Mafiascum.net

I didn't include Benmage. Benmage has shared reads.

That's extremely fucking narrow. I'm p sure I have most, or at least close to the most, posts in the game, and you are trying to only classify "active" as "someone with as many posts as me." That's ridiculous. None of those players have received prods; all of them have posted content. That's an insanely impossible standard.

Captain Haddock re-stated his read because it's so wrong that people keep poking holes in his logic; some simply chose the longer route of doing so. I said, very simply and concisely, why his logic was wrong and scummy. He spent another ten years talking about; nothing changed. I had nothing more to say on the subject. I was paying attention to how he treated people, but sometimes, it's time to get in there, and sometimes, inserting yourself will change the outcome.

No one hounded me about my read on Captain Haddock because it wasn't fucking stupid, so I didn't have to explain it 10,000 times.

I feel much better about Amrun now.
VOTE: CES

Shea, I'm going to trust my team mates when they tell me stuff like that + it kind of feels like in character for you. Also: Weather Mafia II.

↑ Regfan wrote:Benmage is admittedly partially 'gut' based alongside with me liking his comment about why he'd take town.

I still kind of think he picked White Flag ahead of time (like he said "No power roles. Skill>=win.") and he made that comment to look town.

Regfan, wanna wagon 'marble?

↑ Cogito Ergo Sum wrote:Shea, I'm going to trust my team mates when they tell me stuff like that + it kind of feels like in character for you. Also: Weather Mafia II.

↑ Regfan wrote:Benmage is admittedly partially 'gut' based alongside with me liking his comment about why he'd take town.

I still kind of think he picked White Flag ahead of time (like he said "No power roles. Skill>=win.") and he made that comment to look town.

Regfan, wanna wagon 'marble?

I've always appreciated the pure skill aspect of mountainous. See Zachs mountainous game.

Yes? I'm disputing that?

EBWOP: not disputing

Oh nvm... its 4 am here.

Lol, won't let this one go will ya.

↑ Amrun wrote:That's extremely fucking narrow. I'm p sure I have most, or at least close to the most, posts in the game, and you are trying to only classify "active" as "someone with as many posts as me." That's ridiculous. None of those players have received prods; all of them have posted content. That's an insanely impossible standard.

Captain Haddock re-stated his read because it's so wrong that people keep poking holes in his logic; some simply chose the longer route of doing so. I said, very simply and concisely, why his logic was wrong and scummy. He spent another ten years talking about; nothing changed. I had nothing more to say on the subject. I was paying attention to how he treated people, but sometimes, it's time to get in there, and sometimes, inserting yourself will change the outcome.

No one hounded me about my read on Captain Haddock because it wasn't fucking stupid, so I didn't have to explain it 10,000 times.

1) That's the thing though; you have the most posts but looking through your posts I don't see a massive amount of scumhunting and the ratio of scumhunting to defensiveness/relatively useless posts make me lean towards you being scum quite heavily. Perhaps it's an impossible standard I'm holding you to, but I've yet to see anything from you that's made me second guess my read strongly.

2) Sure, he restated his read because people were pointing out flaws in his argument however it was easy to see where his mind-set was in terms of who he FoS'ed which is what I consider to be town. The easier it is to follow someone elses thoughts and position the easier it is to read them.

↑ Cogito Ergo Sum wrote:Regfan, wanna wagon 'marble?

I'm happy with my vote on Amrun right now though I plan on talking with Slaxx about this game tomorrow so I'll see what he says.

CES vote from TSQ is unimpressive.

I can sum up the rest of his activity as basically challenging Regfan's scumreads, and then calling Amrun obvtown.

Hardly anything that screams at me to unvote. If nothing else, I want the pressure on him to remain so he doesn't just go and disappear for another week.

You realize that is in one day, right, zach?

And CES, you can't just say "I trust my team." Like, I am directly challenging something you have said is the reason you think I was scum, you can't say "welp, I believe it, even though I have no proof it is true." And look at day one in weather mafia. I did literally no lurking. Look at consulmaker which you were the mod. I did a lot of day one lurking as town. My game activity, is, shockingly enough, determined by my real life.

Zach, that wasn't my point. My point was essentially that if you are voting someone for lurking, when they stop lurking it makes no sense to leave your vote on them, since you will now get an opportunity to read them that you didn't have before. It's like you're saying "Well, I really don't want to make a more informed lynch on this person. They LURKED for ONE part of ONE day!!!!" Do you not see how that's a nonsensical position, especially considering I haven't been the only inactive player, and my lurking is the type that is much more likely to come from a player who is simply not getting the time to devote to the game, regardless of alignment? Like, do you seriously think that scum would think it beneficial to not post at all? Drawing all attention to themselves? No. Is there town motivation for doing so? No. It's a completely null tell. Let me post content and THEN tell me you think I'm scum. That doesn't sound like an unreasonable request.

↑ Thestatusquo wrote:Like, I am directly challenging something you have said is the reason you think I was scum, you can't say "welp, I believe it, even though I have no proof it is true."

One out of three reasons. You haven't exactly given me any good reasons to disbelieve it either.

Thestatusquo wrote:Do you not see how that's a nonsensical position, especially considering I haven't been the only inactive player, and my lurking is the type that is much more likely to come from a player who is simply not getting the time to devote to the game, regardless of alignment? Like, do you seriously think that scum would think it beneficial to not post at all? Drawing all attention to themselves? No. Is there town motivation for doing so? No. It's a completely null tell. Let me post content and THEN tell me you think I'm scum. That doesn't sound like an unreasonable request.

Is there scum motivation to wait until you can get back into the game into a somewhat natural manner? Pretty sure there is. I mean, of course a good part of the lurking you've done is going to attributable to real life, but as a whole your lurking looks like a scum tell to me.

↑ Bub Bidderskins wrote:Because I hate theme shit.

Since when?

↑ Thestatusquo wrote:Put another way: If I am being voted because I was lurking, and now I am not lurking, it makes no sense to continue voting me, since the genesis of the votes is no longer a relevant cause It is preferable to not lynch me here because now you have a chance to read me as opposed to lynching me blind. If my new content makes me seem suspicious to you, then thats a fine reason to vote me, but barring new suspicion, voting a player for lurking when they are no longer lurking makes no sense.

And I do want CES's comment explained, back to game relevant material.

Isn't the reason that you're suspected that you're not posting content, which you still aren't? (Ftr, TSQ just got scummier in my eyes since he actually posted but with almost none content)

↑ Thestatusquo wrote:I am aware its not a non-serious wagon. I just think that as long as I remain here and continue to post content that it should not remain a serious wagon. Surely there are better candidates to lynch than someone who just got caught up in the real world for a little bit.

Do you think you're posting content? Because I'm not agreeing. The only thing you've contributed is a vote on CES with some shitty reasoning.

↑ Amrun wrote:I didn't really consider "very active" as part of the bargain. But still, then, we'll throw out TSQ, and even Sociopath, who is not "very" active. Johhoq came to mind - one scum read, Ben, no reasoning at all that I remember, which shows how good it was.

What? Perhaps that was true by page 5 but you should really reread.

Alright, TSQ is more active by this post but I still think my reasoning is valid as he didn't contribute at the time he wrote that post IMO.

↑ Regfan wrote:

↑ Bub Bidderskins wrote:Yes, and most of them are about that comment she made. Here's the problem I have with the Amrun wagon. Amrun has been fairly scummy all game long. Not nearly as scummy as Johhog or Haddock IMO, but still on the scum side of the spectrum. She was like the third or fourth suspect for a lot of people, but she sort of flew under the radar a little bit. Then, all of a sudden, she makes what I find to be a legitimate comment about not wanting to reveal some info from her QT. There are several legit reasons to do this, but all of a sudden, people are jumping on that as if its scummy in some way.

It's not that Amrun is scummy, its just that the wagon is even scummier. Within a day Amrun went from one vote to four. And yes, some of that is based off "a lack of stated scum reads", but she had "a lac of stated scum reads" before that. I really don't like how this wagon ballooned out of nowhere.

No, they're not about the comment she made at all. The only person that used that comment as part of their reasoning was Socio and he didn't even vote her for it. The whole bandwagon or votes on her are for her not-scumhunting given the massive amount of posts she has alongside with her not mentioning her primary or well only suspect at all since her vote on him at day start. That's the reasoning that Haddock presented.

She was scummy before the comment and one person was voting for her.
She was scummy after the comment, and four people are voting for her for stuff she did before the comment.

Do you see the problem I have with this wagon? All those reasons could have been used earlier but they weren't, because Amrun wasn't a convenient wagon then.

Johhog, for real? that post is so bad. TSQ HAS provided content. He hasn't walled us to death, but he's here and trying to participate. He hasn't had a chance to read the backlog. What a copout.

↑ Johhog wrote:

↑ Bub Bidderskins wrote:Because I hate theme shit.

Since when?

Since I started playing mafia. The only reason I join theme games is if its a canon that I like or if I really don't want to play the mini normal in queue for some reason.

Johhog wrote:

↑ Thestatusquo wrote:Put another way: If I am being voted because I was lurking, and now I am not lurking, it makes no sense to continue voting me, since the genesis of the votes is no longer a relevant cause It is preferable to not lynch me here because now you have a chance to read me as opposed to lynching me blind. If my new content makes me seem suspicious to you, then thats a fine reason to vote me, but barring new suspicion, voting a player for lurking when they are no longer lurking makes no sense.

And I do want CES's comment explained, back to game relevant material.

Isn't the reason that you're suspected that you're not posting content, which you still aren't? (Ftr, TSQ just got scummier in my eyes since he actually posted but with almost none content)

↑ Thestatusquo wrote:I am aware its not a non-serious wagon. I just think that as long as I remain here and continue to post content that it should not remain a serious wagon. Surely there are better candidates to lynch than someone who just got caught up in the real world for a little bit.

Do you think you're posting content? Because I'm not agreeing. The only thing you've contributed is a vote on CES with some shitty reasoning.

↑ Amrun wrote:I didn't really consider "very active" as part of the bargain. But still, then, we'll throw out TSQ, and even Sociopath, who is not "very" active. Johhoq came to mind - one scum read, Ben, no reasoning at all that I remember, which shows how good it was.

What? Perhaps that was true by page 5 but you should really reread.

Alright, TSQ is more active by this post but I still think my reasoning is valid as he didn't contribute at the time he wrote that post IMO.

Weak support for TSQ wagon without wagon hopping or pressure is noted. Saying that he hasn't produced content is bullshit. He voted CES, he said Amrun was town, he defended himself.

Regfan wrote:1) Johhog is town via the meta-information that I found; that he strongly strongly prefers town and finds that he is a weak scum player. It might be nullified and 'wifom' brought into it had he mentioned the point himself however he never stated anything of the sort. Also I worked out what the whole Isa/white flag ect. thing has to do with and with that line of reasoning I no longer find his 'why lie for' statement as scummy and in fact find his 'finding me scummy for outside of game shit and i'll rage at you post game' as a town-tell. His change of vote and lesser activity seems to match his town player in the games I looked through and as scum he seems to attempt to post more.

That's 100% WIFOM and definitely not reason enough to call somebody town. There are many reasons why somebody would end up with scum when they wanted town or vice versa.

Johhog, he barely got off the ground with the quotes that you made.

Can someone please explain to me why teammate-meta says Johhog is town?

My teammates reads so far:

Rhinox says that scum is within Haddock, Benmage, Zach, TSQ. However, I don't think I agree with these. Reg, Amrun and Bub are town to him, the rest are null/lean town. I agree with Reg and Bub, not so much Amrun, who I'm still neutral with.

None of his reads are really strong except for Reg, Amrun and Bub. The TSQ read may be out of date.

iam and Fonz are still reading.

I'd like Socio's read on TSQ when he comes back, too. He's starting to irk me.

Matias wrote:I'd like Socio's read on TSQ when he comes back, too. He's starting to irk me.

I've never played a game with TSQ, nor do I think I have read a game with him in it.
Which is interesting considering his presence on the site in general certainly isn't unknown.
Until I see more, a vote is a waste regardless.
Especially considering the make up of his team.

You're completely missing the point, everyone of you. I'm not saying that TSQ isn't contributing (which he is) but that he wasn't contributing at a time when he claimed to be, which means SCUM POINTS. But you want a straight answer to if I'd support a TSQ-lynch or not you can get one; I won't, not at this time. I read him as null leaning on scum.

↑ Johhog wrote:You're completely missing the point, everyone of you.

OH SORRY.

Well, obviously I'm talking about the ones commenting on that post of mine, not you. But I think you knew that already.

He never claimed to be contributing when he wasn't. What?