Mafiascum.net

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:17 pm**

In post 591, MiniMegabyte wrote:
In post 590, BBmolla wrote:u
Mind explaining how?

you're not scumhunting you're just trying to look like you are

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:21 pm**

etymonline.org wrote:
band (n.2)

"an organized group," originally especially of armed men, late 15c., from French
bande
, which is traceable to the Proto-Germanic root of
band
(n.1), perhaps via a band of cloth worn as a mark of identification by a group of soldiers or others (compare Gothic
bandwa
"a sign"). But perhaps from Middle English
band, bond
in the sense "force that unites, bond, tie" (late 14c.). Also compare Old Norse
band
"cord that binds; act of binding," also "confederacy."

The extension to "group of musicians" is c. 1660, originally musicians attached to a regiment of the army and playing instruments which may be used while marching. To
beat the band
(1897) is to make enough noise to drown it out, hence to exceed everything.
One-man band
is by 1931 as "man who plays several musical instruments simultaneously;" figurative extension is by 1938.

Official Votecount 1.7PlusJOYED (4): Luca Blight, DrippingGoofball, Titus, quiet

[E-7]

DrippingGoofball (3): Momrangal, NorwegianboyEE, MiniMegabyte
CheekyTeeky (3): Vaxkiller, Gamma Emerald, NoPowerOverMe
MiniMegabyte (2): Nero Cain, BBMolla
NoPowerOverMe (2): CheekyTeeky, chkflip
Titus (1): PlusJOYED
Rannygazoo (1): Norfolk Boy1
Norfolk Boy1 (1): Rannygazoo
Gamma Emerald (1): Andresvmb

Not Voting (2): Hayker, Binatog13

With 20 players alive, it takes 11 votes to achieve an elimination.

Day 1 will end in (expired on 2021-01-16 23:15:00).

@Hayker:

I am unsure if 541 was meant to be a vote so I haven't counted it. Please could you try to use vote and unvote tags

E.g. you get "VOTE: Name or UNVOTE: Name" with:

Code: Select all

[v]Name[/v] or [uv]Name[/uv]

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:32 pm**

In post 574, Nero Cain wrote:
In post 572, BBmolla wrote:
In post 570, Nero Cain wrote:
In post 566, BBmolla wrote:
In post 548, Nero Cain wrote:
In post 379, BBmolla wrote:nero's bad reads probably make him town tbh
and this is pssible TMI. How does he know the alignments of 5 other players? If not why are my reads "bad"?
lmfao
not helping
your fucking logic is ridiculous here nero do I actually need to explain why it's ridiculous
yes

Lol this is town!Nero.

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:33 pm**

In post 575, Gamma Emerald wrote:
In post 558, quiet wrote:@norweigianEE, how do you propose to give the game a push?

@gamma cheeky could be scummy, but not with the info I have. If you have a better read I’m happy to hear it. Otherwise, it feels better to push there in a day or two from my perspective. I’m not discrediting the suspicion, just don’t like that wagon rn.

It’s my understanding that it’s good to push productive wagons, especially this early in the day? But maybe I’m missing something. Is cheeky your most scummy read?
Yeah she is, and you say Cheeky isn’t scummy rn, but the key elements of her play seems to be shading others and useless commentary. That’s not what I expect from Cheeky nor what I expect from town. And her post announcing her leaving is a sign that she’s meeting some nebulous quota of content and then buggering off. Scum do that so they are seen as giving content but also have more wanted from them, keeping themselves just beyond the threshold of being voted by seeming useful.
In post 559, chkflip wrote:
In post 420, Gamma Emerald wrote:VOTE: cheekyteeky
In post 418, CheekyTeeky wrote:Sorry guys for the mass spam I don't have much time but that should be enough stirring until my return xx
This is a scum approach
*sees post number* Nice.

Just do the gamestate a favor and just start from the beginning.
I’ve been considering re-reading but still fuck you.

Basically what i’ve been wanting to say about Cheekys slot from the beginning, but you put it much nicer. Thank you.

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:34 pm**

VOTE: Cheekyteeki
Let’s gooo~

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:37 pm**

In post 582, MiniMegabyte wrote:
In post 529, NorwegianboyEE wrote:This game needs an actual good push to get some good discussion going.
How do you suggest we do this?

Well for starters. You could vote Cheekibreeki.
Consolidation onto a scummy slot is always a great way to gain consensus.

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:41 pm**

In post 600, BBmolla wrote:you're not scumhunting you're just trying to look like you are

Genuine question, now applied to both cheeky and mini

Is this really scummy? Like can someone give me a game or three where scum did this? It gets read as scummy, but to me it seems really bad for that exact reason.

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:43 pm**

Quiet you. (lol)
Let’s vote first and ask questions later.
Remember we need 11 votes to actually even get an elimination. If any of these wagons so far have been on scum i doubt they’ve felt threatened.

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:49 pm**

Ah so we are still in RVS then after all. Vote first questions later got it. I’ll fall in line.
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Cheeky

So now that I did the thing, can someone answer my question? Seems like a fair trade. Link me any examples where scum actually behaved like either a) “I need to take a vacation, throw shade, see you later” or b) filler content, such as asking lots of questions, “not actually scumhunting”, etc. I want to see some of it in action. My bad pet theory is that reports of such scummy behavior by actual scum are grossly overstated.

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:53 pm**

I think it can happen relative often. I think i’ve done it myself in many scum games where i’m not motivated.

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:53 pm**

In post 607, NorwegianboyEE wrote:If any of these wagons so far have been on scum i doubt they’ve felt threatened.

I’m with BB here, this is a reason why the cheeky wagon feels boring. cheeky isn’t even here to threaten.

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:54 pm**

We can see reactions of people around and they will come back eventually.
I don’t see why it’s illegal to wagon a slot just because they’re not here yet.

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:56 pm**

Like, they’re afk ok.
But all their content so far has been scummy.
Are we going to leave it aline just because they dip?

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:58 pm**

I’ll drop it, i can feel myself getting out in the weeds, but I guess I still wonder if that kind of logic wouldn’t also hold for unmotivated town. I’m not convinced it’s AI is all.

Nah I get it, I’m okay enough with it to vote it. I didn’t read their posts as towny, just need some more evidence to back the low activity shade throwing=scum read. If Gemma says they also have a cheeky specific read on it, I’m cool with it. The waiting till cheeky is here is just a preference thing. We could conceivably have a whole different wagon come and gone by then.

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 11:45 pm**

In post 606, quiet wrote:
In post 600, BBmolla wrote:you're not scumhunting you're just trying to look like you are
Genuine question, now applied to both cheeky and mini

Is this really scummy? Like can someone give me a game or three where scum did this? It gets read as scummy, but to me it seems really bad for that exact reason.

um... I mean I can but literally look at any game where I'm scum cause I do it pretty plainly imo

Posted: **Thu Jan 07, 2021 11:55 pm**

Uhhhhhh yeah tells are tells for a reason.

Posted: **Fri Jan 08, 2021 12:17 am**

like the only way to not be faking it is not see your role PM, cause sure there's a degree you can always pretend you're town, but as long as you're not cheating you know you're scum and that means your reads can't be real

this is why some people don't like multiball cause it's not the case there

Posted: **Fri Jan 08, 2021 2:31 am**

In post 579, BBmolla wrote:
In post 574, Nero Cain wrote:
In post 572, BBmolla wrote:
In post 570, Nero Cain wrote:
In post 566, BBmolla wrote:
In post 548, Nero Cain wrote:
In post 379, BBmolla wrote:nero's bad reads probably make him town tbh
and this is pssible TMI. How does he know the alignments of 5 other players? If not why are my reads "bad"?
lmfao
not helping
your fucking logic is ridiculous here nero do I actually need to explain why it's ridiculous
yes
I know for a fact one of your reads is wrong, and I disagree on another read, so they're bad

I don't need to be clairvoyant about every single one of your reads to call them bad bro

this is very basic and pretty lame. Writing my reads off as bad when you only disagree with yourself and 1 read doesn't make a ton of sense to me. Theoretically speaking it I could have all 4 scum in the pool. I think wondering whether or not this was TMI is a plenty valid concern and your violent reaction is both scummy and dumb. As an example, scum Skitter called my reads "bad" in a game when we were in (I mean they were but still...) so I don't think it's impossible that you could TMI like this as well.

Posted: **Fri Jan 08, 2021 2:49 am**

In post 529, NorwegianboyEE wrote:This game needs an actual good push to get some good discussion going.

I've actually found this game to be quite refreshing so far, with decent discussion with minimal shit posting. Do you just not like any of the current wagons?

Posted: **Fri Jan 08, 2021 2:58 am**

In post 592, Luca Blight wrote:A possibility that entered my mind when I read the above posts:

Mini: does nothing

In post 158, NorwegianboyEE wrote:VOTE: MiniMegabyte
Mini, i distinctly remember your meta as scum is to do literally nothing.
Mini in scum pt: I’m being scumread for doing nothing, what should I do

Scum partner: just look interested by asking questions

Mini: ok.

lol, so much this!

VOTE: mini

Posted: **Fri Jan 08, 2021 2:59 am**

I'll swing back around to cheeky, but that last page from mini was bad.

Posted: **Fri Jan 08, 2021 3:01 am**

I want mini more.

Posted: **Fri Jan 08, 2021 3:16 am**

In post 618, Vaxkiller wrote:
In post 529, NorwegianboyEE wrote:This game needs an actual good push to get some good discussion going.
I've actually found this game to be quite refreshing so far, with decent discussion with minimal shit posting. Do you just not like any of the current wagons?

Actually i like this.
Competing wagons between Cheeky/Mini makes the game much easier for me to read in terms of finding scum.

Posted: **Fri Jan 08, 2021 3:23 am**

In post 622, NorwegianboyEE wrote:
In post 618, Vaxkiller wrote:
In post 529, NorwegianboyEE wrote:This game needs an actual good push to get some good discussion going.
I've actually found this game to be quite refreshing so far, with decent discussion with minimal shit posting. Do you just not like any of the current wagons?
Actually i like this.
Competing wagons between Cheeky/Mini makes the game much easier for me to read in terms of finding scum.

There have been other wagons...

Did none of them ping you?

Posted: **Fri Jan 08, 2021 3:50 am**

In post 622, NorwegianboyEE wrote:
In post 618, Vaxkiller wrote:
In post 529, NorwegianboyEE wrote:This game needs an actual good push to get some good discussion going.
I've actually found this game to be quite refreshing so far, with decent discussion with minimal shit posting. Do you just not like any of the current wagons?
Actually i like this.
Competing wagons between Cheeky/Mini makes the game much easier for me to read in terms of finding scum.

It's easier for VCA.

Mafiascum.net

Large Normal 231 | Etymologies | Game Over