Mafiascum.net

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 3:54 pm**

In post 592, Kerset wrote:
In post 578, Severa wrote:townreading

Severa
Bitmap
Sujimichi
Alchemist21
Gamma emerald maybe
That's almost my scumread list. Could you remove bitmap?

Why is removing Bitmap all you ask for when your reads are so polar?

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 3:55 pm**

In post 621, Gamma Emerald wrote:
In post 582, Alchemist21 wrote:
In post 580, Evenstar wrote:
In post 569, Alchemist21 wrote: So far I’m only sure on Townreading Severa and Salamence. Severa’s main is someone I’ve played with a lot and I’m fairly confident this is their Town play. Regardless of whether Salamance’s claim is real or not, I don’t think scum would cave so easily to a fake guilty on them so I townread them for the response.

You’re the first one to reach out to me so you’re a bit Towny too.

Gamma’s the closes thing to a scumread I have right now but it’s not definite.
What do you think is your most non-consensus read atm?
Probably Gamma. I know other people are looking at them, but not for the same reasons I am.
Why does different reasons = non consensus for you? I don’t think there’s anything AI about this but you seem rather particular about this so I want to figure out your logic here.

The answer to that question should be obvious. If it's different from what everyone else was saying then it's not the consensus. And I was answering Evenstar asking what my most non-consensus read was, and this was as best as I could answer it.

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 3:56 pm**

In post 623, Gamma Emerald wrote:
In post 620, Evenstar wrote:
In post 618, Gamma Emerald wrote: Don’t know if I’ll have a reason to go back to this so like
Why the hell is TL on the bottom but you will only lynch him “if you had to”? This honestly strikes me as scummy enough to shift you to a full scumread
Would lynch TL if I had to [lynch someone this instant], but...
That feels like the phrasing of a compromise lynch though

if you feel like i ought to have a non-compromise lynch on page 20, before three of the players had even really done anything, idk what to say to you.

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 3:56 pm**

In post 605, Severa wrote:You better fucking apologize

I was apologizing to Kerset for doing what she just complained about, but I guess you also deserve an apology for my shit push on you

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 3:57 pm**

In post 608, Severa wrote:VOTE: Venus and Mars

play this game

I won’t be following this unless they criminally underperform but I agree with the spirit of the vote

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 3:58 pm**

D1 is a terrible day, intentionally stalling out D1 by refusing to have a proper lynch vote after it being clear where your reads should be is scummy.

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 3:59 pm**

In post 624, TemporalLich wrote:if you're not committed you're trying to stall out D1, therefore Evenstar is scum

VOTE: Evenstar, even if hammer

...

VOTE: TemporalLich

This is staying until such time as TL demonstrates they're actually fucking reading the game.

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 3:59 pm**

In post 622, Evenstar wrote:
In post 617, Alchemist21 wrote:
In post 613, Evenstar wrote:Your example non-consensus read is based on meta you have and other people don't, and is therefore difficult for any other player to evaluate unless you give something more of a basis for it. I would also have expected you to elaborate a bit on it rather than just saying "it's X."
I already elaborated when asked and my interaction with Gamma included me trying to make sense of what I was scumreading them for. Those explanations you want
are
already there.
Not sure you're really doing anything of value there, to be frank. I'd rec pivoting to examine someone else and coming back to Gamma later today.

I disagree. I think I'm coming around to a Town Gamma, and if Gamma and I both realize we're Town it adds a lot of value to the game. This is why I wanted to talk with Gamma, to try and get a better understanding of them here, and I think I am.

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 3:59 pm**

okay at least you're making an attempt to not stall out the game Evenstar...

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:00 pm**

In post 624, TemporalLich wrote:if you're not committed you're trying to stall out D1, therefore Evenstar is scum

VOTE: Evenstar, even if hammer

wut?

The Day just started, how can someone be trying to stall it out?

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:00 pm**

In post 633, TemporalLich wrote:okay at least you're making an attempt to not stall out the game Evenstar...

Hastiest backtrack in all of mafia history, folks.

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:01 pm**

by lacking the conviction to have an actual effing SR or at least a scumlean that isn't a compromise

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:01 pm**

TL/Evenstar are you guys scum partners

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:02 pm**

In post 635, Evenstar wrote:
In post 633, TemporalLich wrote:okay at least you're making an attempt to not stall out the game Evenstar...
Hastiest backtrack in all of mafia history, folks.

you know that was in response to 631 right?

Your intentional misrep makes me SR you harder.

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:03 pm**

In post 638, TemporalLich wrote:
In post 635, Evenstar wrote:
In post 633, TemporalLich wrote:okay at least you're making an attempt to not stall out the game Evenstar...
Hastiest backtrack in all of mafia history, folks.
you know that was in response to 631 right?

Your intentional misrep makes me SR you harder.

I'm speechless.

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:04 pm**

Spoiler:

In post 606, Alchemist21 wrote:
In post 601, Gamma Emerald wrote:
In post 593, Alchemist21 wrote:
In post 589, Gamma Emerald wrote:
In post 575, Sujimichi wrote:I can't argue with your opinion.

And, yes, I have stated where I agree with others. This is true. Consistently is not an adverb that is accurate, however.
I think it’s fair to say you have been agreeing with others a lot. Yes, you’ve raised points yourself but it seems like you’re more than happy to sit behind someone and cheerlead them. I think the Boonism for that action is warlocking? It comes across as scummy because you’re trying to promote the idea without taking as much responsibility. I know scum do this because I did it myself subconsciously once when I was starting out.
I’ll say it again - agreeing with consensus doesn’t make someone scum.
Yes, but the way he’s doing it is extremely shady. He’s like “ah yes, this makes sense”. I have noted in my history here two ways scum will agree with people that are solid tells imo. The first is where scum will support a townie’s idea by bolstering the Townie’s argument while adding little of their own content to it. This is what I mentioned I was caught for in the past earlier, and it serves scum because it helps keep them blameless. I have noticed Suji doing this in spades. The second method is when scum entrench themselves into one argument, then a Townie makes a better one and they hop on at full speed to the Townie’s idea. I caught scum doing this in a game that I can’t recall the name of but that I know had Aliens in the name, and the reason why it’s scummy is it’s a demonstration that they aren’t interested in honest discussion, they just want the argument that best suits them. I don’t recall Suji doing this but I feel like someone else may have done it this game if not him, so it’s something to keep in mind.
Adding a bit of your own perspective to something you agree with isn’t scummy at all. Idk where you get that from.

The second example I will agree is actually scummy, not because it’s sheeping but because the sudden switch when you were so entrenched in the previous argument shows a lack of conviction and sincerity in your own argument.

In post 614, Sujimichi wrote:
In post 601, Gamma Emerald wrote:Yes, but the way he’s doing it is extremely shady. He’s like “ah yes, this makes sense”.
How, in your opinion, does one convey agreement in a non-shady manner?

In post 601, Gamma Emerald wrote:I have noted in my history here two ways scum will agree with people that are solid tells imo. The first is where scum will support a townie’s idea by bolstering the Townie’s argument while adding little of their own content to it.
So, in your view, if I am town and I agree with someone's point of view with reasoning or rationale that may strengthen said view, I should keep it to myself?

Your second argument, by your own admission, does not apply to me.

Responding to both of these since my response for one probably deals with the other

@Alch I think you slightly misinterpreted me. Adding a bit of your own perspective is not scummy, I agree with that, but I’m pretty sure I specified that adding nothing was part of the problem.

@Suji as mentioned to Alch if you had expressed a more unique perspective in the posts where you had agreed with others that would have looked better to me. Something like “I agree X is scummy for this, in fact this is how I interpreted it”. Essentially it kinda like the alternative idea thing from before, if you give your alternative interpretation when agreeing with someone, it is towny because you help build on the logic that exists which helps solve the game.

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:04 pm**

In post 639, Evenstar wrote:

I'm speechless.

you at least made the best move when it comes to what is pretty much a catch-22 then...

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:05 pm**

In post 637, Severa wrote:TL/Evenstar are you guys scum partners

do you think I would've hesitated to bus this

gentleman

for 20 pages?

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:06 pm**

In post 640, Gamma Emerald wrote:@Alch I think you slightly misinterpreted me. Adding a bit of your own perspective is not scummy, I agree with that, but I’m pretty sure I specified that adding nothing was part of the problem.

Oh, you're right. I thought that said "adding a little" instead of "adding little." Still not sure it's really scummy though.

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:06 pm**

In post 642, Evenstar wrote:
In post 637, Severa wrote:TL/Evenstar are you guys scum partners
do you think I would've hesitated to bus this
gentleman
for 20 pages?

like you're doing right now?

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:10 pm**

In post 617, Alchemist21 wrote:
In post 613, Evenstar wrote:Your example non-consensus read is based on meta you have and other people don't, and is therefore difficult for any other player to evaluate unless you give something more of a basis for it. I would also have expected you to elaborate a bit on it rather than just saying "it's X."
I already elaborated when asked and my interaction with Gamma included me trying to make sense of what I was scumreading them for. Those explanations you want
are
already there.

Tbh I don’t get what’s wrong with the meta, if other want to look at it they can (but check Alchemist’s egosearch because mine is a blessed mess)

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:12 pm**

In post 619, Evenstar wrote:aight pops can be town

Yeah I’ll actually evaluate that post later but I def like what I am seeing
Pops jumps to my third strongest townread

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:13 pm**

In post 622, Evenstar wrote:
In post 617, Alchemist21 wrote:
In post 613, Evenstar wrote:Your example non-consensus read is based on meta you have and other people don't, and is therefore difficult for any other player to evaluate unless you give something more of a basis for it. I would also have expected you to elaborate a bit on it rather than just saying "it's X."
I already elaborated when asked and my interaction with Gamma included me trying to make sense of what I was scumreading them for. Those explanations you want
are
already there.
Not sure you're really doing anything of value there, to be frank. I'd rec pivoting to examine someone else and coming back to Gamma later today.

What do you believe is not of value from what Alch is doing?

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:15 pm**

In post 647, Gamma Emerald wrote:
In post 622, Evenstar wrote:
In post 617, Alchemist21 wrote:
In post 613, Evenstar wrote:Your example non-consensus read is based on meta you have and other people don't, and is therefore difficult for any other player to evaluate unless you give something more of a basis for it. I would also have expected you to elaborate a bit on it rather than just saying "it's X."
I already elaborated when asked and my interaction with Gamma included me trying to make sense of what I was scumreading them for. Those explanations you want
are
already there.
Not sure you're really doing anything of value there, to be frank. I'd rec pivoting to examine someone else and coming back to Gamma later today.
What do you believe is not of value from what Alch is doing?

I think he's tunneling you when he could be having useful interactions with other people.

Posted: **Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:15 pm**

Spoiler:

My response to both of these boils down to “ok whatever”

Mafiascum.net

Mini 2106 - Magia Record Fate Weave Semi-U-Pick (OVER!)