Mafiascum.net

Ok can we get to the lynching please ty
Zzz

I'll suppose the Thor thing is wrong game.

No its a TM meme Titus

In post 4618, baku and munna wrote:sorry guys its hard for me to care about this gmae when i've basically been false guiltied based on Maid Cafe's BS over the shining dreamers hammer and getting unlucky on timings of my actions. btw if you look at when shiro started posting again it was not long before i submitted the PTs.

So why aren't you trying to scrum hunt? Giving up and saying you aren't interested doesn't make you look like town.

In post 4625, Purple Heart wrote:Ok can we get to the lynching please ty
Zzz

Let's give everybody the chance to weigh in.

In post 4628, Skybird wrote:

In post 4618, baku and munna wrote:sorry guys its hard for me to care about this gmae when i've basically been false guiltied based on Maid Cafe's BS over the shining dreamers hammer and getting unlucky on timings of my actions. btw if you look at when shiro started posting again it was not long before i submitted the PTs.

So why aren't you trying to scrum hunt? Giving up and saying you aren't interested doesn't make you look like town.

if you're asking that question you know you caught a wolf

especially as a response to THAT post.

So why aren't we lynching parliament?

In post 4623, Purple Heart wrote:

In post 4604, Reasonably Rational wrote:To me, the game has one objective, and only one of those options DIRECTLY helps with that objective.

So, parliament!

-Cerb

Elaborate; we need to unify on a decision soon.

<snipped quotes unrelated to Taly's request from me>

~ Taly

Choosing Parliament is about choosing the optimal course for accomplishing our goal.

If we had 3 guilties(legit guilties, given by someone who has since flipped town) I would STILL think it's the best option, because if there happen to be 4 more scum(yes, ridiculous, but you get what I'm saying) there'd be a 25% chance of catching that extra scum that's gone unnoticed.

That's why it's optimal.

At it's root, the ONLY things that determine who wins in mafia are reducing scum KPN, and identifying scum. Titan doesn't do the first, and Parliament does the second, therefore Parliament.

-Cerb

In post 4632, SnarkySnowman wrote:So why aren't we lynching parliament?

Why aren't you?

-Cerb

Hi guys, just want to let you know that thete’s an ice storm in my atea that might result in power outages; so if you don’t see me for a few days, it’s because I haven’t any internet access. Hopefully, that won’t be the case though. *knock on wood*

In post 4623, Purple Heart wrote:1) What do you mean by us saying "we keep doing this"? Alisae and I have made our opinions and thoughts on the gamestate a bit clear. Plus, I was responding to your response on an Alisae post.

I mean you're saying we keep lynching until one scum is left. But if you really believe your reads wouldn't that part of the step be unnecessary? In addition there's the fact that stratagems likely won't last beyond today + tonight.

In post 4637, Gamma Emerald wrote:

In post 4623, Purple Heart wrote:1) What do you mean by us saying "we keep doing this"? Alisae and I have made our opinions and thoughts on the gamestate a bit clear. Plus, I was responding to your response on an Alisae post.

I mean you're saying we keep lynching until one scum is left. But if you really believe your reads wouldn't that part of the step be unnecessary? In addition there's the fact that stratagems likely won't last beyond today + tonight.

Varsoon already specified that the loss of night chat would be permanent, while the parliament PT would only last as long as this theme does.

-Cerb

oh lol derp

Anyways, I understand your fundamental point, that if they had 100% confidence in their reads, then there would be no reason to STOP quicklynching at one scum. I do, however, see what they stated as simply expressing that the benefit of quicklynches will no longer exist once there are no longer any scum alive.

Do you interpret the statement and the implied uncertainty as indicating that PH is scum, or just town projecting more certainty than they actually possess?

-Cerb

In post 4640, Reasonably Rational wrote:Anyways, I understand your fundamental point, that if they had 100% confidence in their reads, then there would be no reason to STOP quicklynching at one scum. I do, however, see what they stated as simply expressing that the benefit of quicklynches will no longer exist once there are no longer any scum alive.

Do you interpret the statement and the implied uncertainty as indicating that PH is scum, or just town projecting more certainty than they actually possess?

-Cerb

I'd say the latter. If they were scum I feel like they'd proofread their logic

In post 4641, Gamma Emerald wrote:

In post 4640, Reasonably Rational wrote:Anyways, I understand your fundamental point, that if they had 100% confidence in their reads, then there would be no reason to STOP quicklynching at one scum. I do, however, see what they stated as simply expressing that the benefit of quicklynches will no longer exist once there are no longer any scum alive.

Do you interpret the statement and the implied uncertainty as indicating that PH is scum, or just town projecting more certainty than they actually possess?

-Cerb

I'd say the latter. If they were scum I feel like they'd proofread their logic

Then what is your intent in bringing that up?

-Cerb

Because I'm trying to underatand their logic

I got lots of reading to do.

In post 4646, Firebringer wrote:I got lots of reading to do.

Baku and Gamma got guiltied by Bee

In post 4646, Firebringer wrote:I got lots of reading to do.

omg it's a firebringer.

Hai!

How are you doing man?

FYI, there's a 90% probability you'll be lynched in the next 2 day phases without very compelling evidence to believe you're not scum.

So, good luck! <3

-Cerb

PH, where are you personally at with regards to the now FB slot?

-Cerb