Mafiascum.net

Good point.

I guess maybe. I think i see it now.

dont say i never did anything for u

In post 626, WaltertheDunce10 wrote:I guess maybe. I think i see it now.

I saw your join date and then had to go check how many games you have actually played, but this isn't like your first or second game...

Walter goes to a stand-up comedy show: Okay but why is he making a joke, what is the point of this?

Something that's bothering me generally about this game: why is nobody making a serious effort to change the gamestate? In particular, why aren't the making a serious effort to change the gamestate? In the situation we have at the moment, there are lots of impatient townies looking for something to do, and if someone made a serious and not-ridiculous case on a scumread of theirs, they would likely get a lot of votes following. That seems like a risky situation for scum if the scumread in question is correct, so I would have expected them to start a wagon of their own, or at least push mine harder. I can only see two real possibilities here; either a) scum are happy with the current gamestate (in which case we should be trying to change it!), or b) scum are not in the thread / out of their depth / have no idea what to do and are simply being inactive as a consequence (in which case we may be able to figure out who they are, directly or via PoE).

Meanwhile, I see attempts to shake things up (such as the whole daycop thing we had recently) that don't ultimately have a huge impact as being unlikely to be from scum; it mostly just helps to get information with which to read players more accurately without making long-term changes to the gamestate, and that seems to only help town.

There are still a lot of players who are alone on their wagons. If anyone's interested in persuading me (and the rest of us) to join them, I'd be interested to hear what you have to say! If not, I guess I'll try doing a full reread of everyone in order to come up with an updated reads list, because something has to happen to get this game moving again (I was hoping that the replacements would help in that respect, but that's going too slowly).

Greetings everyone! Will do a readthrough of the thread after I can sit down and do a comprehensive review. Have seen a couple of names on the playerlist.

First game outside the newbie queue; this is exciting. My Mafiascum experience is on my signature. Have chat mafia and IRL mafia experience as well.

In post 631, callforjudgement wrote:Something that's bothering me generally about this game: why is nobody making a serious effort to change the gamestate? In particular, why aren't the

scum

making a serious effort to change the gamestate? In the situation we have at the moment, there are lots of impatient townies looking for something to do, and if someone made a serious and not-ridiculous case on a scumread of theirs, they would likely get a lot of votes following. That seems like a risky situation for scum if the scumread in question is correct, so I would have expected them to start a wagon of their own, or at least push mine harder. I can only see two real possibilities here; either a) scum are happy with the current gamestate (in which case we should be trying to change it!), or b) scum are not in the thread / out of their depth / have no idea what to do and are simply being inactive as a consequence (in which case we may be able to figure out who they are, directly or via PoE).

Meanwhile, I see attempts to shake things up (such as the whole daycop thing we had recently) that don't ultimately have a huge impact as being unlikely to be from scum; it mostly just helps to get information with which to read players more accurately without making long-term changes to the gamestate, and that seems to only help town.

There are still a lot of players who are alone on their wagons. If anyone's interested in persuading me (and the rest of us) to join them, I'd be interested to hear what you have to say! If not, I guess I'll try doing a full reread of everyone in order to come up with an updated reads list, because something has to happen to get this game moving again (I was hoping that the replacements would help in that respect, but that's going too slowly).

So basically what you're trying to say is scum are happy with the current game state. And the current game state includes you being the top wagon. So you must be town because scum are happy with you being the top wagon and doing nothing about it... all I can read this as is a defense of yourself hidden in lots of words.

Does anyone have any immediate questions for me?

By the way UNVOTE: a fresh start

(PEDIT: re #638)

The reasoning should be correct regardless of my alignment. If you think there's a mistake, please point it out so that I can re-evaluate my reasoning.

I agree that it points towards me as town, but that's hardly a reason not to mention it in thread! Of course, it's harder to be objective about something when it points to you as town, so it's possible I have some confirmation bias here (i.e. "this correctly predicts me as town, so it's more likely to be correct"), in which case it's especially important that you point out any flaws in my reasoning! But "this reasoning benefits CFJ and CFJ is making it" is not a reason to ignore it or consider it invalid.

and by #638 I mean #636

If cfj is scum I'm gonna shoot myself in the foot because I think I can make a pretty good case there. With that said I can make a good case for anyone not named sjreaver, frog, or Nosferatu.

But I agree the game is stale, I've fallen out of love with it and it's gone nowhere since I've stepped back. I kind of expected that.

VOTE: Italiano

Hey Italiano, how's it going? Wagons are great and time to bring fresh energy here.

VOTE: ItalianoVD

In post 620, Gamma Emerald wrote:Helpful scumplay is still scumplay
Why do you think it’s worth keeping active scum alive?

Explain to me how we will lynch three players on D1 and I will.

In post 639, callforjudgement wrote:(PEDIT: re #638)

The reasoning should be correct regardless of my alignment. If you think there's a mistake, please point it out so that I can re-evaluate my reasoning.

I agree that it points towards me as town, but that's hardly a reason not to mention it in thread! Of course, it's harder to be objective about something when it points to you as town, so it's possible I have some confirmation bias here (i.e. "this correctly predicts me as town, so it's more likely to be correct"), in which case it's especially important that you point out any flaws in my reasoning! But "this reasoning benefits CFJ and CFJ is making it" is not a reason to ignore it or consider it invalid.

I think the flaw is the wifom you've attached to it and looking at it from our point of view.

First, I have seen scum wagons sit around in a similar gamestate before. It's not nearly as common as town wagons but this doesn't entirely mean you're town.

Looking in from my point of view I see a player indirectly explaining why they must be town based on the gamestate. One way I can see it is this player is scum and for whatever reason (unhelpful scum mates, avoiding defending of scum mates, etc) has decided to defend himself but in a way that on face value doesn't appear to be a self defense. If someone else pointed it out it would appear more towny but the fact that it was you indirectly defending yourself adds wifom.

Of course I could also see it as town simply making an observation which would allow someone else come to the conclusion that it could point to them being town.

In post 643, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 620, Gamma Emerald wrote:Helpful scumplay is still scumplay
Why do you think it’s worth keeping active scum alive?

Explain to me how we will lynch three players on D1 and I will.

Yeah Gamma, it's not rocket surgery OR brain science!

In post 644, Raya36 wrote:

In post 639, callforjudgement wrote:(PEDIT: re #638)

The reasoning should be correct regardless of my alignment. If you think there's a mistake, please point it out so that I can re-evaluate my reasoning.

I agree that it points towards me as town, but that's hardly a reason not to mention it in thread! Of course, it's harder to be objective about something when it points to you as town, so it's possible I have some confirmation bias here (i.e. "this correctly predicts me as town, so it's more likely to be correct"), in which case it's especially important that you point out any flaws in my reasoning! But "this reasoning benefits CFJ and CFJ is making it" is not a reason to ignore it or consider it invalid.

I think the flaw is the wifom you've attached to it and looking at it from our point of view.

First, I have seen scum wagons sit around in a similar gamestate before. It's not nearly as common as town wagons but this doesn't entirely mean you're town.

Looking in from my point of view I see a player indirectly explaining why they must be town based on the gamestate. One way I can see it is this player is scum and for whatever reason (unhelpful scum mates, avoiding defending of scum mates, etc) has decided to defend himself but in a way that on face value doesn't appear to be a self defense. If someone else pointed it out it would appear more towny but the fact that it was you indirectly defending yourself adds wifom.

Of course I could also see it as town simply making an observation which would allow someone else come to the conclusion that it could point to them being town.

I see all of this as pointless since cfj isn't a wagon you entertained at it's height. Pushing this angle now is counterintuitive.

In post 646, RCEnigma wrote:

In post 644, Raya36 wrote:

In post 639, callforjudgement wrote:(PEDIT: re #638)

The reasoning should be correct regardless of my alignment. If you think there's a mistake, please point it out so that I can re-evaluate my reasoning.

I agree that it points towards me as town, but that's hardly a reason not to mention it in thread! Of course, it's harder to be objective about something when it points to you as town, so it's possible I have some confirmation bias here (i.e. "this correctly predicts me as town, so it's more likely to be correct"), in which case it's especially important that you point out any flaws in my reasoning! But "this reasoning benefits CFJ and CFJ is making it" is not a reason to ignore it or consider it invalid.

I think the flaw is the wifom you've attached to it and looking at it from our point of view.

First, I have seen scum wagons sit around in a similar gamestate before. It's not nearly as common as town wagons but this doesn't entirely mean you're town.

Looking in from my point of view I see a player indirectly explaining why they must be town based on the gamestate. One way I can see it is this player is scum and for whatever reason (unhelpful scum mates, avoiding defending of scum mates, etc) has decided to defend himself but in a way that on face value doesn't appear to be a self defense. If someone else pointed it out it would appear more towny but the fact that it was you indirectly defending yourself adds wifom.

Of course I could also see it as town simply making an observation which would allow someone else come to the conclusion that it could point to them being town.

I see all of this as pointless since cfj isn't a wagon you entertained at it's height. Pushing this angle now is counterintuitive.

cfj is one of my scumreads... and this was just an observation I made that supports that

UNVOTE:
reading

In post 648, Looker wrote:UNVOTE:
reading

Weird opening imo. This is pure gut but more than a bit scummy to me