Mafiascum.net

i think 3327 and guyett's reaction to the scumslip in general looked unconvincing

In post 3574, zMuffinMan wrote:

selkies wrote:it demonstrates that scum-you playing like this is not out of the question (since you can compile a strong case for you being town)

that would only be a reasonable explanation for the stuff about why i'm town for interactions with scum / potential scum

really, though, the crux of me being obvtown is that i can only be scum with notscience, and a {me, notscience, goodfather} team who blocked cabd and didn't perform a kill N2 makes... literally zero sense

coz

the scenario here is that optimal play was what i outlined

so either i am scum who... for no good reason, did the stuff N2, even though it was way, way suboptimal play in comparison to getting a D3 mylo and i did this, for ... some, i dunno, possible scenario like this happening where i could wifom............... or i'm town

3535 isn't a play based argument so being paranoid about it seems rather dumb

pedit: that

so actually, for what teams would a no-kill make sense

because when i ask myself this question i draw a big fucking blank

In post 3461, Selkies wrote:

In post 3457, Cabd wrote:Oh and I don't think a team with ffery on it would have role copped me. Maybe.

Not when you're dropping killer crumbs all over the thread, no. There'd be no need.

Town: Cabd

Prob town: zmuffin - 3-player neighborhood is a niggle. However, it would make a great red herring to have 3 town neighbor.

That leaves nacho, guyett, notsci.

nacho hasn't gone through a visible sorting process with me. I'd feel better about the easy read if I'd been srsly obvtown this game. I don't think I have. On the other hand, I feel like troll nacho is town nacho

I feel like guyett has posted some really town thought process here and there. Clearly town thought process was totally missing in the red wine game and he coasted on the town read his predecessor built up.

notsci has come off scummy at the end of the last two game days. But, his scum game was pretty damn smooth in Thad's neighborhood mini. Off game maybe.

In post 3575, Selkies wrote:i think 3327 and guyett's reaction to the scumslip in general looked unconvincing

i'm not taking fery's reads into account for guyett vs nacho atm

do you have something to say because i feel like that's kinda obvious

the most obvious answer to me is the answer i outlined in 3535 - that scum wanted to push the idea that ssk wasn't killed therefore ssk-scum

the N3 kill on bert further points to this being likely

if you're asking specifically why no kill over killing off random player X that isn't cabd (who they wanted to block over blocking ssk and taking out cabd) or ssk (who was a possible mislynch candidate) then i dunno, i can come up with possible explanations (like not wanting to disrupt the game state, even numbers, etc) but i don't know

I'm glad you're back orci.

that's the thought process yeah but it's obviously retarded

and the question was for what teams

because right now i know it makes no sense for you but it makes equally less sense for anyone else

In post 3580, Selkies wrote:I'm glad you're back orci.

I'M SORRY GOSH

In post 3578, Selkies wrote:i'm not taking fery's reads into account for guyett vs nacho atm

do you have something to say because i feel like that's kinda obvious

VOTE: Guyett

do you want to sync up via skype or here

pedit wtf

all of you can get fucked.

I am 60% sure scum is NS + Nacho
30% is that it's NS + Selkies
10% that it's Selkies + Nacho

Get your vote on me Orc
you too Muffin.. I know you've been dying to for ages

how are you 10% that it's selkies nacho

Because I have god like scum hunting skillz

Also because its like THE ONLY OTHER FUCKING POSSIBLITY IF NS IS TOWN

Basically how I feel towards you all right now

the important part isn't so much why no kill occurred though, the important part is scum had 3 options:

- block ssk, kill cabd
- block cabd, kill ssk
- block cabd, kill someone else (or no kill)

and chose the third option

assessing why options one and two weren't chosen are key

selkies wrote:because right now i know it makes no sense for you but it makes equally less sense for anyone else

this is wrong, though

for any team with nacho in it (who was a possible vig candidate given everything cabd said at the end of D2, despite nacho insisting otherwise), it makes perfect sense to block cabd. the no kill really isn't important except in assessing who was trying to push the idea that ssk could be scum because he's still alive. and in that sense, i make the least sense as scum because if my aim were to set up suspicion of mafiassk, i wouldn't go out of my way to talk about the lack of kill pointing to someone wanting to push suspicion onto mafiassk (like i did D3) unless you think this was a convoluted, completely unnecessary white knight attempt (which would again require suboptimal play from me)

also, since any team with nacho in it benefits from blocking cabd and (apart from cabd himself) i am the only one who absolutely cannot be scum with nacho, N2 makes no sense for me being scum but it makes plenty of sense for, say, a ns-nacho, guyett-nacho or selkies-nacho team

i'm tired so my thoughts are jumbled atm and i may be repeating obvious shit i've already gone over but whatever
sleep time

and I'm not even drunk

@everyone
based on your knowledge of me would I no kill N2 if I was scum?

to be fair muffin it's not exactly like you defended ssk d3 is it

or did i just utterly fail in rereading the game

i'm almost starting to think that we should just completely discount n2's no-kill because it points to absolutely nobody

muffin says nacho but then again why wouldn't nacho block ssk+shoot cabd???

honestly the likeliest explanation i can come up for n2 was that guyett was drunk as hell

selkies wrote:to be fair muffin it's not exactly like you defended ssk d3 is it

i don't remember him being a viable lynch at any point and if he was i probably did say i didn't want to lynch him

and i wasn't referring to whether or not i defended him, but the fact that i was talking about what the no kill meant and why i thought it was more likely than not a ploy to frame ssk. i think at one point i was paranoid about cabd being scum who was trying to not only frame ssk but also potentially act like he was conftown because he was the only person ssk would have protected and therefore no kill occurred because cabd was shot at.

selkies wrote:i'm almost starting to think that we should just completely discount n2's no-kill because it points to absolutely nobody

tbh the no kill itself doesn't point to anyone in particular, but it does point away from me. that was the only reason i mentioned it.

anyway

actual sleep time now. night

In post 3597, Selkies wrote:honestly the likeliest explanation i can come up for n2 was that guyett was drunk as hell

For 2 straight days? Actually I was doing very little drinking those two days as my GF had just come home from her 6 month travels and the welcome home party thing was during N2.

Is this ffery or Orc btw?