Mafiascum.net

@Peabody You linked me to plums post I don't understand. Through if you mean kaze being on every major wagon with little reason yeh that's a scum tell. Your other point is my system is robotic. It helps me factor out my personal emotion and i could use it if I was scum if I used it to hide behind a mislynch but we haven't mislynched anyone and i'm not hiding.

@Peabody what do you think on your predecessors behavior.

that second question is bad and its also pointless

Why is it bad and pointless.

Its be like me asking you what you thought of your own behavior. You're basically asking the slot to read itself which gets you nowhere. The ratio of dogs he has in that fight: total dogs he has is basically 1.

Oh ok never thought of it that way.

In post 654, Peabody wrote:Sure, Aeronaut's vote on a Brian wagon looks bad, and his defense-by-word-play doesn't help his case, but I don't understand why more flak was given to him rather than anyone else. Why did CTD's policy vote on Brian go uncontested?

Do you think my vote was bad? Elaborate, please.

In post 672, Peabody wrote:CTD - Can you explain this vote?

Explained in the post before:

In post 384, CrashTextDummie wrote:

In post 354, YYR wrote:Didn't get much out of the catchup. I'm still not getting where everyone is getting a town read on Brian. The SK/Smudger back and forth made me a bit more comfortable on SK, but I kind of just skimmed through Smudger's post. Still like my vote where it is.

This is quite possibly the laziest post of the game. Why is Kaze scum?

Elaborated on why I found this to be the scummy kind of lazy here:

In post 559, CrashTextDummie wrote:He was the first to vote Kaze based on rather weak reasoning, which wasn't really a problem considering the stage of the game we were in. However in the meantime, a serious wagon had formed (L-2) and Kaze had addressed YYR's line of attack, so for him to drop in just stating that he "likes [his] vote where it is" is seriously suspect to me. This post was allegedly the result of a catch-up, and if that's all he had to say, I very strongly question if he has any interest in scum-hunting.

In post 635, notscience wrote:Who would be a better vote, CTD?

You know who my suspects are. Figure it out yourself. Do you disagree that your vote would be better used elsewhere? What purpose does it serve at this point?

In post 672, Peabody wrote:I don't want to waste our Day 1 lynch on a miller claim. It robs us of information for day 2. Scum can easily pass on "Yeah, this lynch should happen," instead of contributing in a meaningful way.

Don't understand this reasoning at all.

Meaningfulness of content can be evaluated independently from who we lynch. Treatment of the miller claim in light of his flip valuable information. I don't see how a Brian lynch would be less informational than any other.

--------------

I did some reminiscing about the good old days and realized that I actually replaced into a game with Spyrex and Plum once (the latter being part of a hydra) where they were both scum and I correctly read the former and was completely snowed by the latter. I'll try to find the time to reread it. Did a very cursory glance of the two games Empire linked and don't feel confident in forming a full meta yet.

Brian, why do you categorize yourself as "not a day 1 player"?

In post 672, Peabody wrote:Spyrex - How did you pick your town reads?

CTD - Can you explain this vote?

Klaxons here - Blank 'explanation questions' on are the easiest to ask. Scum prefer them.

I don't want to waste our Day 1 lynch on a miller claim. It robs us of information for day 2. Scum can easily pass on "Yeah, this lynch should happen," instead of contributing in a meaningful way.

This doesn't feel representative. By this point you should have seen people voting for Brian for more than just "well, he's a claimed miller so I guess we should lynch him at some point anyway".

In post 607, Empire wrote:

In post 511, ChannelDelibird wrote:If Brian flips scum, we get to see how partners reacted to his miller claim. In that instance, I think Kaze broadly avoiding taking a stance on it, as observed by Spyrex a couple of pages ago, might be useful as a buddy indicator.

Do you really think that's a thing? I think buddies of a scummillerfakeclaim would be more inclined to at least say something about it rather than avoid it altogether (it's probably a bit of really pretentious half baked theory, but I'm thinking pregame deliberated actions like that would compel scum to say something because it gives them an easy way to enter the game).

Depends whether or not it was premeditated - I dunno if the scum got a chance to discuss it among themselves before gamestart. But, yes, I do think it's a thing.

In post 626, notscience wrote:Everyone died ;-;

This post makes me think notscience is town. You'd think it was an easy thing to say but I've been burned recently by scum who just sat back and observed nothing happening while nothing was happening.

In post 642, fferyllt wrote:

In post 640, SleepyKrew wrote:Except you didn't offer any real thoughts. Why would you feel like you need to say something game related in a prod drudge before you're caught up?

Do you have a history of this behavior

?

It's kinda caught my attention that you ask these sorts of meta questions but aren't really that curious about the answers.

And now I have a townread on ffery.

In post 686, ChannelDelibird wrote:

In post 626, notscience wrote:Everyone died ;-;

This post makes me think notscience is town. You'd think it was an easy thing to say but I've been burned recently by scum who just sat back and observed nothing happening while nothing was happening.

Out of all that's transpired you think thats what makes him town? I know sometimes its the insignificant things that seem really genuine but that is really stretching it.

In post 616, Plum wrote:CDB himself has pretty much had no suspects outside of Brian and pretty limited contributions overall, muddling around with null reads and coasting on fairly low-risk, low-attention interactions.

Totally fair criticism and one I'm looking to rectify. I'm a little put off by the rather wally nature of a lot of the posts here, which is a contributing factor towards my gravitating towards simpler reads (Brian claimed miller -> Brian is also acting scummy -> It adds up, can we get this done?). Other contributing factors include the fact that I suck, so I apologise. I do think a flip or two would go a long way towards me getting my teeth into this game, but I'll put some more effort in anyway because my current contributions are not fair on y'all.

In post 688, LolWagons wrote:Out of all that's transpired you think thats what makes him town? I know sometimes its the insignificant things that seem really genuine but that is really stretching it.

If there are compelling reasons to think otherwise in a wallpost somewhere, they'll need pointing out to me but, when I come back to a thread I've been neglecting and spot a simple post like that which strikes a chord, I find it pretty clarifying. Also, I just got burned in SpyParty Mafia where town lost because scum let the game drift into oblivion. It reminded me that town care more, and I got that impression from notscience's post.

That said, what do you think my pointing it out says about my alignment (this is really a question I should have asked before I posted the previous post but whatever, I'm interested in your answer)?

I'm going to go to bed now (1.30am here) but I'll be following up on more tomorrow after skimming the last few pages. Having not digested posts over a certain length but read basically everything else I've missed, I'm still pretty happy that Brian should be the lynch, but I'd like to get some thoughts on record about everyone before we do it.

I see where you're coming from with the spy mafia game (one of the games I skimmed to get a feel for the new site meta since ive been gone a while) but to me it looks more like you decided on him being town and gave that reason to justify it afterwards. To me thats more likely to come from scum.

Just...one...more...post...

In post 693, LolWagons wrote:I see where you're coming from with the spy mafia game (one of the games I skimmed to get a feel for the new site meta since ive been gone a while) but to me it looks more like you decided on him being town and gave that reason to justify it afterwards. To me thats more likely to come from scum.

I ... don't really see why you'd think that. I mean, I don't think anyone could argue that I've not been fairly disconnected from this game, so if I'm looking for reasons to call notscience town, wouldn't I have read more thoroughly and made sure I wasn't doing something that would play badly? Subjectivity bias here but I thought it was fairly clear that my last few posts have been from me just picking through the thread basically backwards as I go; why would I decide notscience was town on page 27 if there was a chance he'd done something I could have exploited differently on page 26?

You could perhaps argue that I was looking for a reason to call him , for the sake of having reads. And that's perhaps true; I'm a bit ashamed of having offered so little so far and am keen to make up for it by saying things that can be both useful and analysed. However, I do feel particularly on Day 1 that you don't need huge amounts of reasons to call someone town. You can come back to people later if you townread them before, but on Day 1 you have the most people alive and you want to narrow them down in order to find your first lynch. Quick, simple townreads are valuable and I think there's enough in what I saw to say 'OK, you know what, let's go with notscience as town'.

I hope that wasn't too rambling.

I am, CTD said it was wrong. So, I want to know who he thinks I should vote.

In post 686, ChannelDelibird wrote:

In post 626, notscience wrote:Everyone died ;-;

This post makes me think notscience is town. You'd think it was an easy thing to say but I've been burned recently by scum who just sat back and observed nothing happening while nothing was happening.

I really don't like the reasoning for this read. IMO:
Generally, when a game is low on activity, coming in and questioning and pushing discussion etc is protown. Just lurking along is generally scummy. Don't you think if he truly cared about getting activity up he'd be more active and more thoughtful and perhaps putting more effort into the game? Don't you also think that something like this ("he's town for commenting on lack of activity) is something that should be judged using a player-by-player case-by-case basis? Do you know that ns hasn't doesn't or wouldn't do this as scum? I don't think you do.

Reminder to self: Peabody research

In post 695, notscience wrote:I am, CTD said it was wrong. So, I want to know who he thinks I should vote.

If I tell you who to vote, will you do it? My guess is no, since this is a redundant question and you're being a smartass.

I didn't say your vote was wrong, I said you need to put it to better use. That means either moving it or giving it more weight. The wagon you're on is dead. You're doing nothing to change that.

I made a case against YYR not that long ago, it's implicit that I think that would be a good vote. But I shouldn't have to tell you explicitly who to vote. Either sheep my case or come up with your own.

I can't believe I got back out of bed to make this post.

I actually will.

VOTE: YYR