Mafiascum.net

In post 697, Carcalilly wrote:I am terrified of the possibility of hectic!scum because there's no way I'd be convinced besides the use of PRs.

In post 700, davesaz wrote:"ooh that's gotta be town because who would do that as scum" mentality.

In post 702, Elements wrote:

In post 700, davesaz wrote:"ooh that's gotta be town because who would do that as scum" mentality.

AKA WIFOM

In post 692, Judge Joseph Dredd wrote:

In post 685, YOUAREGREAT wrote:maybe i'm confusing our conflicting playstyles with you being scummy

I do believe that to be the case. And you obviously never played with someone like Wisdom, but that's a whole lot of another bucket.

Seriously though, it's a combination of how they phrase their posts for some and how they react to stuff for everyone. Stuff maybe stuff I said or stuff someone else said. I know how X would react to something. I know Y would see "that thing" as an opportunity to push a mislynch on someone. So, when "that thing" happens and they don't push it, and -in fact- try to find the town motive behind it I figure this isn't their scum game.

I'll give you one example (and one example only) as a means to elaborate on the idea: profii asked me if I had asked him something to convey that I was town )this happened after IO posted my list, I know, but it's a good example, and it also confirmed my read on him). The question he was referring to was me asking if he had a personal PT. He was the Cop in that game (in which I was the mod), and he thought I was crumbing Cop. And

although I am a Cop

I told him that wasn't my intention. For profii to think that was a crumb is NAI, but for him to ask the way he did rather than just keep silent and deal with me at night is town indicative.

Also, many players (you included) keep referring to my "scum pool list" as such, when I clearly said I had no reason to TR them yet it didn't mean I FoS them all. I dunno why people like to be selective in their comprehension of what's been typed. Most people read something and it translates into something else in their minds and then they keep assuming that's the truth.

Take a look at my recent back & forth with Hopkirk. I say I have a TOWN LEAN on Hectic and he wastes like 2 pages arguing I had a scum lean on the guy. That's too stupid to be pushed as scum indicative of Hopkirk, because he was quoting my post every single time, so it's clearly he had a brain fart and decided what he misread was the truth. In his mind he believed I has a scum lean on Hectic despite the test he was quoting said otherwise.

SO, all I ask is for people to read what I say

as it is

. Don't assume any hidden meanings (especially if you have no experience with me). If I say I am a Cop (I just did a few lines above) just assume that I am claiming a Cop of some sorts, and act upon it.

In post 704, Carcalilly wrote:

In post 702, Elements wrote:

In post 700, davesaz wrote:"ooh that's gotta be town because who would do that as scum" mentality.

AKA WIFOM

was that really necessary

In post 703, Carcalilly wrote:That was low-key a check request. Although I have doubts that we have a cop.
If we do then mafia might also have a pr.

In post 706, Elements wrote:

In post 704, Carcalilly wrote:

In post 702, Elements wrote:

In post 700, davesaz wrote:"ooh that's gotta be town because who would do that as scum" mentality.

AKA WIFOM

was that really necessary

I like pointing it out. For some reason people take a stronger stance when it's called out

In post 703, Carcalilly wrote:That was low-key a check request. Although I have doubts that we have a cop.
If we do then mafia might also have a pr.

In post 708, Carcalilly wrote:Doesn't large balance do with either prs or more scum?
I'm not talking about lousy things like godfather or rolecop though.

In post 710, davesaz wrote:

In post 706, Elements wrote:

In post 704, Carcalilly wrote:

In post 702, Elements wrote:

In post 700, davesaz wrote:"ooh that's gotta be town because who would do that as scum" mentality.

AKA WIFOM

was that really necessary

I like pointing it out. For some reason people take a stronger stance when it's called out

Exactly what do you think you're pointing out?

In post 675, davesaz wrote:

In post 663, Gamma Emerald wrote: Maybe. Question for you, have you ever read the Normal rules in full?

Truthfully, I don't remember if I have

in full

. It's quite likely that things have changed since, if I have.

In post 712, Elements wrote:Are we talking about setup now?

In post 713, Elements wrote:It's more putting a label on it then pointing it out.

In post 714, Gamma Emerald wrote:

In post 675, davesaz wrote:

In post 663, Gamma Emerald wrote: Maybe. Question for you, have you ever read the Normal rules in full?

Truthfully, I don't remember if I have

in full

. It's quite likely that things have changed since, if I have.

Okay, because the rules say the

only

allowed third party in normals is a Serial Killer. And SKs aren't allowed in Mini + Micro Normals following implosion's renovation of the normal rules

In post 716, davesaz wrote:

In post 713, Elements wrote:It's more putting a label on it then pointing it out.

What are you putting the label on?

In post 700, davesaz wrote: the "ooh that's gotta be town because who would do that as scum" mentality.

In post 690, Carcalilly wrote:maybe I should ask again because it's even more relevant

how is YAG scum, I legitimately cannot see it
Is it the anime pfp?

In post 691, YOUAREGREAT wrote:it's definitely the anime pfp

In post 692, Judge Joseph Dredd wrote:

In post 685, YOUAREGREAT wrote:maybe i'm confusing our conflicting playstyles with you being scummy

I do believe that to be the case. And you obviously never played with someone like Wisdom, but that's a whole lot of another bucket.

Seriously though, it's a combination of how they phrase their posts for some and how they react to stuff for everyone. Stuff maybe stuff I said or stuff someone else said. I know how X would react to something. I know Y would see "that thing" as an opportunity to push a mislynch on someone. So, when "that thing" happens and they don't push it, and -in fact- try to find the town motive behind it I figure this isn't their scum game.

I'll give you one example (and one example only) as a means to elaborate on the idea: profii asked me if I had asked him something to convey that I was town )this happened after IO posted my list, I know, but it's a good example, and it also confirmed my read on him). The question he was referring to was me asking if he had a personal PT. He was the Cop in that game (in which I was the mod), and he thought I was crumbing Cop. And

although I am a Cop

I told him that wasn't my intention. For profii to think that was a crumb is NAI, but for him to ask the way he did rather than just keep silent and deal with me at night is town indicative.

Also, many players (you included) keep referring to my "scum pool list" as such, when I clearly said I had no reason to TR them yet it didn't mean I FoS them all. I dunno why people like to be selective in their comprehension of what's been typed. Most people read something and it translates into something else in their minds and then they keep assuming that's the truth.

Take a look at my recent back & forth with Hopkirk. I say I have a TOWN LEAN on Hectic and he wastes like 2 pages arguing I had a scum lean on the guy. That's too stupid to be pushed as scum indicative of Hopkirk, because he was quoting my post every single time, so it's clearly he had a brain fart and decided what he misread was the truth. In his mind he believed I has a scum lean on Hectic despite the test he was quoting said otherwise.

SO, all I ask is for people to read what I say

as it is

. Don't assume any hidden meanings (especially if you have no experience with me). If I say I am a Cop (I just did a few lines above) just assume that I am claiming a Cop of some sorts, and act upon it.

In post 703, Carcalilly wrote:That was low-key a check request. Although I have doubts that we have a cop.
If we do then mafia might also have a pr.

In post 720, Gamma Emerald wrote:I don't buy your claim pal

In post 717, davesaz wrote:

In post 714, Gamma Emerald wrote:

In post 675, davesaz wrote:

In post 663, Gamma Emerald wrote: Maybe. Question for you, have you ever read the Normal rules in full?

Truthfully, I don't remember if I have

in full

. It's quite likely that things have changed since, if I have.

Okay, because the rules say the

only

allowed third party in normals is a Serial Killer. And SKs aren't allowed in Mini + Micro Normals following implosion's renovation of the normal rules

Evidently you didn't read my

very next post

.