Mafiascum.net

Oh lordy this game.

I've got a townread, a scumread, two unknowns, and two nobodies.

Oh good, Lavar shows up soon.

In post 201, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:Let x be the probability that all 3 mafioso are in 5 random players.

x = 10/13*9/12*3/11*2/10*1/9 + 10/13*3/12*9/11*2/10*1/9* + 10/13*3/12*2/11*9/10*1/9 + 10/13*3/12*2/11*1/10*9/9 + 3/13*10/12*9/11*2/10*1/9 + 3/13*10/12*2/11*9/10*1/9 + 3/13*10/12*2/11*1/10*9/9 + 3/13*2/12*10/11*9/10*1/9 + 3/13*2/12*10/11*1/10*9/9 + 3/13*2/12*1/11*10/10*9/9
= 10 ((10*9*3*2*1)/(13*12*11*10*9))
= 5/143 ≈ 3.50%

I scumread people who do math.

In post 210, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:

In post 180, Frogsterking wrote:Hey Frederick, I just thought of a couple of questions for you! Mainly because you replaced in recently and I noticed you had just finished moderating a game.

1) Have you noticed anything telling about lobbies on this site where all of the scum players became among the top 5 most active players in the game on D1?

and

2) Have you noticed anything telling about lobbies on this site where all of the scum players became among the top 5 most townread players in the game on D1?

After going through all that trouble of answering one of you questions, I have got to know what was the point of these questions?

Another call-out. I must've missed the answer to the last one.

In post 247, Frogsterking wrote:I've been giving myself a little time away so I can get a fresh look at things. I plan on posting my preferred D1 lunch candidate list tonight or tomorrow morning and a separate list for any players I tr. I plan on responding to posts by Mush, Redados and Frederick.

I'm holding you to this.

Ugh, all this talk about voting preferences, theory, and other meta topics are putting me to sleep.

In post 254, Frogsterking wrote:Here's the full research if you want to read:

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _Detection

I read that paper and I'm significantly disappointed that none of my four favorite scumtells were analyzed.

1. Forming common activity suggestions solely as questions instead of statements. This one is frighteningly good. (e.g. "Are we good with voting X?" instead of "Let's vote X y'all.")

2. Using temporary qualifiers for things that shouldn't be temporary. (e.g. "X is my top scumread for now.")

3. Using math, specifically to determine who is best to vote. In an endgame scenario, this one is surprisingly good. (e.g. "If we vote off X, that gives us a 5/7 chance in the last two days, rather than a 3/7 chance.")

4. Using "honest" or related words when opining. This one is commonly just a NAI filler word, but it helps make folks sweat when they get called out on it. (e.g. "Honestly, I think X is scum." instead of "I think X is scum.")

Mostly what I do is get reads from my gut and call out BS when I see it.

In post 254, Frogsterking wrote:I double-checked my research on syntax this afternoon and was mixed up about sentence length and pronouns; longer sentences and use of the second-person were negatively correlated with scum not positively.

NEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRD

In post 257, MUSHSHAGANA wrote:MagikHorse, can I get your opinion of Italiano's play? My take is: emotionally charged reasoning presenting with logical face. His play is also centered on himself -- which manifests as Always Right (unwillingness to concede lost points, unwillingness to cooperate with other players, etc), and deeply entrenched reads (taking subjective view as objective truth).

I actually see the opposite. The amount of times he's dropped a conversation with "Fair enough" or "I guess we'll just have to disagree" would be a workout program if he dropped that many pounds instead.

In post 649, Casey wrote:How do you have only 10 posts so far? I replaced in 2 hours ago and my ISO is already larger than yours.

Some find peace in solitude lol. Welcome aboard, Casey.

Welcome to the game Casey. You can definitely talk.

In post 632, LavarManos wrote:Ok then
Italiano? Was Redados similarly LAMIST in 2019?

He actually was. I actually scumread him early for doing what I thought was LAMIST by giving a readslist on page 2.

In post 258, MUSHSHAGANA wrote:I'm going to post my first public read: I think Frogsterking is town. If he isn't town, he's unreadable. I think his playstyle edges a bit toward anti-town overall, he's focused on game-solving over scum-hunting, but scum has no reason to give town a weapon like that paper. Arguably against their win condition to do so.

1. Did you read the paper? Arguably the only thing tangible it highlights as a scumtell is a reduced activity level, and it doesn't take a... to figure that out.

2. I think he seems like the kind of guy who doesn't feel good about a win unless he lets the opposing team take their best shot at him. Not out of hubris, but out of fairness. Debates of a grand scale of life an death, humanity versus nature, and a search for truth and purity. He did mention he played paragraph games prior and was getting used to the more rapid-fire nature, after all. It's not his fault he's a nerd.

Show me the hornets.

In post 659, rocknil wrote:

In post 649, Casey wrote:How do you have only 10 posts so far? I replaced in 2 hours ago and my ISO is already larger than yours.

Some find peace in solitude lol. Welcome aboard, Casey.

Who is the mafia?

Okay I lightly townread MagikHorse and now I lightly townread Casey in the same slot which makes my life a lot easier.

In post 660, ItalianoVD wrote:Welcome to the game Casey. You can definitely talk.

Who is the mafia?

Casey if you didn't already say what is your opinion of the N1 Mush kill and my Rocknil/Lavar theory.

Frog wasn't there something about welcome posts in that paper?

In post 665, Frogsterking wrote:Casey if you didn't already say what is your opinion of the N1 Mush kill and my Rocknil/Lavar theory.

Haven't gotten that far. I'll get to it when I get to it.

In post 663, Frogsterking wrote:Okay I lightly townread MagikHorse and now I lightly townread Casey in the same slot which makes my life a lot easier.

Also what downgraded me from "town" to "lightly townread"?

In post 666, Casey wrote:Frog wasn't there something about welcome posts in that paper?

Probably. I've read a lot about welcome posts. It all blurs together a little bit.

In post 668, Casey wrote:

In post 663, Frogsterking wrote:Okay I lightly townread MagikHorse and now I lightly townread Casey in the same slot which makes my life a lot easier.

Also what downgraded me from "town" to "lightly townread"?

I was just welcoming you earlier, not implying that I townread you yet.

In post 667, Casey wrote:

In post 665, Frogsterking wrote:Casey if you didn't already say what is your opinion of the N1 Mush kill and my Rocknil/Lavar theory.

Haven't gotten that far. I'll get to it when I get to it.

That's fine, there's a lot to read.

Okay so look at these.

In post 640, Frogsterking wrote:Welcome to the town Casey!

In post 659, rocknil wrote:Welcome aboard, Casey.

In post 660, ItalianoVD wrote:Welcome to the game Casey.

Italiano and Rock welcome me to the game / aboard, but you specifically welcome me to the .

In post 672, Casey wrote:Okay so look at these.

In post 640, Frogsterking wrote:Welcome to the town Casey!

In post 659, rocknil wrote:Welcome aboard, Casey.

In post 660, ItalianoVD wrote:Welcome to the game Casey.

Italiano and Rock welcome me to the game / aboard, but you specifically welcome me to the

town

.

Hmm that's interesting. Maybe I implicitly read you as town because I was motivated by hope and my prior read of the MagikHorse slot.

Ok. Can you guess my career?