical thing I've seen on site so far.

Can you point me to where you answered it?

Yes I can. Can you point out to me where you answered peaches?

I didn't respond to Peaches. But I must have missed your response to me. If you'd direct me to it, I'd appreciate it.

In post 367, 3bounty wrote:

In post 365, Aloratom wrote:

In post 349, 3bounty wrote:

In post 346, Aloratom wrote:

In post 344, 3bounty wrote:@Alo I answered that question, but for someone who actually ignores questions to scum read for that, is the most hypocritical thing I've seen on site so far.

Can you point me to where you answered it?

Yes I can. Can you point out to me where you answered peaches?

I didn't respond to Peaches. But I must have missed your response to me. If you'd direct me to it, I'd appreciate it.

So your vote on me was because you thought I did not respond to you. In this, we can conclude that you think it's scummy to not respond to question directly aimed at a player.

You admit you did not respond to peaches (twice). Do you see where and how you are scum claiming here?

I can try to break it down and make this argument more simpler. Let me know if you're not following.

In post 252, LuckyLuciano wrote:UNVOTE: InWho22
VOTE: Aloratom

I decided to do some research as to whether he always speaks in a manner that is intentionally obfuscating. After all, he did say that he is communicating the way he is this game deliberately (195). The first thing that popped out when viewing his topics was a mafia PT: https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=94&t=82227. I decided to look there first, because if there is ever a time you would communicate clearly, it's with your known teammates. He speaks very clearly there. He also speaks very clearly in the game itself: https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.p ... er_sort=Go. Of note, is post 12 of the mafia PT,

That's fine with me.

The only Intel I have is on geraintm. He's back after a long break. He's from Wales, so his posts are GMT. He doesn't post during weekends. He was scum in a newbie game I just finished. When he talked it was in a confusing manner.

I don't think it was wholly by design. There was a lot hemming and hawing. Talking but not saying anything. I'll be interested to see if he does that as Town. If so, he's a good lynch candidate.

I looked up that newbie game: https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=81784. Mafia won a flawless game. While I think geraintm's communication was clearer in that game than Aloratom's is here, he both found it memorable enough to point out in a later mafia PT, and this game he said his confusing language is deliberate, which is backed up by looking at other games he's played. It looks to me like he is trying to imitate a characteristic of a player who perfect gamed him as scum. I don't know why he would imitate this as town, especially when he said in the mafia PT that if geraintm spoke confusingly he would use it to try and mislynch geraintm. There appears to be plenty of motive to imitate this as scum.

In post 253, LuckyLuciano wrote:The fact that he is both capable of intelligibly interpreting what people say, and communicating eloquently both reinforce my earlier belief that his readings of my statements were deliberately off-base and made in bad faith. More damning that making his own speech more difficult to decipher is choosing to misrepresent what other players say.

In post 254, LuckyLuciano wrote:Actually that unvote should be on Peaches. You know a player has been flying under the radar when you forget they are in the game even after you vote them for activity.

In post 256, LuckyLuciano wrote:I looked at 1994 first, and the way you speak there aligns with the other games of yours I have seen, and does not match the way you speak here. Before I waste my time looking at the other games, why don't we cut to the chase. You are deliberately structuring your sentences differently this game than in your other games.

Why?

In post 259, LuckyLuciano wrote:For the reference of the other players in the game: Posts 108, 112, 113, 149, and 204 all represent areas of the game where I feel that Aloratom's interpretation of what is said is far enough off-base to be beyond any sort of standard deviation that could be derived from any of his games I have looked at up to this point. That is to say, I believe his capacity to correctly interpret statements is proven in his past games. It is very possible for him to misunderstand something here or there, but his misunderstandings have been frequent enough, and egregious enough for me to consider them intentional.

Further, since Aloratom wanted me to look at some of his other games, and I did assuming he would come off as deliberately obfuscating in those as well, yet be town (spoiler: this is still the only game of his I have seen where he acts this way), I have come to realize that 175 is a lie.

Reference:

Newbie 1994

https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.p ... #p11693906
https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.p ... #p11693960

Of note: 3b played with Aloratom in that game yet neither called out Aloratom for 175, nor for his strikingly different approach to the game than what was displayed in 1994.

pedit: Aloratom, I'm not going to start arguing with you that you are behaving differently in this game than in your others, when you know that it is true. I asked you why. You chose not to answer, and instead to deny it. Either I'm crazy, or every other player in the game is going to be able to look at any of your other games and see what I see. You can either explain your deliberate change in approach to the game, or you can be lynched. I have reason to believe that the change is scum-motivated, based on the fact that you were perfect gamed as town, and your takeaway from that game, as indicated by the mafia PT of yours I posted, was that one of the scum spoke in a confusing way.

In post 260, LuckyLuciano wrote:I humored you and looked at 1986. You still speak eloquently there, unlike here. You were lynched despite breadcrumbing. Breadcrumbing is not the same as acting in a disorienting manner. It's 2:20am here, I'm going to bed. Hopefully you are lynched before I wake up.

I dislike day one associative analysis, but for the sake of vanity I'm going to say that 3b and HEM make the most sense as partners for Aloratom.

In post 330, LuckyLuciano wrote:Peaches wagon has always been, and still is, a push for activity. 3b randomly coming in and presuming Peaches is today's lynch and publicly abstaining is scummy. Alo trying to pivot the wagon from an activity push (284) to a lynch indirectly by arguing there is value in the lynch (316, 325, 326) is scummy. If you really want people to pressure Peaches for activity, then you don't start justifying the lynch before she meaningfully contributes. If Alo flips red, which he will, then Peaches is green and the other scum is not currently on Peaches wagon. This is true because of Alo's desire to lynch within the wagon when Peaches flips green. Inevitably he would be lynched at some point for being on the wagon as well, but if he gets a second mislynch by pushing people for being on the wagon after he justified it, then it will be 2 town for 1 scum and mafia will only need 1 more mislynch to win.

In post 333, LuckyLuciano wrote:3b on Alo

Spoiler:

In post 225, 3bounty wrote:Alo town - scum would be less likely to ignore questions from other players. He just outright ignored peaches question.

In post 234, 3bounty wrote:

In post 232, InWho22 wrote:

In post 225, 3bounty wrote:Alo town - scum would be less likely to ignore questions from other players. He just outright ignored peaches question.

Why would they? Isn't denying town information straight up anti-town, or am I missing some philosophy here?

I am sure there are players out there who can play scum and be anti town, but majority of scum would avoid being anti town.

In post 237, 3bounty wrote:

In post 231, HoldenGolden wrote:

In post 225, 3bounty wrote:Alo town - scum would be less likely to ignore questions from other players. He just outright ignored peaches question.

Can you explain your rationale here more?

I get the notion that scum tends to read the thread more closely, but peaches has been such a non entity it's not like Alo has exactly been punished for skipping a question.

I honestly forgot about peaches until last page

Would scum miss the question? He legit posted 10 mins after the post without answering it. I am not saying it's imossible for scum to do such a thing but less likely.

In post 238, 3bounty wrote:

In post 235, InWho22 wrote:

In post 234, 3bounty wrote:

In post 232, InWho22 wrote:

In post 225, 3bounty wrote:Alo town - scum would be less likely to ignore questions from other players. He just outright ignored peaches question.

Why would they? Isn't denying town information straight up anti-town, or am I missing some philosophy here?

I am sure there are players out there who can play scum and be anti town, but majority of scum would avoid being anti town.

So it is pretty much just NAI?

No. It is giving me town alignment. I give up on this point. Make of it what you will.

3b seems pretty insistent on defending Alo simply because he missed a question. Is it really that easy to get a townread from 3b? What about all of the questions I didn't answer? Why does this apply only to Alo? Further, his reasoning for townreading Alo is essentially that scum wouldn't play anti-town. The scum wincon is literally anti-town. 3b's reasoning here can be used to townread open-wolfing. It can be used to townread any scum-motivated action. It's incredibly weak, and doesn't support the strength of the read that I'm gathering from his desire to defend Alo.

In post 263, 3bounty wrote:Hmmmm. Nah sorry can't see it. Alo is probably town. You're correct I played 1994 with him, but I subbed in halfway through day 1, and the game had no day 2 so. Not much content there at all, dont expect me to be an Alo expert, I am just as confused as the rest by some of his posts in here.

Rereading some of InWho22's recent posts, starting to get lamist vibes.

3b admits to being confused by some of Alo's posts. This both should degrade his town read, because he does not understand where Alo is coming from, but also lead him to support my case against Alo, in that I provide reason to believe that the confusion that Alo is causing - which 3b admits he sees as well - is both intentional and scum-motivated. For some reason he blindly holds a townread on Alo. Not only that, but he begins to redirect focus on InWho22 without explaining what he saw that is giving him lamist vibes. It looks more that he's trying to deflect pressure off a scumbuddy than go after InWho22.

In post 239, 3bounty wrote:Need more content from peaches but I'm slight scum lean. Her RVS vote seems a bit non random with the question to Alo.

At other points in the game he literally says that there's nothing to be read from the Peaches slot, yet here he scumleans her. Why? Because she targeted Alo in her first post.

3b on Peaches

Spoiler:

In post 239, 3bounty wrote:Need more content from peaches but I'm slight scum lean. Her RVS vote seems a bit non random with the question to Alo.

As seen before, 3b believes Peaches may be scum.

In post 243, 3bounty wrote:

In post 241, Kirari Momobami wrote:

In post 228, 3bounty wrote:

In post 223, Kirari Momobami wrote:

In post 222, 3bounty wrote:InWho22 neutral.

Are you still satisfied with your rvs vote then?

Those aren't meant to be satisfying in the first place. Who is your top scum read and why?

I meant more you haven't changed votes, so the question is do you still think your vote is where it's most effective?

Struggling to find a decent scum read I will change when I do find one. Do you have any scum reads?

4 posts later and he is keeping his vote where it was in RVS because he doesn't have a good alternative. Not only is he scumlean on Peaches, but he believes we need more activity from her. Both of these are consistent with switching his vote to Peaches, and inconsistent with his actual course of action. Afterwards, he deflects back to Kirari, in the same way he deflects from Alo to InWho22 in a later post.

In post 299, 3bounty wrote:A peaches lynch unfortunately doesn't give me anything moving forward, but there is a chance that she herself is scum so there's that.

In post 321, 3bounty wrote:

In post 316, Aloratom wrote:

In post 299, 3bounty wrote:A peaches lynch unfortunately doesn't give me anything moving forward, but there is a chance that she herself is scum so there's that.

I don't understand what you're getting at here. If two people jump on and lynch Peaches, and she's Town, we get a lot of information out of that.

I get nothing, she has made two posts to you, that is what I'd label as not enough information.

These are posts I've already gone over in my prior analysis. The entire wagon on Peaches is for activity. 3b himself said we need more activity from Peaches. Why is her operating under the assumption that we are planning to lynch her? Why is he distancing himself from a wagon that isn't even supposed to be pushing for a lynch, and why is he distancing himself from a wagon that he himself is scumlean on? The scum motive would be to distance himself from ALO, WRT my analysis in a prior post that if Alo is red, his partner is not on the wagon and Alo's play indicates as much.

In post 370, Aloratom wrote:

In post 367, 3bounty wrote:

In post 365, Aloratom wrote:

In post 349, 3bounty wrote:

In post 346, Aloratom wrote:

In post 344, 3bounty wrote:@Alo I answered that question, but for someone who actually ignores questions to scum read for that, is the most hypocritical thing I've seen on site so far.

Can you point me to where you answered it?

Yes I can. Can you point out to me where you answered peaches?

I didn't respond to Peaches. But I must have missed your response to me. If you'd direct me to it, I'd appreciate it.

So your vote on me was because you thought I did not respond to you. In this, we can conclude that you think it's scummy to not respond to question directly aimed at a player.

You admit you did not respond to peaches (twice). Do you see where and how you are scum claiming here?

I can try to break it down and make this argument more simpler. Let me know if you're not following.

I don't think I ever scum read you. A vote can have several purposes. I think that this was discussed earlier. One is to effect a lynch. Another is to place pressure on an inactive slot. Yet another is to pressure a player who has not answered a question that has repeatedly been asked. My vote on you was the third. I unvoted you because I'm not sure now how many votes are on you right now, and I don't know that your lynch is the right thing for Town at this point. I don't think that it is, but I'm starting to doubt that.