Mafiascum.net

VOTECOUNT 1.06

+2 — Raskolnikov, Infinity 324
0 —
0 —
+1 — Iprobablysuck
+1 — Aristophanes
0 —
+2 — Naomi-Tan, JarJarDrinks
+1 — Rem
+1 — Manuel87
+1 — Slandaar
+1 — Draynth
0 —
0 —

+3 — DrippingGoofball, rb, LicketyQuickety

With 13 alive, it takes 7 votes to lynch.

Deadline is in .

Awaiting prod responses from: .

ACTIVITY

has not posted in the 24 hours since his prod, and is being replaced.

has not posted in the last 48 hours, and is being prodded.

In post 373, Slandaar wrote:

In post 300, Naomi-Tan wrote:yeah but only 2 of your posts are not responding to people poking you and that is lurking.

That is not what lurking is. Not that lurking is a good tell to begin with. Your whole argument you are making is 'you didn't post anything for 2 days' which is true but does not have any bearing on my alignment.

My argument is that you didn't respond till people started pressuring and talking about you and you only come in to defend yourself and have not really commented about the game as a whole (though odds are this'll prompt you to do so regardless so i'll write that down so I can say I called it regardless if you do it or not)

Continuing my conspiracy theory; looking over there posts they are disregarding Rasks Points entirely because she also mentioned how they was active in other games despite having a good point? like he literally says; "Him having a good case against you has nothing to do with what i didnt like about his approach." And everything about rasks case has been focused on the methods used in the first line (player Stalking) despite the quoted line line making me think he understood and felt it was a valid vote; else he would of said it wasn't a good case or some paraphrase of that rather than admitting its a good case.
but instead he kept disagreeing with the method he posted focusing on the top line multiple times.

In post 342, Manuel87 wrote:

In post 338, Aristophanes wrote:

In post 324, Manuel87 wrote:@Raskolnikov: In my opinion stalking ppl for activity and pointing it out as soon as you find someone that is active in other games is even more scummy.

2 things Manuel.

1. Rask basically wrote my scum meta to a T there. I didn't realize it was what I was doing, but so be it. His scumread is perfectly legitimate and natural if you ask me.

2. I dislike the shade you're throwing his way in that post. You don't ask him questions, just lob things at him that he can't really defend against. Why is that your approach here??

1) Him having a good case against you has nothing to do with what i didnt like about his approach.

2) Call it throwing shade if you want to i just stated my opinion. If you say he cant defend against that doesnt that mean you think that i am correct?

Also saying xyz is aktive in his other games could be considered as the same you are accusing me of (throwing shade you cant defend against)
Its my approach because i didnt like his approach as i stated in my post he should have contributed instead of stalikng inaktive players.

REPLACEMENT

replaces Draynth.

In post 374, Naomi-Tan wrote:Ah I see what happened there, Yeah I saw you unvote and vote on the same page and thought your unvote was a vote, so it looked like you voted for infinity then when that trained stopped you jumped to me. but as it was an unvote not a vote and naomi is being silly. unless in 234... one sec... hmm there is sort of a pattern.

Rb started on infinity and there you joined in with a comment reinforcing what rb was saying but not adding anything. then again with my train, picking up the pressure while slandaar went back to lurking. its not a strong case and it was just a gut feeling but it does kinda pan out a little when you look into it. though its not as strong as the last thing I said.

I voted infinity because i wanted to see how rb would react when Infinity got some votes on his head.
After rb unvoted there was no reason to stay with that vote.

In post 372, Naomi-Tan wrote: Ninja post by Manuel87; His opinion of me being town is an opinion if you want the reason he thinks that feel free to dig into the topic. Additionally, if he did post that while you was typing why didn't you read it? like it comes up and stops you posting you could of stopped and edited before posting just like im doing here. Regardless its still funny having those back to back.

As i said my question wasnt about him reading you town but his opinion on you so him posting that didnt change much for me thats why i went with the post anyway.

Can you explain the first part of this quote because i dont undderstand what you are talking about.

In post 377, Naomi-Tan wrote:My argument is that you didn't respond till people started pressuring and talking about you

I didn't post for a couple days. Nothing to do with anything else.

In post 377, Naomi-Tan wrote: and you only come in to defend yourself

I don't see how my first posts are 'defending myself'. You can explain?

You are just creating a false narrative.

Hi

WELCOME ME

I know rb off-site
QT too
I'll read and post tomorrow cya

In post 319, Manuel87 wrote:

In post 237, Infinity 324 wrote:Do you agree with what IPS was saying?

Not really i just didnt like your response to his reasoning.

Do you also find that people who say that early game reads are weaker are more often scum?

In post 291, Infinity 324 wrote:I wanted to stay on the manuel wagon for pressure

I think i mentioned that before but why should i feel pressured by RVS votes? If i get killed by that i am happy to get into a new game.

Sometimes, even RVS wagons make people scared of being lynched, or at least they know their actions are being scrutinized.

In post 323, Aristophanes wrote:I defended Naomi stronger than I had expected because as I began explaining it my read got stronger. It happens.

And I was prodded, not Beetlejuiced. Believe what you like though.

Well, ok

In post 324, Manuel87 wrote:VOTE: Naomi-Tan
Isoed her last game till Day1 ends and some posts into her 2nd last game. Her playstyle is totaly different in my opinion.
She already made an excuse for that but that excuse is invalid as she hasnt really been pressured since page 3 and still keeps up that silly i am so innocent and silly act.

She got really defensive when Slandaar asked her about that and still didnt answer his question but accused him of throwing shade at her instead.

Have you read naomi's scumgame?

In post 340, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 339, Aristophanes wrote:I had to Iso you to see that, as I have yet to read that portion on the game. I don't think I've been hiding that fact. How did you miss it?

I was under the impression that you were caught up based on this:

In post 337, Aristophanes wrote:Have to read from page 6, as I said.

Granted, I missed that you said you were behind in that same post.

I understand that you missed a bunch of things, but it rubs me the wrong way that almost everything you've done so far was based on you missing something.

Can I get a readslist or something?

In post 356, Manuel87 wrote:

In post 348, JarJarDrinks wrote:Manuel Flipflopping his Naomi read cause of a meta ISO looks shitty to me.

I probably had the same townread everyone else has.

Probably?

In post 358, Manuel87 wrote:In my opinion activity stalking means you are looking for someone you can throw shade on.

Posting in other threads or being online doesnt necessarily mean you are lurking.
Take me for example yesterday i had the gamethread opened the whole day at work but i couldnt read anything because of meetings and other stuff.
Now take the same situation while you are active in 2 or 3 games. You want to read everything before you write a response to something at least i would want to.
That takes time now you have 3 games to catch up on and you may not manage all 3 games so instead of playing all of them halfassed you decide to concentrate on the ones further into the game.

True ppl could actually just be lurking but i like that players get replaced after their 3rd prod so i doubt ppl would deliberately get prodded just to lurk for a little longer.

Thats also why i only play one game at a time because there are days i cant manage to read at all.

I understand why you think the argument is weak, why does that make it scummy?

In post 372, Naomi-Tan wrote:Guys Im really Convinced Manuel87 might be scum because of the huge miss rep in this post

In post 324, Manuel87 wrote:@Raskolnikov: In my opinion stalking ppl for activity and pointing it out as soon as you find someone that is active in other games is even more scummy.
You had been scumread by some ppl and instead of addressing that you disappeared yourself and came back by throwing shade at ppl that also were inactive.

I'm not talking about myself in this one I'm talking about Raskolnikov Because her argument found here;

In post 320, Raskolnikov wrote:snip

Though does mention his lurking is mostly focused on pointing out his meta and reasoning behind the vote and the lurking doesn't seem to be the major focus of their case. in fact when I looked over the main body of astro's section nothing was said about this, its like he read the first line and represented his entire cased based on that.. and he obviously finds meta a valid voting point because at the same time he was using it to pressure me. am I just seeing things guys? or is this just town paranoia? or am I onto something? Could do with some Assistance looking at this matter.

Actually, this is quite a good point. Manuel, what do you think about the rest of rask's argument?

Noting that manuel has chainsawed both aristo and IPS so far.

There are a lot of scummy-looking players for early d1, there's a good chance of at least 2 scum being in {ari, LQ, manuel, IPS}.

I was thinking about the setup a bit and concluded that mafia roleblocker and jailkeeper are the only PRs that would really make sense. Tracker, watcher, rolecop, etc. don't really work because after you use them on n2, everyone is essentially vanilla anyway. Encryptor doesn't make sense because daychat at night does nothing lol. Ninja, strongman, BP, doctor, etc are possible, but counter a specific town role and when everyone is 1-shot that's not really necessary. Just something to keep in mind, I guess. (don't randomly claim yadda yadda)

Hi replacement

In post 381, Slandaar wrote:

In post 377, Naomi-Tan wrote:My argument is that you didn't respond till people started pressuring and talking about you

I didn't post for a couple days. Nothing to do with anything else.

In post 377, Naomi-Tan wrote: and you only come in to defend yourself

I don't see how my first posts are 'defending myself'. You can explain?

You are just creating a false narrative.

your first post came because 2 people voted for you after saying literally nothing.
your second post had your read on Manuel and your vote on Raskol
your third post was saying you'd explain your vote later (which you havn't yet done nearly 24 hours later) after someone questioned you about it
and every post there after was a direct response to me after I remarked on your weak line on me.

In post 384, kraska77 wrote:I know rb off-site
QT too
I'll read and post tomorrow cya

WTF?

Hold it, I slightly misrepped you there; On your 5th post you give a hint of a larger post to come

In post 388, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 384, kraska77 wrote:I know rb off-site
QT too
I'll read and post tomorrow cya

WTF?

How do you know me? Who are you, just so we're on equal footing.

In post 389, Naomi-Tan wrote:Hold it, I slightly misrepped you there; On your 5th post you give a hint of a larger post to come

based on your Raskol vote

I should know to expect this kind of shit.

@kraska77, What site?

if kraska is from PerC, this is going to be interesting.

Boy
What's with the overblown reaction?
Should be quite obvious what site when I said I know both you and rb offsite

It's zerkalo from intpf

In post 394, kraska77 wrote:Boy
What's with the overblown reaction?
Should be quite obvious what site when I said I know both you and rb offsite

I guess..? Zerk?

In post 395, kraska77 wrote:It's zerkalo from intpf

Ninj'd me.

anyways, hi, Zerk, how goes it? We're playing a game so we can't really chit chat, but I didn't think you were super keen on the mafia thing. I guess once it bites there's no going back.

/overblown reaction.

Thought I'd do a rollcall list again as its been 10 pages or so to make all my positions currently clear; So once again here is my list of reads for your guys enjoyment and confusion

Aristophanes*
I feel they might be scum. but not based on their own actions but based on rasks case showing he is on his scum meta and Manuel87 Chainsaw Defence given I think Manuel87 might be scum its just the combination of these two factors making me think there scummy I thought there content was pretty good so.. guilt by association and meta here. Its a pretty weak footing for me to stand on though if Manuel87 is a member of town then I'd clear them based on that.

kraska77 (repl. Draynth*)
Who? erm.. oh.. Null. for Null content literally only voted a random vote when they entered many pages after the RVS had ended. I realy disliked that they posted jack, but now they been replaced.

DrippingGoofball*
I dislike there posts and find them unhelpful, but they have been too silent to form a real idea on there alignment would like more to go on going forward

Infinity 324;
I feel fairly confident that there town given there reads match my own pretty much

Iprobablysuck;
Confused/neutral I have no idea where they sit, but I'm thinking there just bad town, might be scum no idea really

JarJarDrinks*;
They feel lazy town to me, like they post pretty well when they post but don't say as much as i'd like.

Manuel87;
I think there one of the scum team given my conspircy theory and looking at them over all

Raskolnikov:
I feel they are pretty towny they had a strong evidence on astro that changed my veiws from him being more pro-town to him being more pro-scum and I appreciate the time they took to research this. I don't have any doubts they are town given the lengths and efforts they went through to make that post.

rb
Likely town they have good content and seem to talk about everything i'd expect from a good player, if they are mafia i'm gonna need a pretty strong case to disbelieve

Rem*
Though the early town slip I felt was pretty soild towny proof they havn't really spoken much since then, just enough to avoid a mod poke (I think) I'm starting to feel less that they are true towny but not enough to make them be scum so.. i'm thinking there a weak town // null read right now which is a shame as if they had kept up with the thread I'd had them in higher standing.

LicketyQuickety (repl. SavageDestroyer)
I dunno if there scum or bad town, but i'm still voting for them till I feel like voting someone else just for there 'women' comment when they entered, I guess I'd read them slightly below null? If Slandaar turns out to be town then he would be my next guess as scum.

Slandaar
Possible final scum member; dislike how they are posting nothing but defence and focusing only on responding to me and havn't added anything of real substance to the gave and if not talked about they vanish for long peroids without saying anything. if they are town like they claim with not much time i'd advise replacing out as they are not contributing to finding town by posting short posts to keep the heat off themselves