Mafiascum.net

In post 317, Kazekirimaru wrote:

In post 249, Tammy wrote:
Don't know, couldn't care less.

Wagon analysis before a flip is stupid. You're literally scumhunting on a wagon, you were on, for no reason, for someone you have no idea what their alignment is, because they joined the wagon for the same reason you did. You're not scumhunting the wagon; you're scattershot voting and making up a reason. The faster you admit that to yourself the better you'll be.

I'm voting for who I think scum is.

So am I making up reasons, or do I have no reasons? Am I scumhunting in your opinion, or aren't I? If I had no idea what your alignment is, why would I make up reasons?

This post is a clusterfuck, miss.

In post 346, Nachomamma8 wrote:Because if not, you don't know how to read Tammy and I'll probably be too drunk by the time I finish explaining her meta for you to completely understand it.

In post 627, Kazekirimaru wrote:Livin' in the past, livin' in the past~

In post 389, ProHawk wrote: Oh and Nacho, get over yourself. I have yet to see any game-changing moves from you. You are overrated.

In post 400, The Rufflig wrote:

In post 398, Deacon Blues wrote:How did you interpret my request that (someone) unvote prohawk? Furthermore, what is your current read on him?

You seemed concerned that someone might quick hammer Prohawk and end the day prematurely.

My current thoughts on Prohawk: Unengaged with the game. Does not care if he is lynched or not. Pressure will not work on him. I do not expect any meaningful contributions from him. Null. (Although, if he's town and has no intention of playing, he really should do the honorable thing and replace out).

In post 633, TheFuzzylogic99 wrote:are you saying my reasoning is bad or that I did not explain myself well or both

In post 425, Nachomamma8 wrote:

In post 423, Deacon Blues wrote:Why did you choose Tammy to push on in your opening post?

Because her opening post was boring, seemed overly terse. Thought I was sensing a bit of weakness, couldn't pass up the opportunity to catch Tammy-scum in one post and make up for chosen mafia. I did research into her other opening posts and everything!

In post 472, Nachomamma8 wrote:

In post 467, Ms Marangal wrote:Tammy

is

town isn't she?

why does when I make that read on her, matter?

making a read too early is generally not a good sign because scum know alignments already and can guess what will happen with reads on certain players based on those players

In post 529, Minami no Hana wrote:

In post 524, Deacon Blues wrote:Can you provide YOUR reads and why you think that way?

Sure.

GiF's town.



No really that was a joke, anyway as for my reads.

Rufflig: Leaning Scum, I didnt like his vote hoping everytime someone did as much as suspect him, and his vote on prohawk seemed opportunistic (bus?)
prohawk: Scum, Don't like his attitude this game, but then again i didnt like him in xenologue either and he was town, so i'm letting Nacho deal with him, besides, GiF wants our vote to be on Rufflig.
Mara: Null, because idk wth is she thinking atm, she's doing nothing for me to work with, just a vote...
You: Leaning Town, tho i'm not sure what you're asking everyone's reads for, unless you're planning on doing that big towntell of yours (or you just remembered why i thought you were scum for in that newbie game and refined your scum game for that?).
Kaze: Null, I think im not able to read Kaze at all
orc: Leaning Town, so far he seems like someone that wants to contribute in general.
Mac: Leaning Town, I like his posts so far, specially his interactions with the other players.

Now you asking reads out of everyone is causing me to be paranoid because on that newbie game where you were scum I had to ask you to do trajectory analisis and that's what in the end made me think you were scum, and idk if you're doing this for the towntell or because of your trajectory from that game.

In post 543, Minami no Hana wrote:Oh i did miss the role reveal, well guess that takes my worries off Kaze and strengthens my read on orc then, considering it's a confirmable role if lynching orc does do what he said.

In post 613, TheFuzzylogic99 wrote:Yes being Hypocritical is a partial scum tell. It means you are not being honest....
Once again it goes back to rather you are being honest and truthful... Townie have very little to hide

True but players usually have a scum play-style and a townie style... not always but often. Unless you know my townie style how can you say this is my scum style/

I give you this one though If you are a scum lurker you would more likely not want to replace out...

Ok yes she posted 3 continuous vote and yes that is suspicious. However you seem to jump on that pretty quickly. You dont seem to care if there is a rational reason for action or not. In other words it seems like you were looking for a reason to vote for someone in order to look like you were scum hunting

not sure how you got apologetic from that when it obviously me being nice..but Ok.. I guess I can see how it could be misread

In post 620, Ms Marangal wrote:
Pedit: Nope, not really. Tammy doesn't bother me she's "easy to manipulate" and I'll be able to do it with time

In post 622, Ms Marangal wrote:we made each other's avi's though

they are special