Mafiascum.net

Empking's Alt wrote:Why is everyone calling other people obv town.

I wasn't serious about Gamma, it's obviously too early to determine these things.

Gamma wrote:

Alabaska J wrote:

vote: gamma

yawetog is obv noobtown

I don't take noobtown as a reason.

Yes, especially if this isn't a newbie game.

also noobs don't play solely in noobs games.

yawetag could use more votes though.

But saying I'm a noob doesn't fly if it's not a noob game.

I don't care if he's a new player or not; I'm looking for scum, not newbies.

Braeden (2)-Empking,Jebus
Gamma (2)-Nightfall,Gamma
Empking (1)-Braeden
Jebus (1)-pacman281292
yawetag(1)-charter

If that is the right votecount, I think some people need to come clean about what may or may not be affecting their votes.

charter wrote:If that is the right votecount, I think some people need to come clean about what may or may not be affecting their votes.

Including yourself.

My vote is who I'm voting for in the votecount. This is not the case with others. If they can explain this I think it might be a good idea.

charter wrote:My vote is who I'm voting for in the votecount. This is not the case with others. If they can explain this I think it might be a good idea.

I thought you meant that people need to explain why they have voted for who they've voted for. If so, you have yet to explain your vote.

No, I mean why the vote count continually doesn't reflect who people have voted for. It might just be a mistake in the votecount, but if not, I think we need to discuss whether those with screwy votes explain why.

My vote is on you because you need pressure (incidently you need more votes on you too).

Hello, peoples! I'm reading now, will post soon.

charter wrote: You guys want to nameclaim? (Not your role, just name) I find in situations such as this it can be very helpful.

Possibly rolefishing. There is no way to know what names the scum might have as opposed to what names power roles might have. Even if we didn't nameclaim (which I do not support) the scum might have an easier time guessing who has a powerrole based on how they react to this suggestion.

pacman281292 wrote:Vote: charter

bandwagoning scum

wait THAT'S WHAT EYE'M DOING?!?!?!

unvote, vote: Empking's alt because I don't like alts

pacman281292 wrote:lol sorry.

Vote: Jebus

for bandwagoning ever more than charter.

Fakevotes charter and Empking for joke reasons, then actually votes Jebus. Suspicious maybe, but too bizzarre to be genuinely scummy.

charter wrote:Is that a serious vote yawetag?

yawetag wrote:Are all of the other votes serious?

Right now, it will stay. There's been absolutely no game play yet, and until I see something to change my mind, I won't move it. That said, I'm almost positive *something* will change my mind.

charter wrote:That doesn't answer my question. Was there serious backing to that vote or was it a joke?

There was obviously nothing serious about yawetag's vote. There is a good chance that charter is trying to find an excuse to suspect yawetag here.

Gamma wrote:

unvote, vote yawetag

Why don't you be a good boy and answer his question?

I do not like this vote at all. It's plainly obvious what yawetag was doing.

charter wrote:

unvote, vote yawetag

FOS Nightfall. Six posts and said nothing. Trying to fit in with the rest of the town.

Why vote now? charter seems to have set himself up for this vote and followed through once Gamma backed him up and Jebus jumped on the bandwagon. The FoS on Nightfall is waaaaaay too early for the reason charter gave.

charter wrote:

Gamma wrote:

Alabaska J wrote:

vote: gamma

yawetog is obv noobtown

I don't take noobtown as a reason.

Yes, especially if this isn't a newbie game.

Gamma and charter are both wrong. If you don't take into account everything you know about a person (in this case, experience) you're either opening yourself to all kinds of mistakes putting together an easy lynch.

The timing of his vote/FoS post is very suspicious. I'm not sure about Gamma yet (or anybody else, really).

You want me to show evidence where claiming names leads to catching scum? Or do you want to just assume everything I do is scummy?

About all but one of your points there about everyone is not scummy or you are wrong about. Sorry.

charter wrote:You want me to show evidence where claiming names leads to catching scum? Or do you want to just assume everything I do is scummy?

About all but one of your points there about everyone is not scummy or you are wrong about. Sorry.

I'm voting for you because of your vote/FoS post. Everything else in that post is just a series of observations. If you didn't suggest nameclaiming, I'd still be voting for you.

BTW, which point was I right about?

I'm reluctant to vote charter just yet, as I always find him scummy, but I for the most part agree with Megatheory's analysis there.

Megatheory wrote:

pacman281292 wrote:Vote: charter

bandwagoning scum

wait THAT'S WHAT EYE'M DOING?!?!?!

unvote, vote: Empking's alt because I don't like alts

pacman281292 wrote:lol sorry.

Vote: Jebus

for bandwagoning ever more than charter.

Fakevotes charter and Empking for joke reasons, then actually votes Jebus. Suspicious maybe, but too bizzarre to be genuinely scummy.

lol I was just kidding.

well... I totally forgot what I wanted to post yesterday... so I eed some time to reread all this stuff...

Megatheory wrote:

Even if we didn't nameclaim (which I do not support)

the scum might have an easier time guessing who has a powerrole based on how they react to this suggestion.

The emboldened text suggests that you do not support the town not nameclaiming (and therefore support the town nameclaiming), but that seems contrary to your point as a whole.

Can you clarify?

I kind of lost track of this game with all of the random voting, it always confuses me so much.

I do agree with Megatheorys analysis as well, Charters actons do seem questionable but I dont think I am anywhere near ready to cast my vote yet.
That part of Megas argument that Spolium pointed out seems akward like a mistake, but I am waiting to hear Megas response.

I also agree with the fact that you have to take everything into account about the person(s) you are playing with. If you have the benefit of playing with them in other games, or the simple fact that they are newer.

for the sake of getting serious

Megatheory wrote:

charter wrote: You guys want to nameclaim? (Not your role, just name) I find in situations such as this it can be very helpful.

Possibly rolefishing. There is no way to know what names the scum might have as opposed to what names power roles might have. Even if we didn't nameclaim (which I do not support) the scum might have an easier time guessing who has a powerrole based on how they react to this suggestion.

Not rolefishing, also stems from the assumption that this suggestion has no pro town benefits. Also contradict yourself.

pacman281292 wrote:Vote: charter

bandwagoning scum

wait THAT'S WHAT EYE'M DOING?!?!?!

unvote, vote: Empking's alt because I don't like alts

pacman281292 wrote:lol sorry.

Vote: Jebus

for bandwagoning ever more than charter.

Fakevotes charter and Empking for joke reasons, then actually votes Jebus. Suspicious maybe, but too bizzarre to be genuinely scummy.

Random, not suspicious.

charter wrote:Is that a serious vote yawetag?

yawetag wrote:Are all of the other votes serious?

Right now, it will stay. There's been absolutely no game play yet, and until I see something to change my mind, I won't move it. That said, I'm almost positive *something* will change my mind.

charter wrote:That doesn't answer my question. Was there serious backing to that vote or was it a joke?

There was obviously nothing serious about yawetag's vote. There is a good chance that charter is trying to find an excuse to suspect yawetag here.

He provided a reason with his vote, I wanted to know if he meant that as a serious vote since he had previously posted but had not voted. Since he had already provided content you cannot assume it's a joke. And I'm looking for reasons to suspect people, not "excuses". Had he said yes that would have been a good reason to suspect him. It's called scumhunting.

Gamma wrote:

unvote, vote yawetag

Why don't you be a good boy and answer his question?

I do not like this vote at all. It's plainly obvious what yawetag was doing.

Contradictory. You don't like Gamma calling yawetag for calling out scummy behavior. (refusing to answer legit questions is scummy)

charter wrote:

unvote, vote yawetag

FOS Nightfall. Six posts and said nothing. Trying to fit in with the rest of the town.

Why vote now? charter seems to have set himself up for this vote and followed through once Gamma backed him up and Jebus jumped on the bandwagon. The FoS on Nightfall is waaaaaay too early for the reason charter gave.

This is the only one of your points I'd say is an actual one. However I throw Fos's around like santa claus throws presents on christmas.

charter wrote:

Gamma wrote:

Alabaska J wrote:

vote: gamma

yawetog is obv noobtown

I don't take noobtown as a reason.

Yes, especially if this isn't a newbie game.

Gamma and charter are both wrong. If you don't take into account everything you know about a person (in this case, experience) you're either opening yourself to all kinds of mistakes

or

putting together an easy lynch.

No, this will allow anyone to get away with anything because they've done it before. I've lied heavily as town, does that mean I should get to lie freely this game? Not at all.

Spolium wrote:

Megatheory wrote:

Even if we didn't nameclaim (which I do not support)

the scum might have an easier time guessing who has a powerrole based on how they react to this suggestion.

The emboldened text suggests that you do not support the town not nameclaiming (and therefore support the town nameclaiming), but that seems contrary to your point as a whole.

Can you clarify?

I do not support nameclaiming. This is really silly. It makes no sense for me to support nameclaiming and speculate that charter was rolefishing by suggesting it.

charter wrote: Not rolefishing, also stems from the assumption that this suggestion has no pro town benefits. Also contradict yourself.

I find it interesting that you would assume I was contradicting myself there shortly after Spolium asked for clarification on that comment.

charter wrote:

charter wrote:Is that a serious vote yawetag?

yawetag wrote:Are all of the other votes serious?

Right now, it will stay. There's been absolutely no game play yet, and until I see something to change my mind, I won't move it. That said, I'm almost positive *something* will change my mind.

charter wrote:That doesn't answer my question. Was there serious backing to that vote or was it a joke?

There was obviously nothing serious about yawetag's vote. There is a good chance that charter is trying to find an excuse to suspect yawetag here.

He provided a reason with his vote, I wanted to know if he meant that as a serious vote since he had previously posted but had not voted. Since he had already provided content you cannot assume it's a joke. And I'm looking for reasons to suspect people, not "excuses". Had he said yes that would have been a good reason to suspect him. It's called scumhunting.

K, let's work backwards a bit here. What do you mean by "serious vote?"

charter wrote:

Gamma wrote:

unvote, vote yawetag

Why don't you be a good boy and answer his question?

I do not like this vote at all. It's plainly obvious what yawetag was doing.

Contradictory. You don't like Gamma calling yawetag for calling out scummy behavior. (refusing to answer legit questions is scummy)

Obviously I don't think the question is as legit as you think it is. I think it's more likely that a townie would understand what yawetag was doing rather than question him and then punish him with a vote. I think Gamma jumped the gun with that vote. I don't think that's necessarily suspicious at this point in the game, I just pointed this out as a general note. How is this contradictory? I don't see it.

charter wrote:

charter wrote:

unvote, vote yawetag

FOS Nightfall. Six posts and said nothing. Trying to fit in with the rest of the town.

Why vote now? charter seems to have set himself up for this vote and followed through once Gamma backed him up and Jebus jumped on the bandwagon. The FoS on Nightfall is waaaaaay too early for the reason charter gave.

This is the only one of your points I'd say is an actual one. However I throw Fos's around like santa claus throws presents on christmas.

So you admit the yawetag vote was suspiciously timed? That's the main thing, the FoS is just gravy. You basically called Nightfall out for not contributing when we're on page 3 and serious discussion has just barely begun. I don't disagree with that general line of thought, but it's too soon to call him out for that reason. And if you throw out FoS's a lot, you should expect people to call you out on them, IMO.

charter wrote:

Gamma and charter are both wrong. If you don't take into account everything you know about a person (in this case, experience) you're either opening yourself to all kinds of mistakes

or

putting together an easy lynch.

No, this will allow anyone to get away with anything because they've done it before. I've lied heavily as town, does that mean I should get to lie freely this game? Not at all.

It takes more effort to weigh someone's behavior against what you know about them then to pursue people based on general principles or policies. That's just my opinion. All I'm doing here is providing good advice (at least, what I think is good advice).

charter wrote:You want me to show evidence where claiming names leads to catching scum? Or do you want to just assume everything I do is scummy?

Charter, can you please explain what you just said here?
Reword it maybe? The way I read it you could be saying two different things.