Mafiascum.net

JamSV is surely scum, I would bet the game on it.

In post 23, Blopp wrote:

In post 21, ClarkBar wrote:Hmm. Well this is only my second game, and my first one was out of RVS and humming along pretty quickly. So... not sure if there are any other good strategies to break the ice a little.

What happened to make the RVS go so quickly in your other game?

ClarkBar didn't mention this but I happened

In post 52, ClarkBar wrote:JamSV is surely scum, I would bet the game on it.

Yes.

While we're on it. May I have permission to move this out of RVS clark?

Permission granted. *waves hand with a flourish*

This game is hereby out of RVS.

VOTE: Blopp
Feel free to hammer, not that anybody would. Its 00:25 at the moment. Sorry to be inconvenient but rest is needed sometimes.

Dude, Menalque could swoop in Echovision's slot...I don't want a repeat of that nonsense.

In post 52, ClarkBar wrote:JamSV is surely scum, I would bet the game on it.

My vote stays on you. It's almost as if you "know" this is true. Someone else join the Clark wagon.

By the way just before I go off, there are certain things I'll stand by as a matter of policy regardless of meta.

• Quickhammers are NAI, however quickhammers without explanation or warning are Scum Indicative.
• The pretext, something is so scummy, therefore I'm not scum, is highly scummy
• Wagoning is NAI
• I don't like going off of meta nor previous games
• I assume everybody is a good player regardless of experience

With all that send, let's have a good game.

JT, Clark's memeing about the game that just finished where JamSV hammered Clark at LYLO and they were both town.

In post 58, TheThirteenthJT wrote:

In post 52, ClarkBar wrote:JamSV is surely scum, I would bet the game on it.

My vote stays on you. It's almost as if you "know" this is true. Someone else join the Clark wagon.

We've both played one on site game, in the previous game he mistakenly took me a scum me in an ELo, with 3 total people remaining and lost the game for town.

EBWOP: JT, Clark's memeing about the game that just finished where JamSV hammered Clark at ELO/KILO and they were both town.[/quote]

Perhaps it is a coincidence, but since being wagoned, Blopp has removed their profile pic. That means they have been onsite and decided not to post. So now we have her ignoring the initial wagon that I started with 72o, despite posting after it began and ignoring my case. In addition, we have her logging on to remove her profile pic and still not posting. Feels a lot like giving up to me.

Are you actually unironically pushing that angle?

Are you actually unironically denying that I may have a point?

As much as I would like to chime in on Lucky's angle, I guess I'll just keep my big yapper shut.

UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer

In post 67, Raya36 wrote:UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer

Is he your only scumlean or do you have more?

Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure

In post 69, Raya36 wrote:Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure

Where's your vote then?

Also can you all look back at my two questions (rqs) I asked. I really want to know the answer for the first one.

In post 68, TheThirteenthJT wrote:

In post 67, Raya36 wrote:UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer

Is he your only scumlean or do you have more?

In post 69, Raya36 wrote:Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure

"I scumlean Lucky for possibly wanting a quick hammer on my other scumlean."

For the record, I'm expecting Blopp not to post again until the slot is replaced, and if the slot claims VT I will be pushing for the slot to be eliminated.

In post 37, TheThirteenthJT wrote:1. Are you a straightforward player or like to do a lot of private analysis?

Depends. I'm typically pretty open with my thought process. Sometimes I keep my thoughts private to observe, but tend to quickly make them public once I've gauged how players have reacted with the information they had available.

In post 37, TheThirteenthJT wrote:2. How upset would you be if you are lynched Day 1 from a scale of 1-10? 10 being highly upset.

I've never been a typical D1 elimination target, so I couldn't tell you.

In post 72, LuckyLuciano wrote:For the record, I'm expecting Blopp not to post again until the slot is replaced, and if the slot claims VT I will be pushing for the slot to be eliminated.

So I am going to address this after all. As Jam may recall, I can be somewhat of lush and tonight is no exception, but I'll try and keep my thoughts clear.

I do find activity on this site by a player which does not occur in the thread(s) in which they are playing to be scum-indicative. In other words, if you're here doing stuff (on Mafiascum) but not I find that suspicious. I hate to keep referencing my last game, but it's my only frame of reference. In my last game there was a player whose activity/behavior outside of our game thread was distinctly different than it was inside it. I voted for that player, the wagon got to L-1, and then the player was replaced. That slot ended up being scum.

Which brings up my next point, and I am just thinking out loud here. I think Lucky is correct in pushing this "angle". I think I disagree that a replacement be lynched unless they claim a PR. How can a replacement answer for another player who has barely posted? What information can be gleaned from that Lynch provided it doesn't turn up scum? Just a wagon exam?

I know: "here goes Clarkbar defending Blopp again". I disagree that I ever did, and I'm not doing so now. I like the wagon well enough, I just wonder about the virtue of that last bit regarding lynching a replacement unless there's a PR claim. Since Lucky has made that the condition of a successful claim, couldn't any replacement (even town perhaps) make a PR claim? Thus forcing possible counter-claims?