Mafiascum.net

In post 41, Impede wrote:

In post 39, Kokichi Oma wrote:

In post 37, northsidegal wrote:

In post 36, Kokichi Oma wrote:Because he didn't even say anything about it, just voted.

how does that make it opportunistic, or scummy? other people did the same thing or something similar, would you say the same thing about them?

Nero's vote didn't seem fabricated to me. And his was the second vote. Soooo~

Did you neglect to read your first post? You basically baited everyone in this entire game. If anyone is sus, I'd be more inclined to think it's you.

In post 49, Impede wrote:

In post 46, Kokichi Oma wrote:I just wanted to see who would have a weird reaction, and I think I found the person.

Make up your mind. I wasn't the one who suggested a PL on you page 1.

I still don't know what you were hoping to achieve. I can't see any response to that, organic or fabricated, being AI... especially because anyone in their right mind already suspects that you only posted it to stir the pot, so any reactions you get are WIFOM.

In post 44, Impede wrote:

In post 43, Kokichi Oma wrote: So baiting people to see their reactions is scummy? Got it.

Why would scum react to that post???

"Oh ok, sounds good Kokichi. Thank you for the heads up!"

So why bark at him for 3 posts if its WIFOM and you are leaning newbtown?

In post 74, Impede wrote:when we could instead focus on more promising scumreads.

Who are they?

Read the thread. It's super clear why I was getting after him. It's not smart play and he was trying to defend his position against northsidegal's questioning.

As far as scumreads, I personally don't have anything terribly compelling at this stage.

In post 27, Kokichi Oma wrote:

In post 9, Lapsa wrote:VOTE: Kokichi Oma

VOTE: Lapsa

Just to make it clear. Kokichi, you think that Lapsa is scum and your argument is, that when sameone claimed scum he voted, 2 posts after it, against the claim whisout reasoning?

In post 76, Impede wrote:It's not smart play and he was trying to defend his position against northsidegal's questioning.

I think this comes from scum alot. Attacking bad or poor play to make themselves look useful but it serves no purpose in scumhunting. I like my vote.

I feel confident in my ability to defend myself if need be

Wow. I just want to policy lynch all you useless lursacks.

Bory answer my question please.

That Nero post on Impede isn’t bad either ftr.

In post 78, Nero Cain wrote:

In post 76, Impede wrote:It's not smart play and he was trying to defend his position against northsidegal's questioning.

I think this comes from scum alot. Attacking bad or poor play to make themselves look useful but it serves no purpose in scumhunting. I like my vote.

I'm curious to hear how questioning anti-town play is scummy. If I was scum, wouldn't I stfu and let bad town players take the game into a pointless rabbit hole?

In post 78, Nero Cain wrote:look useful

In post 78, Nero Cain wrote:serves no purpose in scumhunting

of course you might argue that you were scumhunting but you were already said that you were leaning newbtown so...

and honestly? 41, 44 and 49 don't give me any scum hunting vibes. They just seem like you fussing at KO for "not smart play" but you've already admitted to that so....



Can you explain what the town motivation is here?

no, i think nero's right here. questioning another player's logic if they're making weak points makes you look like you're trying to solve the game, when the reality is that mafia isn't a debate competition and townies can make mistakes or have fault logic too. obviously this doesn't mean that questioning another player's logic is pointless, always a scumtell or even likely to be one, it's just that an argument centered around logic rather than around scumhunting probably shouldn't form the basis for your reads on a player.

In post 21, Shinobi wrote:

In post 20, Bory wrote:

In post 11, Shinobi wrote:Hi.
I don't feel like RVSing but I look forward to playing with all of you.

Same here.

Right on.
Do you have any alternative ideas/plans in regards to starting to play this game?

I don't like voting/ accusing peaple whisout any proofs or indications from my character so I don't want to join RVing.

I haven't saw any other game openings and can't think up samething either. If you know a page which discuss about other alternatives, I am eager to take a look at it.

In post 87, Bory wrote:

In post 21, Shinobi wrote:

In post 20, Bory wrote:

In post 11, Shinobi wrote:Hi.
I don't feel like RVSing but I look forward to playing with all of you.

Same here.

Right on.
Do you have any alternative ideas/plans in regards to starting to play this game?

I don't like voting/ accusing peaple whisout any proofs or indications from my character so I don't want to join RVing.

I haven't saw any other game openings and can't think up samething either. If you know a page which discuss about other alternatives, I am eager to take a look at it.

No, I get it - some people don’t like RVS and that’s fine. I also don’t think there’s a page of the game that people have posted plans, which is also fine.

What I’m asking is how are you intending to go about solving this game? If you haven’t found something worth talking about, how are you intending to create the lead you want/need?

In post 88, Shinobi wrote:
No, I get it - some people don’t like RVS and that’s fine. I also don’t think there’s a page of the game that people have posted plans, which is also fine.

What I’m asking is how are you intending to go about solving this game? If you haven’t found something worth talking about, how are you intending to create the lead you want/need?

I can wait. Peaple are already talking and I hope that soon will sameone post samething which will catch my eye.

What do you think about my discussion with Impede?

In post 77, Bory wrote:

In post 27, Kokichi Oma wrote:

In post 9, Lapsa wrote:VOTE: Kokichi Oma

VOTE: Lapsa

Just to make it clear. Kokichi, you think that Lapsa is scum and your argument is, that when sameone claimed scum he voted, 2 posts after it, against the claim whisout reasoning?

I think he's scum because of the way he went about it

In post 79, Lapsa wrote:

@Bory

I feel confident in my ability to defend myself if need be

Then why haven't you said anything to me?

Also why did you point that out to just Bory? That's a bit weird.

In post 89, Bory wrote:

In post 88, Shinobi wrote:
No, I get it - some people don’t like RVS and that’s fine. I also don’t think there’s a page of the game that people have posted plans, which is also fine.

What I’m asking is how are you intending to go about solving this game? If you haven’t found something worth talking about, how are you intending to create the lead you want/need?

I can wait. Peaple are already talking and I hope that soon will sameone post samething which will catch my eye.

so nothing so far has been enough for you to comment on? what exactly you waiting for?

North, don't you find it weird that Lapsa pointed that out to just Bora?

In post 86, northsidegal wrote:no, i think nero's right here. questioning another player's logic if they're making weak points makes you look like you're trying to solve the game, when the reality is that mafia isn't a debate competition and townies can make mistakes or have fault logic too. obviously this doesn't mean that questioning another player's logic is pointless, always a scumtell or even likely to be one, it's just that an argument centered around logic rather than around scumhunting probably shouldn't form the basis for your reads on a player.

RIP. Ok, I can eat crow. I definitely wasn't scumhunting with those posts, more just getting after KO for what I thought was an annoying and unfruitful tactic. I see why Nero would want to jump on that since I'm getting after KO for being anti-town while essentially not contributing meaningfully to the discussion with my posts either.

I stand corrected.

In post 95, Kokichi Oma wrote:North, don't you find it weird that Lapsa pointed that out to just Bora?

huh, i had actually glazed over that. that strange. lapsa, you don't feel any need to defend yourself now?

In post 96, Impede wrote:

In post 86, northsidegal wrote:no, i think nero's right here. questioning another player's logic if they're making weak points makes you look like you're trying to solve the game, when the reality is that mafia isn't a debate competition and townies can make mistakes or have fault logic too. obviously this doesn't mean that questioning another player's logic is pointless, always a scumtell or even likely to be one, it's just that an argument centered around logic rather than around scumhunting probably shouldn't form the basis for your reads on a player.

RIP. Ok, I can eat crow. I definitely wasn't scumhunting with those posts, more just getting after KO for what I thought was an annoying and unfruitful tactic. I see why Nero would want to jump on that since I'm getting after KO for being anti-town while essentially not contributing meaningfully to the discussion with my posts either.

I stand corrected.

i never really know how to interpret people just straight up admitting that they were wrong in mafia games. you don't really see it that often! for what it's worth i wasn't even making a point against you, i was just agreeing with nero in general about scumhunting vs debating.

Why did northsidegals words make sense but you got upset with me?

In post 93, Kokichi Oma wrote:Also why did you point that out to just Bory? That's a bit weird.

Because I can't see a problem in his post so I wanted to know what is the problem you see in the post.