Mafiascum.net

In post 547, bji wrote: Interesting. Why don't we just let the cops, vigs, etc, find all the scum for us then?

Easy - because we can theoretically find the scum ourselves when those scum are providing content. That's the whole point of playing the game. Power roles are best used to sort the people who aren't providing content.

I agree with Skitter30, there is a good argument against the Tex slot based on the replace outs from that slot. Every bit of in-game evidence is just speculation because the scum are lying through their teeth all the time here, and spotting that is hard. But you can't lie about a replace out. It happens and is factual evidence. I wouldn't mind basing my Day 1 vote on such factual evidence when the alternative is all WIFOM.

Yes, a replace out is an objective fact. No, it's not factual evidence of scum, as townies replace out all the time.

Yes, spotting scum who are lying through their teeth is hard, but again, that's the whole point of playing the game.

And the fact that you replaced into that slot and immediately went after Clemency, doesn't really clean the slot in my opinion.

I agree. I never said it should. No slot is clean at this point.

I think it's obvious to anybody why Clem would write that. He obviously thinks that the slot is highly suspected because it's been twice replaced out on Day 1 and will have a hard time redeeming itself. Also given Clem's play style it's an expected thing for him to say -- he doesn't really make cases, just fluffy observations.

It looks like you're trying to pick an argument with Clemency; there is no good reason for starting a back-and-forth with him on his throwaway comment otherwise.

Er, yes, that's exactly what I was doing. I can get information that way. You're pointing out that I'm actually playing the game instead of voting lurkers, but saying it in a disparaging way. I don't get that - unless you're doing the same with me now in order to get info from my response.

I would venture a guess that from your position, Clemency is possibly the easiest person to a) get to move off of your wagon with some pressure given that he's capitulated to just about every counterpoint in this game thus far,

Wrong. I'm not concerned about my wagon.

b) get some momentum towards as a mislynch vote given that he hasn't shown the ability or interest in defending himself. Under pressure he's acted like he's defeated before the argument even starts and is expecting to be lynched (from my first exchange with him). That would probably be a good player to try to turn the attention to, especially if you think that you're likely to be able to make him look bad in every exchange, which it appears you try to do (post 513, post 514).

Seriously, as scum you would try to mislynch this person today?

Scum!persivul would want to take this person to end game.

So when Clemency votes your slot for its replace-outs, he's scummy? But when Skitter does it, it's just because she's lazy?

I voted Clemency for having no original thought, not for voting my slot.

Post 550 checks out. I'm very conflicted on this slot.

In post 550, Persivul wrote:[

I agree with Skitter30, there is a good argument against the Tex slot based on the replace outs from that slot. Every bit of in-game evidence is just speculation because the scum are lying through their teeth all the time here, and spotting that is hard. But you can't lie about a replace out. It happens and is factual evidence. I wouldn't mind basing my Day 1 vote on such factual evidence when the alternative is all WIFOM.

Yes, a replace out is an objective fact. No, it's not factual evidence of scum, as townies replace out all the time.

I do agree with alot of what you say but this doesn't quite ring true to me. First, my personal experience is that scum replaces more frequently. It is a sucky part of the game because it reduces the fidelity of the game that there can be this objective fact that takes non-gameplay information and affects the game, but it is true in my experience. Second, it makes more sense that Tex would replace out because he didn't want to play scum than anything else. He did express interest in joining, and he did pretty much noped out as soon as he saw his role PM and then saw how the game was going. This all seems so much more likely to come from scum than town.

You seem like a very good player though, if you are town and get lynched because of Tex then it will be a big blow to town.

Of course, if you are scum then I think we'll be lucky to get you on the Tex slot dirtiness. So your skill is null obviously when it comes to evaluating the value of lynching the slot.

In post 552, bji wrote:

In post 550, Persivul wrote:[

I agree with Skitter30, there is a good argument against the Tex slot based on the replace outs from that slot. Every bit of in-game evidence is just speculation because the scum are lying through their teeth all the time here, and spotting that is hard. But you can't lie about a replace out. It happens and is factual evidence. I wouldn't mind basing my Day 1 vote on such factual evidence when the alternative is all WIFOM.

Yes, a replace out is an objective fact. No, it's not factual evidence of scum, as townies replace out all the time.

I do agree with alot of what you say but this doesn't quite ring true to me. First, my personal experience is that scum replaces more frequently. It is a sucky part of the game because it reduces the fidelity of the game that there can be this objective fact that takes non-gameplay information and affects the game, but it is true in my experience. Second, it makes more sense that Tex would replace out because he didn't want to play scum than anything else. He did express interest in joining, and he did pretty much noped out as soon as he saw his role PM and then saw how the game was going. This all seems so much more likely to come from scum than town.

You seem like a very good player though, if you are town and get lynched because of Tex then it will be a big blow to town.

Of course, if you are scum then I think we'll be lucky to get you on the Tex slot dirtiness. So your skill is null obviously when it comes to evaluating the value of lynching the slot.

I'm the opposite I feel worse replacing out as scum than town. I think it's more on the individual through.

You know I'm going to take the replace out as a null and look at Percival alone.

I think his reasoning for voting clemency is a bit meh but I can put myself in his shoes and see how he got there. The creature one puzzles me because even if creature himself looks scummy and it's his own bias he could of given a read of raya who is actually appears more scummy to me.

In post 515, Persivul wrote:I've read the full thread, but haven't done ISOs yet except for clem. At this point:

{garmr, irrelephant (neat name BTW)}
{bji, skitter, sashadin}
{reaper}
{clemency, creature*}

* - I'm biased against creature from past experience and I hate his playstyle, so take that FWIW.

VOTE: Clemency

Read his ISO. He has the highest post count in the game, but practically no original thought. Frequently when a person gets heat on them early in D1 and gets out of it, people have a difficult time getting back to examining that person. Seems to be the case here. Yes, his frustration felt genuine, but both town and scum can get frustrated in that situation, so that's NAI.

So I got Three things I want to ask to help sort you.

-what do you think of creatures predecessor?
-what made you push clemency over creature?
-You said you should let power roles sort out low content players but your reads list has all of them on the bottom to lynch straight away. Is that intentional or coincidence?

In post 554, Garmr wrote:
So I got Three things I want to ask to help sort you.

-what do you think of creatures predecessor?

Scummy. That's mainly where the read comes from. Creature is too fluffy to really analyze. Some people might be able to read him based on meta. I can't. For me, VCA/NKA would be the only way to get a scum read on Creature.

-what made you push clemency over creature?

See above.

-You said you should let power roles sort out low content players but your reads list has all of them on the bottom to lynch straight away. Is that intentional or coincidence?

They have plenty of content. I believe they're the top two posters. What I don't see is any scum hunting in that content.

bit harsh to call for a lynching based on playstyle, innit?

@persivul post 555

Why didn't you bring up the scum read of raya earlier if you thought creature play so far was null when given reasons to scum read the slot? Tbh it looks kinda bad in retrospect.

So want to explain the case or is more or less the same points as irrelephant and I made.

In post 557, Garmr wrote:@persivul post 555

Why didn't you bring up the scum read of raya earlier if you thought creature play so far was null when given reasons to scum read the slot?

Because I don't have time to write every thought that goes through my head, particularly when I'm replacing in and catching up.

Tbh it looks kinda bad in retrospect.

So want to explain the case or is more or less the same points as irrelephant and I made.

Declaring another interaction as TvT is super easy scum play. Worse, when pressured, her story changed.

And no, I don't do preflip associatives, so don't ask.

In post 552, bji wrote:
I do agree with alot of what you say but this doesn't quite ring true to me. First, my personal experience is that scum replaces more frequently. It is a sucky part of the game because it reduces the fidelity of the game that there can be this objective fact that takes non-gameplay information and affects the game, but it is true in my experience. Second, it makes more sense that Tex would replace out because he didn't want to play scum than anything else. He did express interest in joining, and he did pretty much noped out as soon as he saw his role PM and then saw how the game was going. This all seems so much more likely to come from scum than town.

That's interesting, what are the numbers? How many town and scum replace outs have you seen? That's something I've thought about doing myself but never got around to.

In post 559, Persivul wrote:

In post 557, Garmr wrote:@persivul post 555

Why didn't you bring up the scum read of raya earlier if you thought creature play so far was null when given reasons to scum read the slot?

Because I don't have time to write every thought that goes through my head, particularly when I'm replacing in and catching up.

Tbh it looks kinda bad in retrospect.

So want to explain the case or is more or less the same points as irrelephant and I made.

Declaring another interaction as TvT is super easy scum play. Worse, when pressured, her story changed.

And no, I don't do preflip associative, so don't ask.

1.It helps me understand through, because if I didn't ask I would of thought you were calling creature scummy because of a null playstyle alone.

2.I meant mine or irrelphants points on raya not our vs. Like did you have a different opinion to why raya/creature may be scum or sheeping?

In post 560, Persivul wrote: That's interesting, what are the numbers? How many town and scum replace outs have you seen? That's something I've thought about doing myself but never got around to.

I checked my 7 previous games, just going by slots there were 8/18 scum replaces and 21/60 town replaces. I didn't count multiple replaces to a slot, that was just too much work to count, but I don't recall seeing any particular disparity there between scum and town for that metric.

That's 44.4% scum slot replaces and 35.0% town slot replaces. So in my games, scum slots have replaced about 25% more often than town slots.

To be honest I expected an even larger difference before I did the math, but that's probably because I have replaced into three games and twice it was into a scum slot, so I think that fact made me feel like scum slot replaces were even more likely than they are.

In post 46, Sashaddin wrote:

In post 44, bji wrote:Do you think that Clemency has a weak town game?

This is my 7th game only, so take my word for it's worth. I don't see her play as weak, because those scums were really good in last game. In fact I've seen weak players and Clem is not one of them.

Sashaddin - when you wrote the above, did you expect Clem to play the game as he has played it?

Has he played it like you would expect him to if he were town?

In post 561, Garmr wrote:

In post 559, Persivul wrote:

In post 557, Garmr wrote:@persivul post 555

Why didn't you bring up the scum read of raya earlier if you thought creature play so far was null when given reasons to scum read the slot?

Because I don't have time to write every thought that goes through my head, particularly when I'm replacing in and catching up.

Tbh it looks kinda bad in retrospect.

So want to explain the case or is more or less the same points as irrelephant and I made.

Declaring another interaction as TvT is super easy scum play. Worse, when pressured, her story changed.

And no, I don't do preflip associative, so don't ask.

1.It helps me understand through, because if I didn't ask I would of thought you were calling creature scummy because of a null playstyle alone.

2.I meant mine or irrelphants points on raya not our vs. Like did you have a different opinion to why raya/creature may be scum or sheeping?

I don't recall what your or irrelephant's points were.

In post 562, bji wrote: I checked my 7 previous games, just going by slots there were 8/18 scum replaces and 21/60 town replaces. I didn't count multiple replaces to a slot, that was just too much work to count, but I don't recall seeing any particular disparity there between scum and town for that metric.

That's 44.4% scum slot replaces and 35.0% town slot replaces. So in my games, scum slots have replaced about 25% more often than town slots.

To be honest I expected an even larger difference before I did the math, but that's probably because I have replaced into three games and twice it was into a scum slot

, so I think that fact made me feel like scum slot replaces were even more likely than they are.

Exactly. People tend to make sweeping statements on such items as if they're fact, when really it's mostly confirmation bias from their own very limited experience.

In post 564, Persivul wrote:

In post 561, Garmr wrote:

In post 559, Persivul wrote:

In post 557, Garmr wrote:@persivul post 555

Why didn't you bring up the scum read of raya earlier if you thought creature play so far was null when given reasons to scum read the slot?

Because I don't have time to write every thought that goes through my head, particularly when I'm replacing in and catching up.

Tbh it looks kinda bad in retrospect.

So want to explain the case or is more or less the same points as irrelephant and I made.

Declaring another interaction as TvT is super easy scum play. Worse, when pressured, her story changed.

And no, I don't do preflip associative, so don't ask.

1.It helps me understand through, because if I didn't ask I would of thought you were calling creature scummy because of a null playstyle alone.

2.I meant mine or irrelphants points on raya not our vs. Like did you have a different opinion to why raya/creature may be scum or sheeping?

I don't recall what your or irrelephant's points were.

Oh ok so can you case raya slot or give a short reasoning why you thought she was scum.

I already did: "Declaring another interaction as TvT is super easy scum play. Worse, when pressured, her story changed."

79 - "I think this is a TvT interaction." Easy for scum to say as they know alignments.

130 - "To explain this a little more clearly I found the interaction to be likely TvT overall as an initial and not thought. It was nothing I felt confident about. It's too early to look at an interaction and settle on the players' alignments. The player I would find more likely to be scum in this interaction is clemency if I'm wrong about it being TvT." Oh fuck, I was way too confident earlier and we need mislynches, better dial back that read.

In post 568, Persivul wrote:79 - "I think this is a TvT interaction." Easy for scum to say as they know alignments.

130 - "To explain this a little more clearly I found the interaction to be likely TvT overall as an initial and not thought. It was nothing I felt confident about. It's too early to look at an interaction and settle on the players' alignments. The player I would find more likely to be scum in this interaction is clemency if I'm wrong about it being TvT." Oh fuck, I was way too confident earlier and we need mislynches, better dial back that read.

Oh ok so if I try to step in your shoes, I can assume from this post you think it's unlikely that clemency and Creature/raya slot are a scum team together despite individual reads. So from your perspective who if one flips scum who do you think the partners of each one could be?

Also if I had reads like yours and with the cases you presented I would be personally voting creature over clemency but that's me.

In post 569, Garmr wrote: Oh ok so if I try to step in your shoes, I can assume from this post you think it's unlikely that clemency and Creature/raya slot are a scum team together despite individual reads. So from your perspective who if one flips scum who do you think the partners of each one could be?

In post 559, Persivul wrote: And no, I don't do preflip associatives, so don't ask.

In post 570, Persivul wrote:

In post 569, Garmr wrote: Oh ok so if I try to step in your shoes, I can assume from this post you think it's unlikely that clemency and Creature/raya slot are a scum team together despite individual reads. So from your perspective who if one flips scum who do you think the partners of each one could be?

In post 559, Persivul wrote: And no, I don't do preflip associatives, so don't ask.

You make it tough to try and get into your head.

Preflip associatives are a waste of time. There are other ways to get into someone's head.

BTW do you know why you're focusing on me rn?

In post 572, Persivul wrote:Preflip associatives are a waste of time. There are other ways to get into someone's head.

BTW do you know why you're focusing on me rn?

A couple of reasons

1.Because your slots predecessors were inactive, now you became an active player so it allows me to get information.

2.I think the replace out argument is trash.

3.I agree and disagree with you on certain things but your reasoning seems to be a bit guarded, I wanted to pry open your shell a bit.

4.The questions the other players are asking you don't interest me as they seem to be focused on the replace out. The ones that are on your vote clemency aren't hitting the right notes for me either and it seems like you are prepared for them, so I wanted to hit you off balance a bit to see your intentions.

Sorry I have been away longer than I anticipated. I will try and get ISO reads in sometime today. But as I go back to work tomorrow, I have to get my vehicle back in complete working order(running over a deer at 65mph is not advisable.)