Mafiascum.net

Ranny might actually be scum. 41 is very professory and doesn't move the game forward. Rather it seems that Rannygazoo feels caught in a hard place and would have us debate how long RVS goes on for.

Not sure what to think about BM indulging this in 43.

In post 46, Titus wrote:That feels like a lot of words to say that my observation was correct but that you assign my rationale no weight. If that's the case though, why are you voting Ranny?

I think you could have made a credible argument that Ranny's post was scummy, but you didn't. That's slightly different than saying your observation was correct, as I've already pointed out why it wasn't (he vote based on a really weak rationale, he gave no rationale for the vote itself).

I was pinged by Ranny's post for the reason I assumed you might have been, as I explained in post 45. I also didn't really understand the attempt to sort you so early based on a 1-game meta and a couple of empty posts.

Not sure that makes me think you're town. I don't think we've played together so unsure of how you typically play so I'll watch others who have.

In post 51, Battle Mage wrote:he didnt vote based on a really weak rationale, he gave no rationale for the vote itself

Great. That's not what I said (or meant to say). I was arguing my own reason for suspecting Ranny was weak.

my initial take is that this is a defensive (and aggressive) open from Titus. Surprised that in post 49, she didn't probe Ben's line at all - just defended her own position.

In post 51, Battle Mage wrote:I also didn't really understand the attempt to sort you so early based on a 1-game meta and a couple of empty posts.

Why not? It's early and everything is weak. If it gets players invested, we can get started. Now if such a basis persisted with nothing more, that's scummy. We're at the point where weak evidence is better than none.

P.S. ben is town.

In post 47, benhalkum wrote:

In post 44, Titus wrote:

In post 42, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 38, Titus wrote:

In post 36, Battle Mage wrote:my initial suggestion would be...it's very early to draw a conclusion one way or another about Titus' alignment in this game, especially based on the 1-game meta cited and given she only has a couple of non-AI posts.

And this needed saying because?

All you're doing is stopping scum from whiteknighting me based on flimsy evidence and exposing themselves.

...what's the reason behind your entrance being a tad on the aggressive side? I've previously known you to be a lot more moderate and composed as town.

To actually respond to your point, I didn't stop anyone doing anything, by giving a view on something which had already happened.

I'm in a no bullshit mood and I am sick of getting nightkilled day one and then praying people solve without me.

Sick of being night killed on day one but ok with making yourself a target?

I mean, unless you know you're safe at night

Ben, can you please explain what you mean here?

specifically about Titus making herself a target? and how you infer this means she would be safe at night?

In post 50, Titus wrote:Ranny might actually be scum. 41 is very professory and doesn't move the game forward. Rather it seems that Rannygazoo feels caught in a hard place and would have us debate how long RVS goes on for.

Not sure what to think about BM indulging this in 43.

Post 43:

In post 43, Titus wrote:

In post 40, Rannygazoo wrote:@Titus: sounds like you have really high standards for RVS

In post 56, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 47, benhalkum wrote:

In post 44, Titus wrote:

In post 42, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 38, Titus wrote:

In post 36, Battle Mage wrote:my initial suggestion would be...it's very early to draw a conclusion one way or another about Titus' alignment in this game, especially based on the 1-game meta cited and given she only has a couple of non-AI posts.

And this needed saying because?

All you're doing is stopping scum from whiteknighting me based on flimsy evidence and exposing themselves.

...what's the reason behind your entrance being a tad on the aggressive side? I've previously known you to be a lot more moderate and composed as town.

To actually respond to your point, I didn't stop anyone doing anything, by giving a view on something which had already happened.

I'm in a no bullshit mood and I am sick of getting nightkilled day one and then praying people solve without me.

Sick of being night killed on day one but ok with making yourself a target?

I mean, unless you know you're safe at night

Ben, can you please explain what you mean here?

specifically about Titus making herself a target? and how you infer this means she would be safe at night?

He's literally just asking for my goal here, so I told him. I don't get why and how you claim that as defensive to answer that question.

BM, your biggest problem is that you don't listen.

You didn't listen to 41 but you heard it. 41 is a scummy post for what it doesn't say.

Yea, the way Titus is acting, to me, is in a way I'd feel comfortable voting her out of it came down to it.

But it's also brash, and scum may see it as a threat if she is in fact town, this targeting her at night.

Unless, she's scum and isn't worried about a night kill.
If that makes sense.

In post 57, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 50, Titus wrote:Ranny might actually be scum. 41 is very professory and doesn't move the game forward. Rather it seems that Rannygazoo feels caught in a hard place and would have us debate how long RVS goes on for.

Not sure what to think about BM indulging this in 43.

Post 43:

In post 43, Titus wrote:

In post 40, Rannygazoo wrote:@Titus: sounds like you have really high standards for RVS

Typo. Should be 48.

In post 49, Titus wrote:

In post 47, benhalkum wrote:

In post 44, Titus wrote:

In post 42, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 38, Titus wrote:

In post 36, Battle Mage wrote:my initial suggestion would be...it's very early to draw a conclusion one way or another about Titus' alignment in this game, especially based on the 1-game meta cited and given she only has a couple of non-AI posts.

And this needed saying because?

All you're doing is stopping scum from whiteknighting me based on flimsy evidence and exposing themselves.

...what's the reason behind your entrance being a tad on the aggressive side? I've previously known you to be a lot more moderate and composed as town.

To actually respond to your point, I didn't stop anyone doing anything, by giving a view on something which had already happened.

I'm in a no bullshit mood and I am sick of getting nightkilled day one and then praying people solve without me.

Sick of being night killed on day one but ok with making yourself a target?

I mean, unless you know you're safe at night

Well, if I am making myself a target, then I am obvtowning.

However, no one nightkills the class know it all.

So therefore my goal is to be right, vocal and brash. This prevents scum from lynching or killing me. Well if they do, town will know exactly where I stand and can sheep it.

Making yourself a target and obvtowning are not necessarily the same thing. If you play in a way which is vocal and brash, you may be a target even if you are not obvtown, as I have learnt in the past. The idea that you wouldn't be NKed at some point in this game is a strange one to be peddling at this stage, especially if you plan to deliberately play in a way where scum might be more likely to kill you. Are you trying to sow the seeds early to justify why you dont get killed?

In post 59, benhalkum wrote:Yea, the way Titus is acting, to me, is in a way I'd feel comfortable voting her out of it came down to it.

But it's also brash, and scum may see it as a threat if she is in fact town, this targeting her at night.

Unless, she's scum and isn't worried about a night kill.
If that makes sense.

I have been nightkilled night 1, three games in a row by not being brash. I'd like to play to day 2. So fuck it. I'll tell you exactly who is scum and who isn't without caring about how it makes you feel.

In post 59, benhalkum wrote:Yea, the way Titus is acting, to me, is in a way I'd feel comfortable voting her out of it came down to it.

But it's also brash, and scum may see it as a threat if she is in fact town, this targeting her at night.

Unless, she's scum and isn't worried about a night kill.
If that makes sense.

yes that makes sense, thanks

In post 61, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 49, Titus wrote:

In post 47, benhalkum wrote:

In post 44, Titus wrote:

In post 42, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 38, Titus wrote:

In post 36, Battle Mage wrote:my initial suggestion would be...it's very early to draw a conclusion one way or another about Titus' alignment in this game, especially based on the 1-game meta cited and given she only has a couple of non-AI posts.

And this needed saying because?

All you're doing is stopping scum from whiteknighting me based on flimsy evidence and exposing themselves.

...what's the reason behind your entrance being a tad on the aggressive side? I've previously known you to be a lot more moderate and composed as town.

To actually respond to your point, I didn't stop anyone doing anything, by giving a view on something which had already happened.

I'm in a no bullshit mood and I am sick of getting nightkilled day one and then praying people solve without me.

Sick of being night killed on day one but ok with making yourself a target?

I mean, unless you know you're safe at night

Well, if I am making myself a target, then I am obvtowning.

However, no one nightkills the class know it all.

So therefore my goal is to be right, vocal and brash. This prevents scum from lynching or killing me. Well if they do, town will know exactly where I stand and can sheep it.

Making yourself a target and obvtowning are not necessarily the same thing. If you play in a way which is vocal and brash, you may be a target even if you are not obvtown, as I have learnt in the past. The idea that you wouldn't be NKed at some point in this game is a strange one to be peddling at this stage, especially if you plan to deliberately play in a way where scum might be more likely to kill you. Are you trying to sow the seeds early to justify why you dont get killed?

None of that is what I am saying though. Listen for the love of all that is good, stop typing and start thinking.

I'm not saying I'll never be nightkilled. I am saying I am going to force scum into a bad situation if they kill me night 1 because I am sick of it happening.

Why did you indulge Rannygazoo's 41 in post 48 bm?

In post 62, Titus wrote:

In post 59, benhalkum wrote:Yea, the way Titus is acting, to me, is in a way I'd feel comfortable voting her out of it came down to it.

But it's also brash, and scum may see it as a threat if she is in fact town, this targeting her at night.

Unless, she's scum and isn't worried about a night kill.
If that makes sense.

I have been nightkilled night 1, three games in a row by not being brash. I'd like to play to day 2. So fuck it. I'll tell you exactly who is scum and who isn't without caring about how it makes you feel.

Titus, it's probably worth flagging at this stage, TGP's rules which include stuff around being nice and respectful to people in the interest of a pleasant game. I'm not suggesting you've breached that thus far, but it's just worth bearing in mind when using your brash and overly-aggressive persona. it's also best not to let influences outside of this game, affect your play in this one.

In post 64, Titus wrote:

In post 61, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 49, Titus wrote:

In post 47, benhalkum wrote:

In post 44, Titus wrote:

In post 42, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 38, Titus wrote:

In post 36, Battle Mage wrote:my initial suggestion would be...it's very early to draw a conclusion one way or another about Titus' alignment in this game, especially based on the 1-game meta cited and given she only has a couple of non-AI posts.

And this needed saying because?

All you're doing is stopping scum from whiteknighting me based on flimsy evidence and exposing themselves.

...what's the reason behind your entrance being a tad on the aggressive side? I've previously known you to be a lot more moderate and composed as town.

To actually respond to your point, I didn't stop anyone doing anything, by giving a view on something which had already happened.

I'm in a no bullshit mood and I am sick of getting nightkilled day one and then praying people solve without me.

Sick of being night killed on day one but ok with making yourself a target?

I mean, unless you know you're safe at night

Well, if I am making myself a target, then I am obvtowning.

However, no one nightkills the class know it all.

So therefore my goal is to be right, vocal and brash. This prevents scum from lynching or killing me. Well if they do, town will know exactly where I stand and can sheep it.

Making yourself a target and obvtowning are not necessarily the same thing. If you play in a way which is vocal and brash, you may be a target even if you are not obvtown, as I have learnt in the past. The idea that you wouldn't be NKed at some point in this game is a strange one to be peddling at this stage, especially if you plan to deliberately play in a way where scum might be more likely to kill you. Are you trying to sow the seeds early to justify why you dont get killed?

None of that is what I am saying though. Listen for the love of all that is good, stop typing and start thinking.

I'm not saying I'll never be nightkilled. I am saying I am going to force scum into a bad situation if they kill me night 1 because I am sick of it happening.

Speaking from personal experience, I get killed N1 often, and I don't worry about it. It's normally a compliment because scum know I'm a good player and hard to mis-elim.

Oh, I'm not going to outright call people dicks. I'm not going to insult people's integrity.

There's a difference between tact and untactful. Being untactful might get me a scum lynch and decent wagons for VCA, which just lets me close out the game.

In post 67, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 64, Titus wrote:

In post 61, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 49, Titus wrote:

In post 47, benhalkum wrote:

In post 44, Titus wrote:

In post 42, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 38, Titus wrote:

In post 36, Battle Mage wrote:my initial suggestion would be...it's very early to draw a conclusion one way or another about Titus' alignment in this game, especially based on the 1-game meta cited and given she only has a couple of non-AI posts.

And this needed saying because?

All you're doing is stopping scum from whiteknighting me based on flimsy evidence and exposing themselves.

...what's the reason behind your entrance being a tad on the aggressive side? I've previously known you to be a lot more moderate and composed as town.

To actually respond to your point, I didn't stop anyone doing anything, by giving a view on something which had already happened.

I'm in a no bullshit mood and I am sick of getting nightkilled day one and then praying people solve without me.

Sick of being night killed on day one but ok with making yourself a target?

I mean, unless you know you're safe at night

Well, if I am making myself a target, then I am obvtowning.

However, no one nightkills the class know it all.

So therefore my goal is to be right, vocal and brash. This prevents scum from lynching or killing me. Well if they do, town will know exactly where I stand and can sheep it.

Making yourself a target and obvtowning are not necessarily the same thing. If you play in a way which is vocal and brash, you may be a target even if you are not obvtown, as I have learnt in the past. The idea that you wouldn't be NKed at some point in this game is a strange one to be peddling at this stage, especially if you plan to deliberately play in a way where scum might be more likely to kill you. Are you trying to sow the seeds early to justify why you dont get killed?

None of that is what I am saying though. Listen for the love of all that is good, stop typing and start thinking.

I'm not saying I'll never be nightkilled. I am saying I am going to force scum into a bad situation if they kill me night 1 because I am sick of it happening.

Speaking from personal experience, I get killed N1 often, and I don't worry about it. It's normally a compliment because scum know I'm a good player and hard to mis-elim.

I do frankly care. To pretend otherwise is dishonest on my part. I can't play because I keep getting nightkilled. That can and does fuel my motivation. I love the compliments, but my goal has to be to help town win, not get an accolade.

Can we both agree that Ben is town and move on?

This discussion helps no one read anyone and is going to encourage skimming.

In post 55, Titus wrote:

In post 51, Battle Mage wrote:I also didn't really understand the attempt to sort you so early based on a 1-game meta and a couple of empty posts.

Why not? It's early and everything is weak. If it gets players invested, we can get started. Now if such a basis persisted with nothing more, that's scummy. We're at the point where weak evidence is better than none.

P.S. ben is town.

I don't agree with your inference that town should ignore odd behaviour early in the game on the basis "everything is weak...it gets players invested", and it's an odd line to take given your earlier claim you didnt want to prolong the RVS. Are you really suggesting it was unreasonable for me to vote for Ranny based on my rationale? If so, I'd be grateful if you could set that out more clearly.

On Ben, tell me how confident you are that he is town, and why?

In post 59, benhalkum wrote:Yea, the way Titus is acting, to me, is in a way I'd feel comfortable voting her out of it came down to it.

But it's also brash, and scum may see it as a threat if she is in fact town, this targeting her at night.

Unless, she's scum and isn't worried about a night kill.
If that makes sense.

Brash players don't get nightkilled unless super accurate.

I just want to point out, just because Titus is saying I'm town doesn't mean I automatically agree she is.

Really weird mentioning it more than once.

The paranoid part of me makes me think if she flips scum it's an attempt to get me targeted next.

That or it's an attempt to get me to lay off my suspecion as why would I want to suspect someone who's baking me as town?

In post 70, Titus wrote:Can we both agree that Ben is town and move on?

You should explain your reasoning. As I see it, a couple of us were discussing why we thought Ben may be town here, and you came in and repeatedly stated "Ben is town" with no justification, which seems a bit like you may have been piggy-backing off a popular sentiment but trying to claim it as an independent read.