Mafiascum.net

In post 64, Karnage wrote:

In post 63, Billy Pilgrim wrote:

In post 57, Karnage wrote:

In post 55, Billy Pilgrim wrote:Wow only played with Micc before and like part of a game with Karnage before. How you two doing?
Doesnt seem like I missed all that much.

VOTE: local jones

Because you're the leading poster and I dont feel like anything you're doing is advancing the game at the moment.

I'm doing well, good to see you replace in

thats L-2 btw

Who did you think was voting him?

In my head I had Micc and BBMolla voting him

What do you make of the fact that hes dominated conversation so much with those two while their votes are elsewhere?

In post 74, Gyro Zeppeli wrote:

In post 71, Billy Pilgrim wrote:Hey Zepp, you gonna play or you just gonna screw around? I checked your other games and they are all pretty non helpful content. In the one where you got lynched, you were vt, and still completely unhelpful.

It's too early to talk about a policy lynch, because that type of shit let's scum sit under the radar for longer. But Zepp, you need to try a bit. Culture on this site is to at least try on D1. This bullshit you're pulling doesnt help either wincon.

And do what D1, waffle about pointless shit?

How do you plan to play D2 differently? What makes your D2 play more confident than D1? Why are you so uncomfortable playing D1?

In post 75, Billy Pilgrim wrote: What do you make of the fact that hes dominated conversation so much with those two while their votes are elsewhere?

meh, I don't make too much of it

@Karnage - where are you at on Bbm, Micc and Jones at the moment?

Also, other folks should probably start getting involved. I'm looking at the two other folks that got prodded.

Person that replaced in with me, what do you think about the game so far?

In post 47, LCpl Jones wrote:

In post 43, Micc wrote:So what’s the purpose of the vote you made in post 30? You’ve already been in the thread plenty and laid down an RVS vote. What purpose does an additional RVS vote serve? From my point of view the reasons look a lot like you appearing to create content while not actually creating content, which is something you called out as something scum happily achieve by sheeping.

I don't see any reason why you can't have multiple RVS votes. I think you could safely say that I've moved the game out of RVS. What scum motivation do you see in that? Why would I call out a tactic that you claim that I am using myself thus drawing attention to it?


I still feel like you're being pockety karnage

I think people's interactions with you have moved the game out of RVS. But to answer your question, the scum motivation is cheap town points. And you pointing to this definitely lends that theory some credence.

In post 78, Billy Pilgrim wrote:@Karnage - where are you at on Bbm, Micc and Jones at the moment?

I feel ok about them but its early so idk, you?

In post 78, Billy Pilgrim wrote:@Karnage - where are you at on Bbm, Micc and Jones at the moment?

Also, other folks should probably start getting involved. I'm looking at the two other folks that got prodded.

Person that replaced in with me, what do you think about the game so far?

avatars would be nice too for anybody that doesn't have one

In post 70, Billy Pilgrim wrote:

In post 68, Karnage wrote:

In post 27, LCpl Jones wrote:I'd almost feel like policy lynching that slot ngl.

In post 30, LCpl Jones wrote:

In post 28, Karnage wrote: under what policy?

seriously though I don't think that a certain person, not to be rude, but this is my opinion, is going to be very helpful.

In post 67, Gyro Zeppeli wrote:Insert something useful here idfk

LCpl Jones may be psychic

Spoiler:

You sure that's who he was talking about? That original post came right after the BB post.

@Jones, can you confirm for me who you were talking about in your original comment about policy lynching the slot? And then who your follow up post about a slot not being helpful was?

In post 80, Karnage wrote:

In post 78, Billy Pilgrim wrote:@Karnage - where are you at on Bbm, Micc and Jones at the moment?

I feel ok about them but its early so idk, you?

BBM is null. I agree with his Micc read, but that's it at the moment. Honestly when you asked me that I isoed him and realized that he hasn't posted as much as I even thought he had. So even the Micc read could be pockety.

Micc's approach feels like his approach in the last game I played with him where we were both town. He engaged in theory discussions asked alot of directed questions that appeared to sort. I doubt this is outside his scumrange, but hes a townlean for me at the moment.


My vote on Jones isnt random. Jones asks about experience, and in my experience playing newbie games on this site that question comes from scum more often than town (you asked arkias the same question but in a more directed and relevant way).

*[maybe a reason]*

I think the way he dealt with the interaction from Micc in response to his BBM vote didnt look good. He starts by saying that sheeping is bad (fine no argument) but then explains that he doesnt think BBM was sheeping and that scum wouldnt be so transparent. Micc then asks for more clarification on whether it was just anti-sheeping or a scumread, and splits it saying it's mostly the anti-sheeping stance but not fully. Then at 39 he commits to saying that BBM wasnt sheeping (so now I completely dont understand the vote). Then in 47 he tries to claim credit for moving the game out of RVS, which I dont think is accurate, and that comes off as scummy in this context. I then think he misrepresents Micc's 49 in how it discussed your vote at 29. Micc was talking about the fact that he didnt view your 29 as RVS because you were already asking game advancing questions. I think Jones misrepped that, and I think it was intentional, because he seemed to double down on it claiming that your questions didnt come until 34, when you were asking for explanations as early as pg 1.

This is the first game that I'm actually taking notes in. I hope it makes my life easier.

In post 83, Billy Pilgrim wrote: I think the way he dealt with the interaction from Micc in response to his BBM vote didnt look good. He starts by saying that sheeping is bad (fine no argument) but then explains that he doesnt think BBM was sheeping and that scum wouldnt be so transparent. Micc then asks for more clarification on whether it was just anti-sheeping or a scumread, and splits it saying it's mostly the anti-sheeping stance but not fully. Then at 39 he commits to saying that BBM wasnt sheeping (so now I completely dont understand the vote). Then in 47 he tries to claim credit for moving the game out of RVS, which I dont think is accurate, and that comes off as scummy in this context. I then think he misrepresents Micc's 49 in how it discussed your vote at 29. Micc was talking about the fact that he didnt view your 29 as RVS because you were already asking game advancing questions. I think Jones misrepped that, and I think it was intentional, because he seemed to double down on it claiming that your questions didnt come until 34, when you were asking for explanations as early as pg 1.

I just re-read through their exchange and I not seeing an issue. I see LJ answering the questions that were asked. In an ISO these may come across weirdly but I think in context with Micc's questions its all reasonable.

I'm more concerned that you don't seem to have an original thought in this. you've essentially copy-pasted from Micc's posts

In post 82, Billy Pilgrim wrote: @Jones, can you confirm for me who you were talking about in your original comment about policy lynching the slot? And then who your follow up post about a slot not being helpful was?

Both Gypo. I didn't want to be blatantly rude but I don't think he's reading this thread, anyway, so...

I'm suffering the effects of caffeine withdrawal right now so I'll be back tomorrow, sorry. I need to sleep.

In post 86, LCpl Jones wrote:

In post 82, Billy Pilgrim wrote: @Jones, can you confirm for me who you were talking about in your original comment about policy lynching the slot? And then who your follow up post about a slot not being helpful was?

Both Gypo. I didn't want to be blatantly rude but I don't think he's reading this thread, anyway, so...

I'm suffering the effects of caffeine withdrawal right now so I'll be back tomorrow, sorry. I need to sleep.

After this answer, the part above where I said *[maybe a reason]* goes away.

In post 86, LCpl Jones wrote:

In post 82, Billy Pilgrim wrote: @Jones, can you confirm for me who you were talking about in your original comment about policy lynching the slot? And then who your follow up post about a slot not being helpful was?

Both Gypo. I didn't want to be blatantly rude but I don't think he's reading this thread, anyway, so...

I'm suffering the effects of caffeine withdrawal right now so I'll be back tomorrow, sorry. I need to sleep.

Cool, when you get back, could you answer 73 please?

In post 84, Karnage wrote:

In post 83, Billy Pilgrim wrote: I think the way he dealt with the interaction from Micc in response to his BBM vote didnt look good. He starts by saying that sheeping is bad (fine no argument) but then explains that he doesnt think BBM was sheeping and that scum wouldnt be so transparent. Micc then asks for more clarification on whether it was just anti-sheeping or a scumread, and splits it saying it's mostly the anti-sheeping stance but not fully. Then at 39 he commits to saying that BBM wasnt sheeping (so now I completely dont understand the vote). Then in 47 he tries to claim credit for moving the game out of RVS, which I dont think is accurate, and that comes off as scummy in this context. I then think he misrepresents Micc's 49 in how it discussed your vote at 29. Micc was talking about the fact that he didnt view your 29 as RVS because you were already asking game advancing questions. I think Jones misrepped that, and I think it was intentional, because he seemed to double down on it claiming that your questions didnt come until 34, when you were asking for explanations as early as pg 1.

I just re-read through their exchange and I not seeing an issue. I see LJ answering the questions that were asked. In an ISO these may come across weirdly but I think in context with Micc's questions its all reasonable.

I'm more concerned that you don't seem to have an original thought in this. you've essentially copy-pasted from Micc's posts

I dont think your characterization is inaccurate, but it is 4 pages into the game, so if reads align, they are probably going to focus on the same events, no?

Also, I think we do have a slightly different take on at least one of the items. Micc seems more concerned with the way that Jones discussed the BBM vote for moving it out of RVS. I'm more concerned with the way that his reasoning seems to have shifted to a point where its incomprehensible. He originally claims that the vote was mostly due to his anti-sheeping stance. He has since shifted to saying that he didnt think BBM was sheeping, and that scum wouldnt be so transparent. Ok, so now why did he vote there? If he didnt think BBM was sheeping, then why do a policy vote?

I mean I grant it's a subtle difference, but I dont think it's fair to call that copy/pasted.

I'm sorry that I haven't been posting anything useful at all. All the games I've played on a different site have been very different to this one and I'm still trying to get used to everything. I'm gonna try to be more productive, I just am not sure how to start.

In post 90, Salsae wrote:I'm sorry that I haven't been posting anything useful at all. All the games I've played on a different site have been very different to this one and I'm still trying to get used to everything. I'm gonna try to be more productive, I just am not sure how to start.

Try by posting thoughts. Theres a few things that happened so far so put your thoughts out there. If you have any reads, even weak, it will give people a way to start interacting with you.

ok VOTE: Billy Pilgrim

his opening vote on LCpl Jones felt opportunistic and I think his subsequent case is lacking

@Salsae, bepwei, and Arkias - what did you guys think of Billy's 83 and 89?

I think he makes a fair point about it being only 4 pages in so there's only so many things for people to focus on and to call it copy-paste isn't accurate but I still don't think he makes a strong enough case for scum!LCpl Jones. I believe its an attempt to retroactively justify his initial vote.

In post 69, bepwei wrote:I have played many games off site. Where I came from though, the RVS was way more chill. I’m not super used to voted people right out the gate haha.

In post 90, Salsae wrote:I'm sorry that I haven't been posting anything useful at all. All the games I've played on a different site have been very different to this one and I'm still trying to get used to everything. I'm gonna try to be more productive, I just am not sure how to start.

Welcome to the site fellas. Our games tend to be more focused on Day play than Night play, and the longer deadlines/slower pace reflects that. The introduction and tips section of skitter's setup post has some great reading material if you're looking for some direction, but my biggest piece of advice is to pick a completed newbie game and give it a read to get an understanding of what you can expect from this game. Ask questions about the stuff you're not sure about and we'll do our best to answer them. Don't be afraid to post your thoughts as you have them. More discussion is generally better than excessive quietness.

I like billy's vote, don't like Karnage's vote. Reserving judgment on Lcpl's vote for the time being. bbmolla being quiet and sheepy fits with what I remember of his playstyle although its been quite a long time since we crossed paths. If he's seeing the things I'm seeing then that's a good start.

gyro vote is good vote. looking forward to seeing his answer to 76. I feel like billy stole my line of questioning before I could get to it.

Hey! I didn't realize a prod meant I had to post every day. I'll fix that ASAP. Sorry on that.

In post 92, Karnage wrote:
@Salsae, bepwei, and Arkias - what did you guys think of Billy's 83 and 89?


I think he makes a fair point about it being only 4 pages in so there's only so many things for people to focus on and to call it copy-paste isn't accurate but I still don't think he makes a strong enough case for scum!LCpl Jones. I believe its an attempt to retroactively justify his initial vote.

My only real experience of Forum Mafia was the KoL forums. On their, Day one was mostly just random voting and noone took it seriously. Then again, I haven't actually played a proper vanilla game in a long time. A lot of my mafia play comes from Town of Salem and Throne of Lies.

In post 83, Billy Pilgrim wrote:

In post 80, Karnage wrote:

In post 78, Billy Pilgrim wrote:@Karnage - where are you at on Bbm, Micc and Jones at the moment?

I feel ok about them but its early so idk, you?

BBM is null. I agree with his Micc read, but that's it at the moment. Honestly when you asked me that I isoed him and realized that he hasn't posted as much as I even thought he had. So even the Micc read could be pockety.

Micc's approach feels like his approach in the last game I played with him where we were both town. He engaged in theory discussions asked alot of directed questions that appeared to sort. I doubt this is outside his scumrange, but hes a townlean for me at the moment.


My vote on Jones isnt random. Jones asks about experience, and in my experience playing newbie games on this site that question comes from scum more often than town (you asked arkias the same question but in a more directed and relevant way).

*[maybe a reason]*

I think the way he dealt with the interaction from Micc in response to his BBM vote didnt look good. He starts by saying that sheeping is bad (fine no argument) but then explains that he doesnt think BBM was sheeping and that scum wouldnt be so transparent. Micc then asks for more clarification on whether it was just anti-sheeping or a scumread, and splits it saying it's mostly the anti-sheeping stance but not fully. Then at 39 he commits to saying that BBM wasnt sheeping (so now I completely dont understand the vote). Then in 47 he tries to claim credit for moving the game out of RVS, which I dont think is accurate, and that comes off as scummy in this context. I then think he misrepresents Micc's 49 in how it discussed your vote at 29. Micc was talking about the fact that he didnt view your 29 as RVS because you were already asking game advancing questions. I think Jones misrepped that, and I think it was intentional, because he seemed to double down on it claiming that your questions didnt come until 34, when you were asking for explanations as early as pg 1.

This is the first game that I'm actually taking notes in. I hope it makes my life easier.

I have no experience from or with anyone here, so I can't really answer that in any proper sense.

I do agree that sheeping is bad since in Forum Mafia and ToS/ToL, sheeping was generally done by people who weren't paying attention and would miss fairly obvious clues (Fake Death Notes, inconsistent voting patterns, and the like. However, it's day one, so I'm half inclined to believe he (BBM) was just funposting.

Reading through what you wrote, I think that's just not right. I feel like you're reading way too much into something that's not exactly there, and even in both 73 and 59 the same answers present. He didn't really believe it was sheeping and just going off that, and even back then, it felt more like a joke. I do understand the following questions were meant to be 'game moving forward' questions, but that's fair.

In regards to 71, this almost reminds me about when in the KoL forums I played a game of 'Masquerade Mafia'. Everyone in the game was given a moniker for the thread, and that game went... interestingly. Turns out, most people could only lean who was scum/mafia or townie by comparing how a player played in a previous game, rather then what they did in the current. While I have no interest in defending players who aren't doing anything, I also just believe it's a case of tonal shift. Playing as someone with no night powers generally means that you either have to read the forums thoroughly and see if people are acting on priviledged information by being able to steer the game in some way. For most players, that just means they're not going to be doing anything then, since they don't really have anything to do.

Though, 94 is nice! I'm unused to a game more focused on day play, but I don't generally know if I have things to add. Sometimes, I feel like I'd just read the new posts and say "Yep. Conversation happened, but nothing worth me commenting on."

Now, with that out of the way, 67 and 71 what is this bullcrap. I get that Night 1 is boring but you can at least try to care. I think the sheep claim and the push on Jones is interesting, even if I just think its a huge misunderstanding.

So, with that, I'm going to VOTE: Billy Pilgrim. I feel like you're misinterperting and misreading posts to push something on someone.

PS.

Am I supposed to quote things I want to talk about or just link the post number?

Thanks!

Since I can't edit a post, excuse this triple post.

The only reason I'm not voting Gyro is because I'm convinced he's a vanilla townie just by the fact he doesn't care.

In post 73, Billy Pilgrim wrote:

In post 59, LCpl Jones wrote:

In post 49, Micc wrote:

In post 44, Karnage wrote:

In post 43, Micc wrote:So what’s the purpose of the vote you made in post 30? You’ve already been in the thread plenty and laid down an RVS vote. What purpose does an additional RVS vote serve? From my point of view the reasons look a lot like you appearing to create content while not actually creating content, which is something you called out as something scum happily achieve by sheeping.

I feel like you're badgering (see what I did there) the LCpl a little bit.

Whats wrong with a second RVS vote? We haven't even had every player post yet I don't think. I made a second RVS vote but for some reason you didn't see the need to comment on it.

Yeah, I've heard that one once or twice.

From a theory standpoint, I see making an RVS vote as unproductive for town. Scum hunting has to begin eventually and a productive member of the town will eagerly make it happen as early as possible. That doesn't really hold true in practice as people love cracking jokes especially with people they are familiar with, but it makes sense from a theory standpoint. I didn't take your post 29 as a RVS vote because you seemed to be trying to actively move the game forward with your other posts, and that's not something I see from LCpl Jones.

In post 44, Karnage wrote:

In post 18, Micc wrote:

In post 13, Gyro Zeppeli wrote:Das pretty gay

Feel free to explain your vote. Karnage did ask about it after all.

I’m going with my theory that you wanted to be unnoticed and unproductive until convinced otherwise.

Couldn't sheeping be seen as wanting "to be unnoticed and unproductive until convinced otherwise"? You seem to hold different players to different standards

Yeah, and I think I acknowledged that. At some point you gotta engage and understand if that's the motivation propelling them to sheep or if they are following in the footsteps of a read they believe in that came from a player they believe is town. The former is bad sheeping the latter is acceptable sheeping. LCpl Jones doesn't seem to have looked into BBmolla's motivation for sheeping which is why I'm questioning him about it.

As I explicitly said I didn't think BBmolla was sheeping at that point and I definitely don't think that you should be believed to be town at this point. I find this very scummy of you.

VOTE: micc

Can you explain this? I'm confused by it. The way I understand it is that you dont think BB was sheeping (which to be fair is mostly consistent if not entirely with how you've been talking about this) you dont think that Micc should be townread. I'm unclear on what you think from there makes Micc scummy.

I find it exceedingly scummy that he is trying to posture himself as a town leader that merits being sheeped (which I took from: "they are following in the footsteps of a read they believe in that came from a player they believe is town", given the obvious inference that its acceptable that BBMola sheep him because he is town. At the moment it's all I got and I'm going with it for a vote.