Mafiascum.net

In post 417, Nauls~ wrote:

In post 413, Fuchs~ wrote:Going from this stance on Clark :

In post 341, Nauls~ wrote:

MacReady, Palmer

Garry, Blair

Copper, Childs, Lars,

Clark, Bennings

Norris, Fuchs, Windows

{snip}

On the flip side, the Clark wagon composition is good enough to make Clark look worse.

(snip}

Kind of like Clark’s 58 and 60, tbh. The annoyance seems to come more from a town POV than a scum one. 239 looks decent I’d say? Don’t like 295 though, it feels fabricated. Also the way the Clark wagon has gradually died down feels off, like scum purposely stopped paying attention to it. Maybe it has something to do with a shift out of the early game wagons, but I feel like Copper’s still being seriously discussed in spite of that. Maybe it’s cause Clark got replaced, but I also don’t see much from Clark 2.0 that looks very town indicative.

To *big text* *all caps* "sweet jesus save this man" based on me voting him is WILD

“Clark is suspicious” and “We shouldn’t put people on E-1 because this setup is particularly conducive to scum sniping a hammer” aren’t contradictory ideas

In post 419, Nauls~ wrote:

In post 412, Fuchs~ wrote:And like... yes?

I did not have a read on Windows, then I read a post that made me think he was likely to be town, and then explained why when asked.

But you said that like it was an accusation lol

I say it like it’s an accusation because I would expect your read on someone who’s posted substantial amounts of content to be based off of more than a single post of theirs. I don’t really see how you can form a read on Windows off of that singular post when there’s plenty more.

In post 163, Nauls~ wrote:

In post 110, Fuchs~ wrote:

In post 104, Garry~ wrote:

In post 87, Fuchs~ wrote:I did not like Clark's 53 and 58

More so then anything else that has happened in this game, but not really ready to move any wagon to E-1.

So, he is in my scum pile but not actually going to vote there atm.

Who else is in your scum pile/what is the anything else that you disliked?

So far I have exactly 2 reads. Blair town and Clark lean scum.

Before I made that post, my vote was parked on my RVS vote because I did not have a serious place to put it. But now I did have a serious place to put it, but I did not want to put it there

Also, wanted to point out that his response to getting votes was worse then anything that anyone had actually voted him for prior to that imo.

Eh... I don't really like this post. Having "only 2 reads" is a very restrictive way to view the game for a townie, who would be organically forming thoughts on the other players. Especially don't like this when both of these reads have been explicitly stated by Fuchs earlier and seem to have not changed whatsoever since.

In post 400, Fuchs~ wrote:There is no built in trigger here for him to scroll back to previous pages to investigate the timing of your posts, because he knows you are telling the truth and that you did in fact have the time to do what you claimed. He would not expect to find a contradiction, since he knows its true based on knowledge of your alignment.

In post 404, Nauls~ wrote:Also the fact the moment where the current wagons get questioned and momentum towards a Windows wagon actually starts to form, 2 players randomly show up to reawaken the Clark wagon, which they’ve been quiet on for a while. Veeeery iffy on that.

In post 431, MacReady~ wrote:I don't have a lot of scumreads

In post 428, Fuchs~ wrote:it is hard to tell if you are just calling every single thing that I do suspicious or if you and I just view the game incredibly differently.

In post 434, Nauls~ wrote:It feels like it very well could’ve been made from a scum POV,

In post 375, Blair~ wrote:in a normal game, you can bus for towncred and get towncred to endgame because really good bussing makes people look very town - that's the incentive to bus your teammate in a normal game

in this game - we are re-evaluating every slot every day because alignments can change so that bus credit doesn't do you any good - it's not like you can bus your teammate on day one and coast for a few days.

In post 382, Fuchs~ wrote:

In post 201, Palmer~ wrote:I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that Lars' treatment of Norris is

worse

than Copper's is, assuming Norris is town. Copper's vote is naked and unexplained, sure. But reading through Lars' posts on the bottom of page 7 and top of page 8, they give off this aura of Lars trying really hard to appear superior to Norris. It doesn't read like he's actually interrogating Norris, it reads like he's trying to show to the rest of us how unreasonable and scummy Norris is.

I also think Norris is a type of player that is easier to read if he's allowed to do his own thing, rather than if he gets jumped on early. Which is an additional point that gives me the chills about Lars here.

In post 383, Fuchs~ wrote:I think windows is town for this post

Why?

I town read Lars's posts about Norris here for the exact reasons that you scum read them lmao.

Lars is putting in work on it, cross checking the tone of his recent posts vs how he presented prior, and putting himself in the forefront of the push by being the strongest, loudest, most detailed pusher. This is not where scum want to be on a town!Norris wagon.

It is early Day 1, and Norris is doing a decent job of making himself look bad. No need for scum to go this hard right there, so this looks more to me like town!Lars genuinely believing in his case.

In post 391, Fuchs~ wrote:

In post 356, Palmer~ wrote:If you read my posts, you will notice that I don't scumread any of the three wagons! And I DO scumread multiple people voting for those wagons!

In addition to that, I do not care about baseless VCA!

In post 362, Palmer~ wrote:Or maybe these are three town wagons and the things don't give two shits about pushing town wagons when there's no threat for them. But I dunno.

Not liking the wagons in part because you scum read multiple people voting on those wagons feels pretty contradictory to coming back and arguing that maybe scum does not feel the need to push any of the wagons since they are all town.

In post 407, Nauls~ wrote:If scum sees what they think is a contradiction or a potential gotcha on a townie, they won’t think “ehhh actually there’s no urgency so I just won’t call this out”, they’ll still call it out. The current gamestate is pretty meaningless, scum will almost always call out something that will push their agenda.

In post 414, Fuchs~ wrote:My point is that when I see someone making arguments that come across as "grasping at straws," such as this timing argument, then it is likely either: a townie who is kinda tunneled and seeing evidence everywhere they look OR scum in a desperate position.

In post 438, Palmer~ wrote:

In post 407, Nauls~ wrote:If scum sees what they think is a contradiction or a potential gotcha on a townie, they won’t think “ehhh actually there’s no urgency so I just won’t call this out”, they’ll still call it out. The current gamestate is pretty meaningless, scum will almost always call out something that will push their agenda.

Once again, saying what I was thinking when reading that.

In post 414, Fuchs~ wrote:My point is that when I see someone making arguments that come across as "grasping at straws," such as this timing argument, then it is likely either: a townie who is kinda tunneled and seeing evidence everywhere they look OR scum in a desperate position.

Why can it not be scum pretending to be a tunneled townie?

This is assuming that scum never forcefully does anything unless they have to, and I think that's very wrong.

In post 440, Fuchs~ wrote:First the bolded: If your basis for claiming that something makes someone a town read, is that they must do something that scum can't do, then you will never form a town read ever. Scum can do anything. This is a game of "more likely's"

In post 441, Fuchs~ wrote:And in my experience, the person making this kind of argument, [saying that you need to explain why scum could not do the thing that makes you think someone is more likely town] is scum most interested in shooting down the formation of town reads on potential miselim options.

In post 440, Fuchs~ wrote:

In post 438, Palmer~ wrote:

In post 407, Nauls~ wrote:If scum sees what they think is a contradiction or a potential gotcha on a townie, they won’t think “ehhh actually there’s no urgency so I just won’t call this out”, they’ll still call it out. The current gamestate is pretty meaningless, scum will almost always call out something that will push their agenda.

Once again, saying what I was thinking when reading that.

In post 414, Fuchs~ wrote:My point is that when I see someone making arguments that come across as "grasping at straws," such as this timing argument, then it is likely either: a townie who is kinda tunneled and seeing evidence everywhere they look OR scum in a desperate position.

Why can it not be scum pretending to be a tunneled townie?

This is assuming that scum never forcefully does anything unless they have to, and I think that's very wrong.

First the bolded: If your basis for claiming that something makes someone a town read, is that they must do something that scum can't do, then you will never form a town read ever. Scum can do anything. This is a game of "more likely's"

Now the Italics: That is not anywhere close to my point.

Scum can, and do, make pushes on townies. Even when they are not in a bad spot, and that is simply not my point.

You are taking something that I am saying about a very specific situation [that he made

this push

, in

this way,

in this game state] And trying to reframe it as if I am claiming a universal truth that scum would not make

any push

, in

any way

, in this game state.

In post 442, Fuchs~ wrote:

In post 441, Fuchs~ wrote:And in my experience, the person making this kind of argument, [saying that you need to explain why scum could not do the thing that makes you think someone is more likely town] is scum most interested in shooting down the formation of town reads on potential miselim options.

Like it not being framed that windows IS SCUM, doing that, just that he COULD BE scum doing that, shows more interest in shooting down the town read then actually sorting windows.

In post 445, Norris~ wrote:aye maybe palmer is actually scum

In post 404, Nauls~ wrote:

Clark is on E-2. Do not vote vote him.

With scum being able to jump accounts, putting someone on E-1 means scum could safely hammer and then jump away.

Also the fact the moment where the current wagons get questioned and momentum towards a Windows wagon actually starts to form, 2 players randomly show up to reawaken the Clark wagon, which they’ve been quiet on for a while. Veeeery iffy on that.

VOTE: Windows

Fuchs in particular looks bad.
Windows only mentioned Fuchs once ever and it wasn’t even when talking about their alignment. Fuchs has been quiet on Windows’ alignment and suddenly decided they liked a single post from Windows, then following that up with the vote on Clark saying they think all other wagons are on town.
May I remind you that Fuchs very briefly calling a single one of Windows’ post townie is his entire stance there.
Doesn’t help that every Fuchs post since 83 has varied from meh to bad and the Palmer push still looks terrible.

Pedit: 400 kind of looks more like scum defending a townie than scum/scum actually, which is interesting. Though it could just be Fuchs trying to justify a read that has no actual justification because he just made it up, regardless of Windows’ alignment.
Ppedit: 401 disagree. Scum can find things they assume to be gotchas and cling onto them, it’s not a purely town thing.
Pppedit: Timing!