Mafiascum.net

You have no idea how hard it was for me not to take that pagetop.

Reminder, the last page has a bunch of game relevant content that you should read.

In post 451, Bingle wrote:You have no idea how hard it was for me not to take that pagetop.

Reminder, the last page has a bunch of game relevant content that you should read.

Whos this for..? everyone..?
the word "you" here is kinda lowkey confusing.

I mean...'you' is Cakez, mostly.

The reminder is for everyone, because I don't want the content from the last page buried and forgotten.

In post 453, Bingle wrote:I mean...'you' is Cakez, mostly.

The reminder is for everyone, because I don't want the content from the last page buried and forgotten.

do people here not read back? thats so sad

In post 454, marcistar wrote:

In post 453, Bingle wrote:I mean...'you' is Cakez, mostly.

The reminder is for everyone, because I don't want the content from the last page buried and forgotten.

do people here not read back? thats so sad :neutral:

Yeah. This is what the game looks like for everybody else:

Holy shit, Dunn. How'd you get the extra three pages?

In post 454, marcistar wrote:do people here not read back? thats so sad

A lot of people don't, especially with 1v1s. Particularly with more active games, but choking a thread to bury things that are inconvenient to your narrative is a pretty effective scum strategy.

In post 456, Bingle wrote:Holy shit, Dunn. How'd you get the extra three pages?

Are you doing 30 posts per page instead of 25?

That would still line up with 450 being a page top/previous page and would explain the missing 3

In post 455, Dunnstral wrote:Yeah. This is what the game looks like for everybody else:

smhsmh does everyone use mafiascum darkmode i like the lightmode alot more

In post 457, Bingle wrote:A lot of people don't, especially with 1v1s. Particularly with more active games, but choking a thread to bury things that are inconvenient to your narrative is a pretty effective scum strategy.

thats stinky, they could be missing valuable stuff

In post 424, Lukewarm wrote:Then Bingle came in with 402 and when he showed the post that you were refering to as my post with reads / reasoning, and I realized that your case was in bad faith.

Like, in that game, I had 4 posts by the end of the 3rd day. In this game I had 41 by the end of the 3rd day. So if you are claiming that that game I was doing more to move the game forward, I no longer think you are making your case in good faith.

Eww.

In post 449, Dunnstral wrote:I reread Vanderscamp, not feeling like voting there

I don't want to vote for Marci or Guiltylion either

So for me it's Luke or hopkirk in the 6

VOTE: Hopkirk

Literally just the same thoughts currently shared by everyone you came up with.

442 is an interesting post.
I feel like it’s more likely to come from town tbh. But i haven’t liked their other "cases" recently on me/Hopkirk.
I’ll need to give this some more time. UNVOTE:

In post 458, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 456, Bingle wrote:Holy shit, Dunn. How'd you get the extra three pages?

Are you doing 30 posts per page instead of 25?

That would still line up with 450 being a page top/previous page and would explain the missing 3

The joke was that my screen only shows 1 and 19.

In post 376, Hopkirk wrote:this game feels markedly different at the start here where Luke doesn't seem to have a clear direction or any scumreads (still based on the recent readslist i asked for). there's markedly a lot more fluff, which could be due to friends being around/vibing with, so how does the vibing read to other people? either way, there's a lot more setup stuff, fluff, and generally contentless posts. in the other game everything is moving the game forwards and it feels resonably easy to see that even barely reading the posts. there's what seems to be a marked absence of proactivity here. like in the first 20 posts how many actually feel game advancing compared to spinning in place and struggling to get reads?

thoughts?

I definitely feel you that Lukewarm is more passive this game, that's why I prodded/voted him because I felt he was just coasting on very light reads and not using his vote to generate any information.

However, I do buy that he has an established precedent of not doing well / not liking early D1, I don't think it's really fair to compare play here to play in games in which he replaced. I do see the difference you're calling out but I'm not certain I can really convince myself it's definitely alignment indicative.

In post 408, Lukewarm wrote:His progression on my slot does not make sense to me. Like he started to townread me, asked me questions, and then townread me harder, and even came to my defense, until I became mildly suspicious of something he did. And he quickly switched to me being his highest scum read / wanting to vote me out?

It just feels like his "soul townread" on me was not genuine if a small bit of suspicion from me is enough to swing his opinion of me so far.

I don't think this is necessarily scum indicative either, IMO scum are more likely to be focused on projecting a consistent narrative and tend to feel scared to completely turn on a dime, I don't think scum!nEE needed to vote you here and I feel if he really was planning and engineering it he'd have tried to add more dressing as to why he was changing his mind.

I think his "soul townread" was likely weak but not necessarily disingenuous. I've similarly also struggled to get a read on you, and seeing now that he's since unvoted I'm not seeing his play as agenda-driven or notably fake.

I think it should have been pretty clear from the get go my "soul townread" was emotionally driven and an extremely weak read based on initial impressions.

In post 449, Dunnstral wrote:I reread Vanderscamp, not feeling like voting there

why the hell is everyone townreading Vanderscamp this game?? I really can't remember a single post or comment he's made that has made me feel like he's earnestly game solving. I'm going to re-ISO him again after I respond to the posts we've had but I'm also asking myself this: if town!Vander, why am I the only person who has even looked his direction? Who is scum in either pool who's keeping Vander on the table as a potential mis-elimination today?

In post 331, Vanderscamp wrote:I feel like it's pretty likely that if lukewarm joined this game to encourage Marci to step out of the newbie queue (which I have no reason at all to doubt) then he's probably going to be buddying up with her as any combination of alignments.

Was going to say it didn't feel like a S/S interaction from them before I remembered that isn't possible anyway

.

I'm mulling over this comment on reread... I feel it's less likely town would forget who is in which pool and which interactions can or can't be S/S. I've had my fair share of poorly thought out comments/takes this game, but certainly the entire game I've been paying attention to interactions cross-pool and keeping in mind potential scum candidates of each pool. I'm skeptical town!Vanders wouldn't really be aware that Marci/Luke can't be scum together 300+ posts into the game.

VOTE: Vanderscamp

This game's inactivity is making me annoyed but at the same time i'm not doing much to help the inactivity because i want to observe what the other players are doing to strengthen my own reads. :v
This calls for radical action. Im gonna sheep GL.

WAKE UP.
VOTE: Vanderscamp

In post 469, GuiltyLion wrote:

In post 331, Vanderscamp wrote:I feel like it's pretty likely that if lukewarm joined this game to encourage Marci to step out of the newbie queue (which I have no reason at all to doubt) then he's probably going to be buddying up with her as any combination of alignments.

Was going to say it didn't feel like a S/S interaction from them before I remembered that isn't possible anyway

.

I'm mulling over this comment on reread... I feel it's less likely town would forget who is in which pool and which interactions can or can't be S/S. I've had my fair share of poorly thought out comments/takes this game, but certainly the entire game I've been

constantly

paying attention to interactions cross-pool and keeping in mind potential scum candidates of each pool. I'm skeptical town!Vanders wouldn't really be aware that Marci/Luke can't be scum together 300+ posts into the game.

VOTE: Vanderscamp

is this the only point you have on him?

In post 471, marcistar wrote:

In post 469, GuiltyLion wrote:

In post 331, Vanderscamp wrote:I feel like it's pretty likely that if lukewarm joined this game to encourage Marci to step out of the newbie queue (which I have no reason at all to doubt) then he's probably going to be buddying up with her as any combination of alignments.

Was going to say it didn't feel like a S/S interaction from them before I remembered that isn't possible anyway

.

I'm mulling over this comment on reread... I feel it's less likely town would forget who is in which pool and which interactions can or can't be S/S. I've had my fair share of poorly thought out comments/takes this game, but certainly the entire game I've been

constantly

paying attention to interactions cross-pool and keeping in mind potential scum candidates of each pool. I'm skeptical town!Vanders wouldn't really be aware that Marci/Luke can't be scum together 300+ posts into the game.

VOTE: Vanderscamp

is this the only point you have on him?

No.

I already called out that 147 combined with 150 looks like fake reasoning to me - he's giving reasons to scumread both N_M and Lukewarm but not paying any attention as to whether those scumreads made sense together.

I didn't feel like his vote on you had any conviction or intent to solve.

The strongest/most meaningful content he's posted has been about Bingle, his questionable reasoning about both the Dunn & Norway slots, but it's rather easy for me to imagine that content being either a) scum!Vanders jumping on a townie making illogical/reachy assertions without justifying why those assertions indicate alignment or b) scum!Vanders distancing/bussing a buddy!Bingle. He's also just holistically been pretty inactive this game, he hasn't bothered to fight harder against the thread consensus to eliminate in the 6p despite his strongest SR being Bingle, and he hasn't taken a lead or a stake in substantially building nor defusing any wagons.

Given that it's D1 and he's played pretty careful, I don't have any surefire scumtells to nail him on, but the overall profile of his posting and votes this game vibes very much to me like scum treading water and trying to let town eat itself up in the meantime.

I'm pretty sure it's just Hopkirk/Norwee at this point, tbh, and I don't see my vote moving.

(472) i have no idea how to read him, he's one of the people i'm unsure on rn so i'm willing to vote along with u VOTE: vanderscamp i like these points you made though, i didn't really think of it like that. that's whats making me comfortable to vote here

In post 473, Bingle wrote:I'm pretty sure it's just Hopkirk/Norwee at this point, tbh, and I don't see my vote moving.

i don't really see it, i probably missed it but where is your last read on norwegianboyee? 403 i see you mentioning you see hopkirk with both, but i don't really see you do much to that..? like you responded to norwegianboyee, but it doesn't seem like you had a mind change in those posts..