Mafiascum.net

Holy shit T Swizzle is still in this game!

He said bad day.
Leave him be, we all have bad days.
We can question him tmrw.

In post 5801, Bell wrote:He said bad day.
Leave him be, we all have bad days.
We can question him tmrw.

Fair enough if A50 doesn’t shoot him.

Call me crazy (because this isn't remotely for what they've done), but I actually read them as null!town here. What Gamma said doesn't sound like a scum talking about another of their scum members, so I'll cautiously put TSwizzle in that bin. Maybe I'll look at the rest of their posts, but I might not. Who knows.

In post 5801, Bell wrote:He said bad day.
Leave him be, we all have bad days.
We can question him tmrw.

is this me youre talking to? you can question me now. im here.

In post 5794, Bell wrote:He explicitly said he wasn't gunna get into town set up spec before then going into set up spec when it would out him in a badish position not to.
He's not wrong, but giving up the ghost of set up spec because it's a shadd game is a very, very odd defense.
He even dropped some meta on Mathblade's head (a read) when he just said he probably wouldn't or doesn't like giving reads.

He's contradicting himself a lot. Normally, I wouldn't find this scummy/easy fruit but for a variety of reasons I can't quite articulate this might be one of those exceptions to the rule.

I'm like 95% positive that these exact same accusations, literally these accusations, were levied against Something_Smart in a prior game...

...Where he was town.

That is to say while I see where you're coming from in the inconsistency I don't think it makes him scum, and if anything, might make him town.

In post 5803, DiamondSentinel wrote:Call me crazy (because this isn't remotely for what they've done), but I actually read them as null!town here. What Gamma said doesn't sound like a scum talking about another of their scum members, so I'll cautiously put TSwizzle in that bin. Maybe I'll look at the rest of their posts, but I might not. Who knows.

this is absolutely not a good reason to townread me.

In post 5804, Tayl0r Swift wrote:

In post 5801, Bell wrote:He said bad day.
Leave him be, we all have bad days.
We can question him tmrw.

is this me youre talking to? you can question me now. im here.

He was talking to me about Pete.

He said he felt condescended to.

I want everyone to feel included.

Everyone has more fun I get more reads.

Huzzah happy funball day!

In post 5799, Bell wrote:No, I mean you cut me out entirely from a list by MM. Where he said he suspected me for pretty vanilla reasons. While responding to the rest.

You weren't the only one cut from the list; I cut only the names I didn't feel like contesting on and while I feel that you're probably more likely town, due to not being able to pin you down better, I didn't really feel so strongly about your townness as to contest MM on fingering you.

In post 5795, mastina wrote:

In post 5708, Bell wrote:I feel like later Mastina's going to do a post-reveal about why I'm town or something.

Eh I do tend to townread players who make points that resonate with me even if I later change my mind, which has contributed to townreads on slots like you, shellyc (I feel like shellyc is going to be rather disappointed in me that she's not in my top town in spite of having resonating thoughts with me, I promise I will try to explain that later), GoldenParadox, and probably more, and a lot of what you do/say does look town beyond me agreeing with a fair amount of what you say but I can't nail things down for sure, can't tell that you're definitively town, but do lean that way.

Easiest way to read me at this point is to say that I'm probably not capable of detecting the nuance between a town win condition a third party win condition and acting on that enough to try to get your teams to claim it to force your teams to play toward your town win conditions.
Since you know, I have no reason to pursue this angle if I'm scum.
Though this is a disputable claim almost based on the fact I'm bringing this up myself and also that as scum I guess I would go for it, I just don't think I'd it.

@Mastina, you're not wrong, these are bad reasons almost any other time and probably even bad reasons this time and I should be going after the goldenparadox for going after easy pickings. I fully expect S_S to confront me about it though, so I guess we'll see how that conversation goes.

In post 5808, mastina wrote:

In post 5799, Bell wrote:No, I mean you cut me out entirely from a list by MM. Where he said he suspected me for pretty vanilla reasons. While responding to the rest.

You weren't the only one cut from the list; I cut only the names I didn't feel like contesting on and while I feel that you're probably more likely town, due to not being able to pin you down better, I didn't really feel so strongly about your townness as to contest MM on fingering you.

That's honestly,
too bad.
Oh well, they can't all be crumbs.

In post 5806, Tayl0r Swift wrote:

In post 5803, DiamondSentinel wrote:Call me crazy (because this isn't remotely for what they've done), but I actually read them as null!town here. What Gamma said doesn't sound like a scum talking about another of their scum members, so I'll cautiously put TSwizzle in that bin. Maybe I'll look at the rest of their posts, but I might not. Who knows.

this is absolutely not a good reason to townread me.

Too bad. I've not made nearly enough bad decisions lately.

In post 5811, DiamondSentinel wrote:

In post 5806, Tayl0r Swift wrote:

In post 5803, DiamondSentinel wrote:Call me crazy (because this isn't remotely for what they've done), but I actually read them as null!town here. What Gamma said doesn't sound like a scum talking about another of their scum members, so I'll cautiously put TSwizzle in that bin. Maybe I'll look at the rest of their posts, but I might not. Who knows.

this is absolutely not a good reason to townread me.

Too bad. I've not made nearly enough bad decisions lately.

this is a boring bad decision. there are way more fun bad decisions to make. scumreading me is fun anyway, you should try it.

In post 5775, TheGoldenParadox wrote:

In post 3422, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 3266, Bell wrote:I think s_s would be more engaged with all the claims/ set up spec if town here.

what's to talk about? it's a schadd game, you can't setup spec it on day 2, or at all really.

In post 5076, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 5061, Nero Cain wrote:S_S you don't seem to be hunting much

look if I'm given the opportunity to engage fully in a game through exclusively mechanics discussion, I'm taking it ninety-nine times out of a hundred.

I am not good at hunting (and I missed an entire day), but I am good at mechanics, and this game needs all the mechanics help it can get.

this progression from SS pings me quite hard and i don't like it at all. d2 he barely engages with setup spec discussion, then does an absolutely massive flip d3 despite not REALLY that much new information. then he uses that as an excuse to not have reads and not hunt. maybe i'm in the minority here, but SS is pinging me very, very hard.

quoting this bc only one person responded to this and i think it's kind of important

In post 5813, TheGoldenParadox wrote:

In post 5775, TheGoldenParadox wrote:

In post 3422, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 3266, Bell wrote:I think s_s would be more engaged with all the claims/ set up spec if town here.

what's to talk about? it's a schadd game, you can't setup spec it on day 2, or at all really.

In post 5076, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 5061, Nero Cain wrote:S_S you don't seem to be hunting much

look if I'm given the opportunity to engage fully in a game through exclusively mechanics discussion, I'm taking it ninety-nine times out of a hundred.

I am not good at hunting (and I missed an entire day), but I am good at mechanics, and this game needs all the mechanics help it can get.

this progression from SS pings me quite hard and i don't like it at all. d2 he barely engages with setup spec discussion, then does an absolutely massive flip d3 despite not REALLY that much new information. then he uses that as an excuse to not have reads and not hunt. maybe i'm in the minority here, but SS is pinging me very, very hard.

quoting this bc only one person responded to this and i think it's kind of important

Response? You scumread SS? Okay?

In post 5775, TheGoldenParadox wrote:this progression from SS pings me quite hard and i don't like it at all. d2 he barely engages with setup spec discussion, then does an absolutely massive flip d3 despite not REALLY that much new information.

hmm, let's see, we got two flips, a set of 3 people between whom there's guaranteed one scum, a lot of mechanical revelations from mastina about why exactly she distrusted April, plus A50 being a king and also our ability to vote for a bulletproof. we also got more statements about the 3p wincons that seemed contradictory, and there was no longer anyone trying to strongarm an execution so there's a chance to actually sit back and examine this stuff in a way that wasn't possible on D2.

But yeah, that's really not that much new information.

When I made 3422, we didn't yet know whether Gamma was scum or 3p. (At least, I didn't.) I don't think much had been claimed about the 3p wincons besides that they were mostly pro-town, or again, if it was claimed then I wasn't aware of it. Most of the mechanical discussion was around +J's claim and April's claim, along with silly things like whether the hood was a cult. These are not interesting things to discuss. And while I theoretically could have started a discussion about the 3p's being potentially not townsiding, it's not like that discussion would have gone anywhere beyond "yeah, it's possible, we'll have to see". Now that all the aforementioned things happened, that discussion, and other similar ones, can be had in more detail.

I'm a very mechanics-minded person. That means that where there are arguments to be made based on mechanics, I will usually be interested in making those arguments. But it does not follow that there are always arguments to be made based on mechanics, even if there have been claims. Some claims are just null; Chemist's is a good example. You don't see me expounding on it, because there's just nothing to say.

In post 5793, mastina wrote:The shortcoming is in not realizing that the setup becomes townsided if that distrust doesn't happen.

Also-- I think this is backward. I realize that if you are in fact townsiding, then the setup is probably townsided if you are universally accepted as such.

If anything, my shortcoming would be erroneously believing that schadd wouldn't design his game around the 3p's definitely being distrusted. I feel like schadd would try to account for the possibility that the 3p's would be mostly trusted as well as the possibility for them to be mostly distrusted-- and the easiest way to do that is to make them mildly helpful to town, but not entirely so. (I do concede of course that schadd doesn't always take the easiest way out.)

I strongly suggest a new topic Something Smart.

Pants are things.

In post 5794, Bell wrote:He's contradicting himself a lot. Normally, I wouldn't find this scummy/easy fruit but for a variety of reasons I can't quite articulate this might be one of those exceptions to the rule.

Sounds like a bad rule.

Contradiction implies lack of a plan. You're right that I didn't intend to focus on reads but that doesn't mean I won't get some on the side, and the best kinds of reads are the ones that you don't force anyway.

Your rule should be that contradiction is towny, because the person cares more about doing what they feel like doing in the moment than about projecting a consistent story.

In post 5819, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 5794, Bell wrote:He's contradicting himself a lot. Normally, I wouldn't find this scummy/easy fruit but for a variety of reasons I can't quite articulate this might be one of those exceptions to the rule.

Sounds like a bad rule.

Contradiction implies lack of a plan. You're right that I didn't intend to focus on reads but that doesn't mean I won't get some on the side, and the best kinds of reads are the ones that you don't force anyway.

Your rule should be that contradiction is towny, because the person cares more about doing what they feel like doing in the moment than about projecting a consistent story.

Haha no. This imho is all kinds of bad.

Some contradiction is Townie some is scummy. It really depends on the situation.

After all don’t you scumread the council for contradicting wincon claims?

“But that’s different!”

Me Exactly

I mean yes obviously no rule covers 100% of cases. It's a heuristic. Contradiction is towny, without a particular reason to believe otherwise.

In post 5822, Something_Smart wrote:I mean yes obviously no rule covers 100% of cases. It's a heuristic. Contradiction is towny, without a particular reason to believe otherwise.

Only if it’s minor yeah.

I really don’t subscribe to this.

Without numbers let’s drop it. Since I doubt either of us actually have them to back up our positions,
I guess it would be about approximate probably to rand.
The types of contradictions probably matter a lot and a blanket rule on it and the exception to the rule directly applied to the idea that I don’t think contradictions are usually scummy.