Mafiascum.net

In post 370, Vedith wrote:

In post 365, Vedith wrote:Hmmm, I have but it was a while back. So you probably don't remember.

I retract this.
I was certain I've played with you before but apparently not.

I actually have a ptetty decent memory. Someone says something that pinged me on page 100, I will remember and find it.

In post 404, Nancy Drew 39 wrote:No, because THIS is actually relevant.

its like not relevant at all to this game.

you can make a meta case on someone using that game but it isn't strong in any manner for one we don't know the alignments of anyone in that game because no one flipped so making meta arguments would only be useful for pointing out things you believe are NAI from that game and comparing it to another, and it would actually still fail because the thigs you point you say are NAI could be AI if you point out two games as a meta basis for this being a NAI and one of those games doesn't match the game you picked. So at best you would be using NAI meta tell. At worst you would be using bad information.

Lastly because no flips occurred saying someones reads were bad from the last round makes no sense because no flips were announced. You can't know if my reads were bad if there are no flips. You can continually say I was wrong but that's like saying I am wrong about who wins the super bowl in 2020. You and I both don't know so you saying I am wrong is stupid, and I am not bringing up superbowl 2020 to prove a point. So you should shut up or you look dumb. Choose one miss Nancy.

Like fuck Nancy I could have been scum last round and you don't know, you could have been scum and I don't know. All this shit is dumb.

In post 398, Taly wrote:

In post 387, Allomancer wrote:Jokes about scumreading the mod are pretty common. I don't see how you think that's a scum move.

Is this the only point I make about you that is worth commenting on?

How about you explain your

Dann/Vedith

read.

I only argue against flaws. The rest of your points were not bad. The thing you need to remember most is that these were very early reads. I change my reads often, and we didn't have much info at the point.

I think the main reason we can't talk about alignments in the first iteration is related to the investigation

Either way we were told not to and should respect that, we were only given permission to talk about the game in general and presumably things not related to alignment.

In post 426, Firebringer wrote:

In post 404, Nancy Drew 39 wrote:No, because THIS is actually relevant.

its like not relevant at all to this game.

you can make a meta case on someone using that game but it isn't strong in any manner for one we don't know the alignments of anyone in that game because no one flipped so making meta arguments would only be useful for pointing out things you believe are NAI from that game and comparing it to another, and it would actually still fail because the thigs you point you say are NAI could be AI if you point out two games as a meta basis for this being a NAI and one of those games doesn't match the game you picked. So at best you would be using NAI meta tell. At worst you would be using bad information.

Lastly because no flips occurred saying someones reads were bad from the last round makes no sense because no flips were announced. You can't know if my reads were bad if there are no flips. You can continually say I was wrong but that's like saying I am wrong about who wins the super bowl in 2020. You and I both don't know so you saying I am wrong is stupid, and I am not bringing up superbowl 2020 to prove a point. So you should shut up or you look dumb. Choose one miss Nancy.

Like fuck Nancy I could have been scum last round and you don't know, you could have been scum and I don't know. All this shit is dumb.

you literally made a case against me because my posts in this game aren't like last game.

In post 378, Dannflor wrote:

In post 358, Nancy Drew 39 wrote:I already answered that.

Uh, where?

In post 352, Pink Ball wrote:If you feel like Nancy is being oblivious and she's posting 95% about reads, it's town Nancy. If she's fluffing more than usual, it's scum Nancy

But I feel like this is closer to fluffing, the oblivious part has me paranoid though

PB’s post. I commented on his reads.

Of course, because you don’t know anything about my meta.

In post 429, Allomancer wrote:you literally made a case against me because my posts in this game aren't like last game.

nope I didn't, saying you don't play like yourself. I read multiple games of yours during last game man.
I had to like cut myself while doing it because the pain of the knife was more pleasant than that, but i did that.

In post 426, Firebringer wrote:You can continually say I was wrong but that's like saying I am wrong about who wins the super bowl in 2020. You and I both don't know so you saying I am wrong is stupid, and I am not bringing up superbowl 2020 to prove a point.

If you say that the Cleveland Browns are going to win the 2020 superbowl, I feel like it's not stupid to say that you're wrong.

In post 431, Firebringer wrote:

In post 429, Allomancer wrote:you literally made a case against me because my posts in this game aren't like last game.

nope I didn't, saying you don't play like yourself. I read multiple games of yours during last game man.
I had to like cut myself while doing it because the pain of the knife was more pleasant than that, but i did that.

you need to cut out the personal attacks. Can you literally make a single point against me without complaining about how bad my posts are?

In post 399, Nancy Drew 39 wrote:

In post 356, Ankamius wrote:

In post 354, Pink Ball wrote:Oh, and if she's talking more about meta than anything else, it's even more town Nancy

No.

Trust me, she's thinking from a scum mindset.

No, we’re not fucking trusting you on jack. You keep calling me scum here, without giving me even a single goddamned reason. That is not acceptable.

You're reacting the exact same way you did in heroes after doing almost exactly the same strategy

In post 433, Allomancer wrote:

In post 431, Firebringer wrote:

In post 429, Allomancer wrote:you literally made a case against me because my posts in this game aren't like last game.

nope I didn't, saying you don't play like yourself. I read multiple games of yours during last game man.
I had to like cut myself while doing it because the pain of the knife was more pleasant than that, but i did that.

you need to cut out the personal attacks. Can you literally make a single point against me without complaining about how bad my posts are?

I am not attacking yourself. I am attacking your content. I think you need to separate the two my friend.

In post 379, Firebringer wrote:

In post 375, Nancy Drew 39 wrote:

In post 348, Firebringer wrote:

In post 347, Nancy Drew 39 wrote:

In post 332, Firebringer wrote:I am in the 90% certainty on Nancy and Allo being scum here. Someone try to change my mind!

I’m not sure about Allo but but your reads are probably wrong like they were last game, when you scumread duck who seemed really townie to me, remember that?

guess what, you can't bring up last round since its not a completed and fakegod told us not to talk about it.

He never said that. You read tw wrong and you’re doing the same thing to me in this game.

I am sorry do you have the worsts flip from last game? No? Don't? Ohh I guess than you need to shut the hell up then.

No, of course not but Duck was blatantly obvtown in that.

Uh no, I’m not fucking shutting “the hell up”, when I’m getting mostly bs reads on me and Ank keeps calling me scum, without even giving me a single goddamned reason - which she 100% did in Heroes.

One thing I think is pretty obvious, Ank and Krazy are never w/w here.

complaining about how bad my writing is accomplishes nothing if you can't form a read on me from it

In post 383, Alisae wrote:

In post 381, Nancy Drew 39 wrote:

In post 350, Alisae wrote:

In post 132, Alisae wrote:

@Fakegod probably a dumb question but can we talk about the first run of this game?

In post 134, FakeGod wrote:

In post 132, Alisae wrote:

@Fakegod probably a dumb question but can we talk about the first run of this game?

Sure.

Exactly, Fire isn’t reading the damn game.

I have airpods in I can't hear you atm sry

He was obviously wrong about this.

In post 431, Firebringer wrote:

In post 429, Allomancer wrote:you literally made a case against me because my posts in this game aren't like last game.

nope I didn't, saying you don't play like yourself. I read multiple games of yours during last game man.
I had to like cut myself while doing it because the pain of the knife was more pleasant than that, but i did that.

also where are you reading this from. I literally have two completed games on site, and one of them was over 2 years ago before I took a long break from mafia and the site in general.

In post 384, Firebringer wrote:wow Nancy actually got me triggered with that loaded statement about my the worst read.
I need something to calm me down.

someone tell me a funny joke

I know how to read tw and I think he was obvtown in that game.

that wasn't a joke tho

In post 437, Allomancer wrote:complaining about how bad my writing is accomplishes nothing if you can't form a read on me from it

I have a read on you, I was just venting my frustration your writing has on my psyche when trying to play the game.
You can be insulted about it if you like, doesn't change that is my feelings of it and it isn't against you personally. You can acknowledge that I don't like your content and not take it personally. Which imo is the better way to approach this since taking it personal doesn't really achieve anything but I can understand feeling insulted because people say you have bad posts. Just not something I think is worth getting upset over since the problem is with me not with you, do your own thing bud. Why care what I think or feel about your posts.

It doesn't reflect your character.

In post 430, Nancy Drew 39 wrote:thing about my meta.

I've played a game with you and I've read a game with you in it. You have a very distinctive style

Allomancer, do you still scum read Vedith, and if so would you share reasoning?

In post 314, Taly wrote:

Nancy Drew 39 wrote:

In post 292, Taly wrote:im feeling better about

vedith

at the moemnt

ank

, can you outline your thoughts specifically on

krazy's

plan being an idea that comes from scum?

allo

is my only scumread at the moment, im looking at

nancy

and

dann

for sorting

+1 to

fire/ali/ank

but still thinking here

Because he didn’t state a reason for his Vedith scumread?

Because

Allo's

been both flippant and non-concrete in his posts so far.

The unexplained vote tier; with

FakeGod

as a read and

Dann

without really engaging with him at all

The non-committal

Vedith

is scummy thought that was practically a sheeped read since Page 1

I don't get his plan about

"lynching some and then seeing what happens"

for First Dance WITH Lady's claiming coin value... that just sounds like telling scum how to position themselves in the game

ISOing him, it doesn't read as town.

What are your thoughts on

Vedith

and anyone stating that he isn't scum?

Sorry, I missed this. I thought he was scummy at first but Gamma has meta on him, so now I don’t know.

Firedog, I have stated why you should townread Nancy and you haven't aknowledged it when you explicitly asked to "change your mind" about your read on her, and I also told you a joke when you said you needed to calm down. Are you ignoring me?

In post 316, Firebringer wrote:

In post 313, Nancy Drew 39 wrote:

In post 303, Alisae wrote:

In post 301, Firebringer wrote:welp Nancy is scum no 2.


we almost have solved the game

so far I am liking your solve

Because I’m not automatically juming aboard an Allo scumwagon?

I’m not convinced of it, so sue me.

has nothing to do with u scumreading allo or not tbh

Awesome, then tell me WHY.

No I am just going for low hanging fruit like a moron pinkball.
I did respond to ur bad townread on Nancy though.

In post 443, Dannflor wrote:

In post 430, Nancy Drew 39 wrote:thing about my meta.

I've played a game with you and I've read a game with you in it. You have a very distinctive style

Allomancer, do you still scum read Vedith, and if so would you share reasoning?

yes, i do. at this point we are almost 500 posts in and vedith has yet to take the game seriously. he is just complaining about not having a partner and advocating for lynches without sharing his reads. he is putting in no effort whatsoever.

In post 318, Dannflor wrote:

In post 304, Nancy Drew 39 wrote:Because he didn’t state a reason for his Vedith scumread?

Why is this such a sticking point? No one ever said not stating reasons was scummy, that's not what this is about

Just freaking tell me already then, please? I’m obviously missing something and no one serms to have the decency to bother sharing it with me.