Mafiascum.net

and here's where the puzzle is at thus far. a double vote affix is on the line.


_ _ _ _ _ _ / _ _ _ / M A F _ A / N _ A _ _ _ _ _ A N

I

E

Vedith/bad/mafia/Neapolitan

In post 3524, Dunnstral wrote:Hey Mirhawk, what do you think of this performer wagon?

I think AGar has good points on him. Boem's are okay, but not as good. I don't really like the "why the fuck not" attitude that most of the town is using to justify their votes, but then again there isn't really any reason to not go along with AGar as I don't see any of his points on performer as being untrue or worth trying to pick apart. The fact that NOBODY is attempting to do so is a pretty solid indicator of what everyone thinks of his case.

We have lots of time left though and I'm not in any particular hurry to end the day.

What are your thoughts on performer personally? Do you think they're likely to flip scum?

In post 3553, beeboy wrote:Vedith/bad/mafia/Neapolitan

Beeboy ur dumb there's no "a" in the second word since a is revealed.........................

In post 3553, beeboy wrote:Vedith/bad/mafia/Neapolitan

____
| . .|
O . |
| . .|
. . _|__

hangman update incoming

_ E _ I _ _ / _ _ E / M A F I A / N E A _ _ _ I _ A N

2 strikes.

In post 3554, Mirhawk wrote:What are your thoughts on performer personally? Do you think they're likely to flip scum?

Yea I'd say pretty good chance of being scum

I also think you have a pretty good chance of being scum, so...

What do you think of implosion?

Reading through AGar's Performer case the first three points at least (and that's all that I've read at the time of writing this) are all deeply unconvincing to me.
Voting NL in your first post is not scummy. I really cannot imagine any scum player feeling such a need to be noncommittal that early that they would feel the need to NL. The only scum motivation that I can think of for voting NL is attempting to mimic one's own town meta if they would do the same thing. And any even vaguely competent scum is going to know that the conspicuity that it draws is not worth the ability to not commit to stances. That's just such a bunk point.

All of the posts that AGar cites as "not contributing to the game" kind of do contribute to the game? In them he states reads, he offers advice, he says who he wants to push and he gives reasoning. Idfk what AGar is looking for in those posts that Performer doesn't have.

As for the should-know-what-NAI-means point, I will just say it doesn't surprise me that much. It's not just based on join date like AGar is implying, it's based on another game that Performer and I played together (both town) where he was under fairly heavy pressure all game and I was constantly calling him obvtown. He even referenced that game early in this game multiple times. I agree it's a janky reason to scumread me but I don't think it's a scum-motivated push.

Honestly so far I'm just being reminded of the reasons that I was townreading Performer in the first place reading through this... though I will continue.

vedith the mafia neapolitan

In post 3549, Transcend wrote:

In post 3546, Mirhawk wrote:Who the heck is suddenlyarabbit?

here's a little hint:

they sleep in the same bed as you.

shannon's town dude and i have my account on the line on this one.

My imagination is not up to snuff in figuring that out.

Also why do you think Shannons town?

FUCK.

implosion wins doublevoter affix for today

I agree with AGar that 1038 is a useless post but it is in no way scummy, it's a NAI emotional reaction.
1039-1043, yeah, decent point. Not super compelling but something.
The "high expectations" thing is, indeed, a description of how Performer's play is unusual. It is not a description of how it is scummy.

I'm noticing a theme throughout a lot of AGar's case that he's just describing Performer's play and sort of leaving it up to the reader to see why those descriptions are scummy and no, they really aren't IMO.

(note that I'm not sure if that theme is indicative of AGar scum, it might be.)

In post 3561, implosion wrote:vedith the mafia neapolitan

...

I really should have known

Hey implosion, what do you think of mirhawk's recent postings?

In post 3559, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 3554, Mirhawk wrote:What are your thoughts on performer personally? Do you think they're likely to flip scum?

Yea I'd say pretty good chance of being scum

I also think you have a pretty good chance of being scum, so...

What do you think of implosion?

To be honest nothing really, it might be kinda rude to say so but I viewed him as kinda meh early on and I've been skimming a lot of what he says.

His last post on performer was weak though. Went out of his way to defend performer on the early no lynch part when it wasn't really a part of his case which is odd.

whoops I'm talking about 3559.

In post 3565, implosion wrote:I agree with AGar that 1038 is a useless post but it is in no way scummy, it's a NAI emotional reaction.
1039-1043, yeah, decent point. Not super compelling but something.
The "high expectations" thing is, indeed, a description of how Performer's play is unusual. It is not a description of how it is scummy.

I'm noticing a theme throughout a lot of AGar's case that he's just describing Performer's play and sort of leaving it up to the reader to see why those descriptions are scummy and no, they really aren't IMO.

you have two votes today. make good use of them. and make me think you're not scum with them.

^^ Something wrong with the post numbers or something if you haven't noticied

I guess since I'm responding to a bunch of points over multiple posts I should probably quote what I'm responding to

AGar wrote:- 1066 - "Titus could be faking, but I'm not lynching her." We were soundly in two camps at that point - "Titus is fake-claiming this as scum. Lynch her." or "Titus wouldn't do this as scum, this is dumb, let's lynch someone else." I don't remember anyone being so dead in the middle of that one, offhand.
- 1077 - I say "Lynch the mason" - the one he suggests could be fake claiming, and he votes me in response.
- 1119 - Very rarely do I find OMGUS to be at all a scumtell, but this is a rare occasion. His vote on Transcend is fucking awful, and this is coming from someone who thinks Transcend is probably shitty town at the most small-chance best case scenario, and scum at worst. The post has a lot of useless spec, and then at the end is "Oh hey, Transcend voted me - quote and vote baby!"

I don't really mind 1066 either. Being noncommittal is not in and of itself a scumtell, it's only a scumtell if it appears that a person is being noncommittal for the sake of advancing some scum agenda, typically leaving flexibility to shift with the tides. This doesn't read particularly as that, it more reads as him saying "we should sort Titus later, I just don't want to deal with her today." Which doesn't really leave him the flexibility to commit to pushing Titus if it continues to happen on d1.

1077, you're ignoring half his post... you know, where he also justifies the vote based on your vote of him. Also finding someone saying "lynch the mason" scummy is not inconsistent with the attitude of "she might be scum but don't lynch her today."

1119, "useless spec" once again is not inherently scummy. It looks like a natural progression of his opinion on Titus to me. Also this post isn't omgus? what?



p-edit @dunn will get to that after finishing AGar's post.

They're right next to each other on the same page, you'll be fine.