One thing to get out of the way first, is I will be using a very bizarre method of reading players because this idea came to me spontaneously.
I will assign
to each individual post I quote of each player, positive means townie, negative means scummy, each player starts off at 0 and at the end of their individual iso-dive I'll tally up the numbers and that'll be my read for the player.
I also felt like doing a huge analysis wall because I feel I haven't contributed much.
10+ = townread
5+ = townlean
0+ = nulltown
0- = nullscum
5- = scumlean
10- = scumread
I know reading into openings is never so positive, but I don't think scum comes off this welcoming.
+0.5
I love this progression from Newbie 2046 Salsabil to now. A player (Scipio1) did this exact same thing and she fell for it. A very genuine reaction here.
+1
This could come off as a joke but they follow it up with:
In post 35, Salsabil Faria wrote: In post 34, Enchant wrote:Vanilla Mafia i calling is boring setups like "Just townies and maybe doctor/cop/SK".
Oh, understood. It's a newbie game, so setups are limited. Do you play on big setups?
Meaning they treated it very seriously, considering they went from getting the same joke to treating a misunderstanding like this, this badly, is a bizarre jump.
-2
In post 44, Salsabil Faria wrote: In post 38, Enchant wrote:Yeeaaah.
So i'm not good at game, where main source of info is people yelling on each other.
Dude, you won Newbie 2046 by fooling the town perfectly! If you are not good, don't know who can be!!
Being supportive is always townie.
+0.5
In post 126, Salsabil Faria wrote: In post 125, safebet222 wrote: In post 118, Salsabil Faria wrote:
If anyone/your scum partner hammered at that point, it would definitely benefit the team mafia cause
(i)
if you are the mafia then you know
flow trap
is a town, so a miselimination would occur and,
(ii)
the day would over without discussing anything, the town would stay behind.
Can't find any town motivation from your E-1 vote.
Then you're not thinking hard enough
I don't think it's up to you that you will decide if I'm thinking hard or not. We are different, so our points of view will be different too.
I like the reaction here, plain and simple.
+0.5
In post 226, Salsabil Faria wrote:I'm getting town vibe (for now) from
safebet222
,
esotericzoomer
and
Spartan117
. Not getting town vibe (for now) from
flow trap
,
Enchant
and
floo
. Not getting any kind of vibe (for now) from
Prism
and
Fredrick A Campbell
.
After being flamed (by me) in 2046 for not supplying enough content and being very passive, I like this progression in their meta.
+1
In post 237, Salsabil Faria wrote:
Don't agree, if a scum wants to read as a town, need to/can draw attention by faking and posting helpful stuff for the town.
mindmeld
+0.5
In post 258, Salsabil Faria wrote: In post 252, flow trap wrote: In post 250, Salsabil Faria wrote:it's not a loaded question, you actually did this: townread those who voted you, stated suspicions/voted who didn't like the E-1 vote on you
I was talking about "Other than esotericzoomer and me, who gave negative attention to safebet222 for his E-1 vote on you?"
Yes I know you were talking about that and my answer is still the same: it was not a loaded question. Also, it seems like you make up your mind, like I'm talking to a wall at this point.
Townie annoyance, standard town!salsabil as seen in other games.
+0.5
(Insert the whole salsabil v. flow trap)
The interactions coming from both parties are very townie, this was a healthy battle.
+2
Total:
4.5
Nulltown
In post 31, flow trap wrote: In post 27, safebet222 wrote:
What's your experience with mafia?
Why do you like to play mafia in general and forum mafia specifically?
Secret (:oops:) & Real time games stress me out
Not particularly indicative of alignment as it's off-topic, but this post radiates genuineness and I feel like mafia members would come off fake and seem like they have a hidden agenda.
+0.5
I like the reaction here, seems like town who's super confused about a stated 'serious' vote but playing along assuming it's a joke.
+0.5
A very positive, light-hearted interaction between enchant and flow trap here.
+0.5
In post 105, flow trap wrote:It seemed like a town play to me, what scum wants this kind of negative attention this early on
scum!flowtrap has no reason to defend safebet, let alone acknowledge I was pushing them, while they are absolutely wrong this comes from a town mindset.
+2
In post 108, flow trap wrote:VOTE: Fredrick A Campbell
Starting a day off with a vote for one of my SRs
Stubbornness is directly equivalent to townie-ness.
+1
In post 114, flow trap wrote:That would be my other SR; however less so and I feel they created a better dynamic which could help next round
Scum could just go with the masses and sheep onto me, however flow has put a lot of thought into it and decided I wasn't the one they wanted to prioritize, that would be far too complicated a decision for scum even though they would have a copout that wouldn't draw suspicion to them in the slightest.
+2
In post 146, flow trap wrote:I have 2 reasons why I don't want to go on that, the first is interesting interactions as I've stated before, and the second I will not state as I do not feel it should be shared yet and it's still developing
Sticking to your guns, townie.
+0.5
In post 171, flow trap wrote:I think that is a Scum tell; I belive you have 3 options
1. Refute that it is a scum tell
2. Refute that you were doing it
3. State something town you did
Feels a bit forced, reads like flow is trying to back Fred into a corner so they do something irrational.
-0.5
Bizarre backpedal. Not a fan.
-0.5
In post 227, flow trap wrote: In post 224, Salsabil Faria wrote:
Like everything... your wagon was on E-1, but didn't get any response from you. You townread those people who voted you, and placed suspicions on those who didn't like the E-1 vote on you. And you already read people while being on page 4 only, like super fast! You also stated you're not a new player, so as an experienced one you should know that being super active/helpful doesn't necessarily indicate town, as well as being silent doesn't necessarily indicate scum. Generally, activity is the last resort to point someone as town/scum. A new player can read people at this early state base on the activeness but not an experienced player. Your suspicion on
esotericzoomer
for this reason doesn't make sense to me, also your vote on
Fredrick A Campbell
and the explanation after, also feel weird to me.
Yeah, I don't respond to things like that as town or mafia. As I've stated it's easier to read people who interact with you, and I was also weary of a pocket attempt how they read me barely affects thing. Yeah, I try to read people early, I just said I was leaning that way. Being fluffy & passive isn't being silent, so idk what you mean. i no longer suspect EZ, I will elaborate later. And if you never played with me before the last thing would feel weird
Feel free to elaborate now, and don't give me any of that "I don't want to give mafia information," because being secretive is anti-town.
In post 244, flow trap wrote: In post 242, Salsabil Faria wrote:Other than esotericzoomer and me, who gave negative attention to safebet222 for his E-1 vote on you?
That's a loaded question
1. To a normal person, what safe did is blatantly scummy
2. Scum does not want to act scummy
3. Town does not care about acting scummy
3. Therefore mostly town would do this
Pressuring someone who you're having a discussion with, no matter if you scumread them or not, is never a positive thing.
It comes off as if you're trying to spin what they're saying to look negative.
-1
In post 277, flow trap wrote: In post 274, Spartan117 wrote:
If you're going to be evasive, people are just going to scum read you inc myself
As I've said if you expect town (more specifically me) to abide by "truth, the whole truth, & nothing but the truth" your gonna have a bad time
Once again being really secretive, directly impeding on town solving the game by behaving like this.
-0.5
This is such an out of the blue thing to do, that requires a lot of effort. While it may not be that logical of a thing to do it's still townie.
+1
In post 288, flow trap wrote:It's a game of mind games, and why should it just be scum, it's so fun to play with the wolves
Townie, but really bloody annoying.
You aren't messing with the wolves, you are directly helping them.
+0.5
In post 302, flow trap wrote: In post 301, Prism wrote:I'm actually not inclined to give this slot time to recenter.
I strongly doubt the third post in light of the first.
I want to go out on my own terms
Not a very good defense, shrugging off what he said in a bizarre manner.
-0.5
Positive interaction they had with me that I really liked.
+1
It seems like you could be getting stuck in the confirmation bias that I warned you about dawg
Once again being this mysterious is not townie.
-0.5
Total:
6
Townlean
In post 67, Enchant wrote:
No problem.
esotericzoomer wrote:are these still rvs votes or nah
No.
Also that's E-2, so don't place new votes. Hammer allways risk.
I've said it before countless times but I really don't like the random, spontaneous wagon on flow trap, and Enchant's reasons are the ones I like the least, these seem very forced and opportunistic.
-1
In post 69, Enchant wrote:New meta to counter Not_Mafia players.
Count like he is on E-1 but actually that's E-2.
Very bizarre tangent that shows that Enchant wasn't at all invested in the wagon and was just throwing his vote around. bad
-1
In post 150, Enchant wrote: In post 139, floo wrote: In post 136, Spartan117 wrote:
Found this sus to even insinuate it is somewhat serious a vote this early on with such little discussion, unless ofc this is to obtain a reaction and read responses.
Right, as I explained I said it was "partially serious" to avoid seeming scummy / too random.
I probably ask something nonsense, but really want.
Why you think placing votes suspicious? Do you really care how suspicious are you?
Of course explaining votes is good, but doing that and claiming you did that just to don't seem suspicious for that is really something strange.
Town supposed to push suspicious people, you know.
I don't know why people jumped on floo for this, and I especially don't like Enchant having more opportunism.
-1.5
In post 195, Enchant wrote:About hammers. This site is first where i see it exists. Really.
Early i just played with system "Vote for someone, and after this, everyone vote should execute him or no", so mafia just can't place final vote and get scotfree. They need to lie/decieve, not just abuse fast fingers and online.
I want minimalise possibility of some mafia/townie placing final vote and claiming "Oh sorry didn't saw that", and save self from thinking, did he on purpose or no. Also it saves possible PR and actually costs nothing.
These random topics Enchant brings up is a lot of filler which is an excuse for not providing much analysis, sifting through his ISO I see he's provided virtually none of his own analysis yet he has spoken a lot, he's very much flying under the radar.
-2
In post 245, Enchant wrote: In post 244, flow trap wrote: In post 242, Salsabil Faria wrote:Other than esotericzoomer and me, who gave negative attention to safebet222 for his E-1 vote on you?
That's a loaded question
1. To a normal person, what safe did is blatantly scummy
2. Scum does not want to act scummy
3. Town does not care about acting scummy
3. Therefore mostly town would do this
Mafia know this too, and can imitate dumb thoughs.
This is not the natural take you get when you want to counter what flow trap said here, this is definitely just Enchant throwing shit at the wall and hoping it sticks. This is entirely a fake feeling post.
-1.5
In post 290, Enchant wrote:I got why he voted me.
Looking will be my partner try rescue me? Well. Good idea, but very badly made.
Very poor reaction to pressure, instead of doing the natural thing town does when in this position (spew reads, contribute), Enchant gets all aggressive and tries to make the votes against him look stupid rather than actually show why they shouldn't be on him.
-2
In post 395, Enchant wrote:We can execute on random. 2/9 chance to kill mafia you know.
Even if we execute townie, mafia will be scared and surrender.
Joking aside. I gladly anonce, that... I'm not found anything. Only Flow somewhat suspicious for me, because of that excuse, but that's probably not enough.
Maybe you should give some ways/ask me questions, and my head start working, otherwise i will just blindly walk here.
Very fancy way of saying, "I'm not contributing and I'm not gonna put the effort in to actually properly find a read."
-1.5
In post 408, Enchant wrote: In post 397, flow trap wrote: In post 395, Enchant wrote:Maybe you should give some ways/ask me questions, and my head start working, otherwise i will just blindly walk here.
What do you think of Salsa+Zoomer interactions?
Well, they kinda fine with each other.
Only times when they interact is explaining terms and agreeing that Flow is suspicious.
Though only Zoomer placed vote, when all i want is answers. Maybe they are trying distance, but not so obvious and so he coach her on public.
But... Aren't mafia then suppose to imitate different thoughs, to give expression like they dislike each other or think in opposite direction? Push from both mafia can bite later.
So i may bet, they are most likely not both mafia.
Says one thing but then says another.
Tinfoils like these don't belong in rational discussion and I don't like it appearing here.
-0.5
In post 415, Enchant wrote:Yes. I said exactly that, not "They probably not maf both, but one of them surely there".
If I'm reading this right and the language barrier isn't fucking this up, Enchant pulls a random "one of them is scum" situation out of his ass, very much disapprove.
-0.5
Total:
-11.5
Scumread
In post 77, floo wrote: In post 46, safebet222 wrote:
So how can you have a serious vote of 3 people haven't even checked in?
...
OMGUS?
"..." not part of original post.
With the game becoming more serious, I can explain my motives. I switched my RVS vote from Enchant to flow trap because I wanted to see where a conversation would go. flow trap's posting style is lighthearted with a lot of small talk and interactions with other player, as one of the most active users so far (might be the most active in terms of post count). I stated my vote was "partially serious" (
40) to avoid seeming suspicious from an apparent OMGUS (as you guessed) and a second (apparently) random vote. I am explaining my intentions now because I would rather have flow trap discuss his/her gameplay or opinions than post joke reactions.
Two things to take from this, while their reasons for their read on flow trap may be genuine I absolutely don't like the fact that they didn't want to appear suspicious, however they're very open about that fact which I regrettably like.
+1.5
In post 134, floo wrote:
You townread three people who have voted you. I started the wagon. safebet made a point of putting you a step away from death. Spartan voted you for no stated reason other than "pressure" (
61). In particular, I find the Spartan townread strange because he has posted only three times, but you find him "genuine" (
121). Meanwhile, you are scumreading esotericzoomer (implied in
114), who is the person who has questioned the votes on you a lot while staying away from an explicit townread. Do you think the wagon on you has a legitimate or beneficial purpose?
I like the rationale behind this, this comes from a good mindset who's out for the benefit of town.
+1
In post 134, floo wrote:
You townread three people who have voted you. I started the wagon. safebet made a point of putting you a step away from death. Spartan voted you for no stated reason other than "pressure" (
61). In particular, I find the Spartan townread strange because he has posted only three times, but you find him "genuine" (
121). Meanwhile, you are scumreading esotericzoomer (implied in
114), who is the person who has questioned the votes on you a lot while staying away from an explicit townread. Do you think the wagon on you has a legitimate or beneficial purpose?
I've said it before somewhere in this wall, but I like people who trust their own opinions but not so much that they're beyond stubborn.
+1
In post 351, floo wrote:Just finished reading the thread up to now.
Some players have found my vote switch to flow trap suspicious because I didn't want to attract suspicion (Enchant in
150 comes to mind). If I don't want to be voted out, I don't see why I shouldn't take the effort not to seem overly scummy.
Will post other thoughts soon.
While I think this is the weirdest fucking motive for town, like I said they're being very open about it, and I like their follow-up.
+1
In post 355, floo wrote: In post 11, Enchant wrote:Hello. This is my first game on this site.
How to play as Mafia Goon? What it do?
Enchant has played Newbie 2046 before according to Sal (
44); it's a pure joke. But Enchant has not posted anything else that relates to this or is a pure joke. It looks unnatural/forced.
Also, you still haven't made any productive comments about your flow trap vote. What did you learn from the pressure you put on flow trap, and in retrospect was it a good idea?
There's a lot of awareness that comes from being able to spot this, then following up and questioning a player about it is townie.
+1.5
In post 360, floo wrote:All right, here's my read on the player I've posted the most about: flow trap.
At the beginning of the day, flow trap asked for "tips on how to read someone" (
53), and short, inconsequential posts suggested that the player did not have a clear sense of their goals. Later on, we saw reads and other opinions that showed a sense of direction. The short posting style remained, but the topics were more substantial. flow trap later admits:
Here is a post written a week ago in the Newbie Introduction thread (
not in this game
):
This makes me think flow trap was also confused.
I think the change in style suggests town. flow trap was moving away from being confused and/or pretending to be new because (s)he maintained the same style that might seem fillery. There was no pretending to have a different personality or posting style, even if that might have looked more towny.
The pair analysis chart (
282) looks like town effort superficially. The image looks like it took time to input the names, fill the color, find a chart template, etc. But I'm skeptical considering how little effort flow trap has put into the writing of other posts. Ultimately, I don't put much weight on the chart.
With very minor posts floo has provided a lot of content, and his read on flow trap (if I'm reading it right it's a townlean) is going against the popular vote if I'm not living under a rock.
+2
Total:
8
Townlean
Lets paint a picture here, scum!safebet sees a townie make a mafia goon jokeclaim, and makes this forced as all hell reaction.
-1
In post 27, safebet222 wrote:A couple of questions for everyone...
What's your experience with mafia?
Why do you like to play mafia in general and forum mafia specifically?
This is my 5th forum game, third one in the last few months. I also have played some chat mafia. I think Mafia is fascinating and suspenseful and I like the fact that its mainly people younger than myself that play. I prefer forum mafia over chat mafia because my mind doesn't work so fast and I naturally am careful with what I write.
In my eyes, typically the people who make these ice-breakers in order to force discussion are doing so out of necessity, so it looks like they're actually doing something, when in reality they are mafia.
-1
In post 46, safebet222 wrote: In post 40, floo wrote:VOTE: flow trap
This is at least a partially serious vote. Don't want to discuss why right now.
So how can you have a serious vote of 3 people haven't even checked in?
In post 86, safebet222 wrote:
Eh... I didn't see his name on the player list...
VOTE: flow trap
That's E-1. My theory is nobody's dumb enough to hammer.
Regardless of it being being a reaction test or not this chain of posts is very much suspicious.
-1
After one, negative reaction, they unvote and act like it is/was a reaction test.
Textbook backpedal because they didn't think they'd come under fire.
-2
In post 101, safebet222 wrote:So what were you going to do? Twiddle your thumbs until sxum raise their hand and say, "Its me!"
This is unfounded arrogance, when he noticed people were on his side he started getting hyper-defensive.
-0.5
In post 188, safebet222 wrote: In post 186, esotericzoomer wrote: In post 179, flow trap wrote: In post 174, esotericzoomer wrote:
No not at all. Being the loudest voice in the room can help you control town or at the very least blend in.
Depends on how anxious the player is.
Players who intentionally fly under the radar are going to be noticed and come under fire.
So town would fly under the radar more?
No? Town would commit, create reads, and not cause confusion.
I created no confusion... I comitted to geting this game moving...and it worked. Plus, I didn't like enchant trying to impose some new fangled meta on us.
While blatantly wrong, it's a good reaction, I can see it coming from stressed/annoyed town, however the bad outweighs the good so far.
+1
In post 189, safebet222 wrote:If I didn't know any better, I'd think that enchant is trying to pocket Salsa. She was quick hammered by Not_Mafia and enchant in Newbie 2042 during D2 and they passed that shit off as a lolhammer that enchant rode into F3 and won for mafia.
Very niche example, I've never been a fan of when people provide one game to explain their reads.
-0.5
In post 345, safebet222 wrote:
UNVOTE: EZ
Yep. You hit the nail on the head.
Plus, I think Prism is probably right. If you were called out on being disingenuous with your outrage, you'd have probably found something else to shift your attention to.
Good post, natural progression in backing off, etc.
+1.5
However the speed in which they forgot they ever pushed me is weird af
-0.5
Total:
-4
nullscum
In post 137, Spartan117 wrote:For now I feel like my vote would be better placed here.
VOTE: esotericzoomer
Two VERY opportunistic votes, swooped in randomly and sheeped a wagon.
-1
In post 283, Spartan117 wrote: In post 277, flow trap wrote: In post 274, Spartan117 wrote:
If you're going to be evasive, people are just going to scum read you inc myself
As I've said if you expect town (more specifically me) to abide by "truth, the whole truth, & nothing but the truth" your gonna have a bad time
I've just asked you a question that was all.
The annoyance is townie, also mindmeld.
+1.5
In post 307, Spartan117 wrote: In post 299, flow trap wrote: In post 297, Spartan117 wrote: In post 294, flow trap wrote:Well, we
are
still talking about it so it definitely got reactions out of almost everyone
Would you agree that there are different kinds of emotions, that there is a difference between reactions now after the fact and reactions at the time when there is more pressure and reactions are more honest.
Yes, yes, no
You don't agree that reactions are more honest at the time when a situation is more pressurised like when you was put on L-1?
Spartan all-around has a good stance on safebet, as far as I've seen he doesn't scumread him yet he will call out how it was a bad action.
+1.5
Being curious towards the opinions from a player he scumreads is Town 101.
+2
In post 434, Spartan117 wrote:
Shouldn't town risk being aggressive enough to be seen as scum in order to try and obtain results?
Fountain of good takes.
+1
Total:
5
Townlean
In post 197, Prism wrote:Yo, not a dirty flaker, late here and will read through tomorrow.
Nice entrance, feels full of hope.
However this is an SE slot so I want to hold them to a higher standard of not wearing their heart on their sleeve but I'ma just go with my gut.
+0.5
In post 275, Prism wrote:flow trap, what was your thought process with this sequence?
In post 8, safebet222 wrote:Hey everyone...
VOTE: clarkbar
You just made me think about breaking my diet with candy.
In post 276, Prism wrote: In post 46, safebet222 wrote: In post 40, floo wrote:VOTE: flow trap
This is at least a partially serious vote. Don't want to discuss why right now.
So how can you have a serious vote of 3 people haven't even checked in?
This is a really bizarre angle. Why does having an individual read/vote depend on others having posted?
In post 280, Prism wrote:I'm not really a fan of openly declaring a vote a pressure vote. Even a naked vote is better.
Having strong confidence in your opinions but not being aggressive/arrogant about it is always a townie thing.
+3
In post 284, Prism wrote:I don't really get why there's a question mark there. I'm asking about what you were thinking during your first two votes. "Because I was pretending to be new" is a deeper purpose in contrast to the "Nothing" you originally gave.
Looking at page 4 and the posts around here you seem to be annoyed by the votes on you. Looking at your comment about being an experienced player, you might need to recenter to first principles. Being dismissive of questions doesn't really help as either alignment. It's better to be straightforward and eliminate the guesswork.
I like this follow up pursuit towards flow trap, having persistence until a question is answered is Town 101.
+1.5
In post 293, Prism wrote:
In post 99, safebet222 wrote: In post 97, esotericzoomer wrote:Where's your motivation to do that as town? There's no positives from dancing around flow traps wagon like this.
Reactions... Gotta have reactions to start getting somewhere.
So if your motivation for voting was to get reactions, what was your motivation in unvoting? You had a vote up for 18 minutes, with only 2 non-flow trap players posting. It's also just bizarre to assert that you were "making a point" but immediately describe a motivation that doesn't make a point when asked why you voted.
Something I didn't notice and I really liked when Prism pointed it out, like I said before it takes a really good townie with a strong town mindset in order to notice these things.
+2
In post 421, Prism wrote:Spartan, re:
339 I agree that these interactions are good for Salsa and questionable at best from flow. I think there's a big difference between that and the interaction being necessarily TvS, though. At this point with flow trap I don't really think I'd be surprised if he flipped either way.
VOTE: Frederick
Concur that the vote hop wasn't great. Safebet's posting the last few pages was okay.
floo's explanations have been like,
fine
. I want to townread the slot but can't really say they've done anything strongly AI.
mindmeld on fred
+0.5
In post 422, Prism wrote:I really hate to be blunt but it's better I do it now than later.
flow trap, you need to put your ego aside this game. It's getting in the way of you being effective and are making you elim bait.
You've taken the exact same dismissive attitude to players repeatedly throughout the game. Your explanations for why range from lackluster to promises of galaxy brain plans. Stating that you're not vulnerable to bias due to experience misses the entire point of bias.
I support you pressuring for a read but I don't support you continuing to be evasive/dismissive of concerns and questions under the guise of big brain. It forces me to guess whether you're being egotistical, malicious, or both.
This absolutely comes from the heart, this is way to personal, and as they said, blunt, for this to come from scum at all.
+1.5
No scummy posts:
+1 bonus
Total:
10
Townread
Unlike safebet I don't see this as anything genuine, I know this is weird since I absolutely agree with his position here but now that I've come to the realization that my read on safebet isn't anything strong this feels like an opportunistic jump on a potential mislynch.
-0.5
In post 166, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:
Your vote below has given me nothing to respond to. To elaborate, I don't even know why you are scum reading me and, hence, do not have a basis to say that you do not have a reasonable suspicion on me.
In post 108, flow trap wrote:VOTE: Fredrick A Campbell
Starting a day off with a vote for one of my SRs
Good reaction.
+1
In post 185, Fredrick A Campbell wrote: In post 174, esotericzoomer wrote:
No not at all. Being the loudest voice in the room can help you control town or at the very least blend in.
Depends on how anxious the player is.
Players who intentionally fly under the radar are going to be noticed and come under fire.
My opinion on the matter is the following. The mafiosoes have motive to do exactly what was stated in the post quoted. However, they also have motive to do the exact opposite.
Nothing post.
-0.5
While he criticized flow trap for having an unexplained vote on him that he couldn't respond to, he then goes and commits the same thing.
Hypocrisy never looks good.
-1
I'm starting to lean towards a Fredrick/Enchant team, so this interaction here is scummy asf. Enchant is like a completely different person here, trolling a lot for no reason, I can only see this motive of scum!enchant being that he's interacting with a teammate.
-2.5
Side Note:
Like Enchant, Fredrick is providing a lot of information but very little substance, but with him he's using the guise of being helpful. This is letting him fly under the radar.
-2
Total:
-5.5
Scumlean
ok fair, I'm arrogant
![:]](./images/smilies/icon_smiling.png "Cheerful Smile"){kind=icon}
Good to see you again Enchant and esotericzoomer 
