Mafiascum.net

I think more people should read people on a curve, people SR limbait for being limbait a decent amount

In post 539, ben dover123 wrote:Shiavetto, I'd like to question why you put Scipio and bridge where they are currently.

Wait do you mean like, why are they in that order, or why are they in those buckets? The nulls aren't in any meaningful order--I don't really have any strong feelings either way on Scipio & I'm not willing to make an alignment read off of the godfather comment. Feelings re: BB Bridgers are unchanged.

In post 539, ben dover123 wrote:

In post 529, Schiavetto wrote: Feels extremely loaded to call it a dogpile in the same post that you're asking for reasoning on the votes.

Well, I do believe I am allowed to call it a dogpile when my wagon gets 3 consecutive votes in less than 2 hours. Not sure how asking for reasoning on the votes correlates negatively when I also call it a dogpile, votes can still have reasoning but the wagon can still be a dogpile.

Schiavetto wrote: The whole "I can't say that scum is on this wagon" feels pretty weak here, too, bc all of it just kind of comes back to the fact that you're not actually

attempting

to make sense of the votes.

I am sorting the votes and trying to make sense of them as you have said because "I asked for the reasoning of the votes". What do you believe "attempting to make sense of the votes" means if asking for the reasoning is not that?

Schiavetto wrote:No attempt from ben to answer their own question, but plenty of effort invested in (preemptively?) painting the wagon as groundless.

Which question was this?

I believe with the context of how my wagon was formed I can assert it as groundless.

I mean, it's less about whether you "can" or "can't" and more about how you ask what the reason is behind those votes, but nothing about that post reads to me as you being genuinely interested in understanding the three votes. Like, I don't think it's out of the question for town to have such a defensive reaction there (three votes in quick succession like that is cause for alarm, sure), but where that falls apart for me is that you're not casing yourself, you're not casing any of the three voters, and there's like... no attempt to actually discriminate between the three votes or determine possible motivations for them or anything like that. And it's not like any of that is mandatory or whatever, but the absence is felt. Some of the stuff that follows--like the tangent on phaselengths, or the explanation for your hesitation to read any of those votes--is maybe less glaring, but still kind of feels unnatural to me, almost like an afterthought.
That's p much where I was at.

In post 568, Isis wrote:I don't really need to interact with people directly as much when I don't feel curious about their alignment.

But I'll try to shift to like not hurt your feelings, doesn't cost me much

No no, that's not what I was getting at, what I mean is like
If you think there's something off about any of the thoughts given, then you know, spell it out, get into it. Bc as it stands, right now a lot of your response there just comes across as looking to bag an easy townread without necessarily having to engage w/ the slot.

Kind of like 617-24 though. Maybe don't agree with all of it but it feels pretty sincere.

lel, rereading the bottom of your last wall the bottom part is a long paragraph saying "Aaron is posting IioA" which I later posted independently when Datisi asked me to explain my Aaron read. You are probably objectively right that I should feel bad.

part of me not responding much is your Datisi townread is just townreading Datisi's strong baseline and it's just usually not that productive to engage that kind of thing, I skip engaging with people who scumlean limbait type players and put 1-2 votes on them earlygame too

there's just so much else you could do with your turn

we will talk about Datisi in eLo he always goes to eLo
that doesn't mean he's scummy it's just TRADITION

Fiddler still goes hard.

I get what you mean though. Do you have a link for that scumgame with you & Dat btw? Or did it get posted earlier and I missed it

"Fiddler still goes hard" seems like a popular culture reference I'm missing

oh boy oh boy oh boy okay.

In post 618, Isis wrote:

In post 603, Datisi wrote:

In post 601, ben dover123 wrote:

In post 600, Datisi wrote:

In post 599, ben dover123 wrote:VOTE: AFF we need wagons and Isis isn't one I'm joining.

have your reads changed in any way in the last ~18 hours and if so, how?

No, they have remained the same since then. Nothing has changed for me yet.

ok so can you talk to me about why you're voting aff now then? you said earlier he's "rather null" and that you wanna wait a bit until voting. the only +town thing you mentioned about isis was that the early attack was more likely to be bad town. is that still the case? is that the whole reason behind not wanting to join the isis wagon? bc i'm still struggling to follow your thought process here and if you're town i'd really like it if you could show me that?

This seems like a scumpost to me. The last line is level zero, extremely towny to post. Datisi knows it's extremely townie to post. But I don't think Datisi organically posted it. It reads like a plastic cake to me. like. this post has 6-7 different lines of inquiry trying to tease out of ben to "solve" him and it seems like overkill and the organic version of this post would focus either on the AaronFrost read or the Isis read.

like.
idk look at some of this diction

ok so what exactly is the issue with the post having multiple lines of inquiry? like at some point i realized ben's answers are too short and he doesn't explain himself enough for my liking. i've seen that in townies who (for whatever reason) only show parts of their thought process but i've also seen it in scum who's struggling to fake their reads and is responding in short answers. ime a good way to figure out which one it is is by giving directed questions, as opposed to vague ones. also like, what even gives you the idea that the """organic""" version of that post would have to focus on one or the other?

In post 608, Datisi wrote:like, is aff the same level as all the rest of your null reads?

In post 611, ben dover123 wrote:Also, no AFF is in the lower half or so of my nulls.

like this ^^ is what i mean. i get that i didn't spell it out but i'm obviously interested in why aff is where he is in his reads. i used to think this ~responding only to the letter~ thing was scum indicative but i've been burned a couple of times by that. like, when i see someone is responding to me in that manner, asking more nitpicky questions to get answers out of them is scummy because ... ?

(also while we're at it, why *is* here there, ben?)

In post 626, Isis wrote:I'm voting Datisi pretty much just for that one post + maybe an internalized expectation that he would obvtown that set his par for course a bit rigged

In post 669, Isis wrote:I expect to think "oh that post is pretty towny" for Datisi more than most players. I've only played with him one time that I wasn't scum and he was super super towny. I tend to like to grade people on a curve, because some people have a kind of townie baseline or scummy baseline.

ok i wanna talk about this.

isis is talking about autumnal mafia here. (mena and ico were also playing in that game, ftr.) this is one of the games in which i was painfully obvtown. and while that was all fun and games, since then i've had towngames in which i was *not* as painfully obvtown, and people who had experience with that game sometimes went "wow, datisi isn't as townie here as he was back there, is he scum?" and every single time that happened, i was town.

now, what's actually *bothering* me here is that isis did use the argument "datisi isn't as townie in this game as he was in autumnal" before, and she used it when she was scum against me.

also also, that second part is false. town!isis also played with town!me in why gun??. and while i myself would argue that i was decently townie that game, i'm p sure she was scumreading me for a good part of day one.

In post 671, ben dover123 wrote:The thing that confuses me is how Datisi didn't get why I was voting AFF like I held off on voting when I did state that I would compromise on voting AFF before but maybe I worded it too vaguely.

what confused me is that you said "I could compromise on voting [aff] now but I want to let my reads sit a bit more". i thought that meant "i want to let my reads sit a bit more before i vote". you soon after voted, which i took to mean you let your reads ~sit~ (which i took to mean let them get firmer / develop more, maybe that's where we're talking past each other) so i asked you if anything in them changed, to which you said no. that confused me because i thought the very act of you making the vote meant that your reads have, in some way, changed.

i kinda don't wanna be dragging this on bc i don't feel it's useful for anyone involved but i also have the urge to explain myself so here we are.

In post 681, Isis wrote:we will talk about Datisi in eLo he always goes to eLo
that doesn't mean he's scummy it's just TRADITION

i actually haven't been in eLo as town in a hot minute
scum keeps killing me before it

In post 688, Datisi wrote:(also while we're at it, why *is* here there, ben?)

"why is here there" lmao
should say "why is there"

In post 683, Isis wrote:https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=84622

Fwiw I scumread datisi in this game

In post 607, Datisi wrote:

In post 604, AaronFrost wrote:

@Datisi

why does it feel like you're sort of backing down from your push on me when you were the one who got it started in the first place with that spicy vote? It's weird to me because there has been some resistance to the push on me, but not

that

much and I feel like you should be interacting with me a little more to try and figure out my alignment, but there just doesn't seem like much effort to read me at all.

Your play around the top two wagons feels pretty wishy-washy right now, you mentioned you didn't vibe with the Isis wagon and then you started the wagon onto me then didn't do much with it when it picked up steam other than an apparent dislike of Isis and ben dover's vote on me.

i don't think i feel like i'm backing down?? like sure i started it, why should that mean that i'd need to be some sorta force behind it? or even that i'm *that* certain in it? and i don't think i need to be interacting with you to be figuring out your alignment? you've pretty much already responded to things that i found suspicious about you (564) which like, *fine*, but i don't see much purpose arguing with you if your response is gonna be "playstyle".

that's just not how i play. if i thought you were 100% scum, i'd be saying that. in a gamestate like this (where i'm aware my reads are probably not top notch quality), i'm looking for something to grab my attention - and what's grabbed my attention was their votes on you.

To me it felt like there was a bit of hesitancy to push on it further after some expressed their dislike of the push. Just you questioning Isis and ben's hop ons when you started the wagon felt weird to me when you were the initial vote caster.

Can you explain what you didn't like about the other votes on me?

In post 617, Isis wrote:notscience is not even actually a low-poster/inactive, he just said he was going to be, then he's had standard activity. I thought it was weird. I guess the only scenario where it's scummy weird is when notscience has posted in a scum PT that he's gonna self impose a limit and gets to lurk but don't worry he'd prob do it as town too.
It's not super characterizable but it's super weird! like notsci feels high content to me. Though I don't remember much of the content so he's probably scum

I think I was looking at pure post count when I said that. When it comes to actual content then yeah his activity has been alright, but their posting hasn't really made me feel any type of way

In post 694, AaronFrost wrote:Can you explain what you didn't like about the other votes on me?

what do you mean? the other votes on you are schiavetto, which i said is a fine vote, and n_m, who is *gestures vaguely* n_m.

In post 696, Datisi wrote:

In post 694, AaronFrost wrote:Can you explain what you didn't like about the other votes on me?

what do you mean? the other votes on you are schiavetto, which i said is a fine vote, and n_m, who is *gestures vaguely* n_m.

the other two votes, ben and isis

bump

bump