Mafiascum.net

In post 712, skitter30 wrote:

In post 698, AaronFrost wrote:a) Fair criticism. I am playing differently than I did in 2099.

b) Nothing fabricated here, but what kinds of things do you think I should be reacting to?

a) why are you playing differently?

b) i particularly disliked your nom vote and vote on me. I'm not sure why nom's flub vote was a voteworthy event
And the vote on me is one of the places i was thinking you reacted weirdly ...

Both of these felt like very ~snap~ reactions, if that makes sense

Oh i guess i figured out how to articulate the difference compared ro the mini - you feel a lot more reactive and like ~less thought ~ is going into your posts almost

It was nom's vote on SS that I reacted to.

I think that's a fair criticism of my play here and I think part of the reason I've been 'snappier' here is because of stress in my irl life and when I get stressed I tend to snap at people without realizing it.

Like I said before I'm gonna try and reread this game with fresh eyes at some point.

In post 749, Billy Pilgrim wrote: @Kerset, I only have experience with Skitt as a mod, so I dont know what I make of the rest of her play. It feels curt and snippy, but that could be NAI.

Early game is the least indicative phase but for some reason you make your SR based around that. If you have at least mediocre confidence that he is scum, you should be able to read him farther. Especially someone with 140 posts like Skitter.

*sigh* VOTE: Billy

Okay, I'm going to look through every page and find anything I find interesting. It will probably be over multiple posts, so just a heads up.

In post 99, nomnomnom wrote:

In post 97, PMysterious wrote:Late to the party, but this is why I chose a number other than 1. I didn't even know what numbers were considered draft numbers.

Here's a theory:
Do you think that scums were more likely to understand that rule? They had a PT, they probably had a talk before choosing and they probably asked what the numbers meant since it's easier to ask that in a PT, rather than send a message to the mod, correct?

That means that people that make a nonsensical choice in terms of numbers have more chances to be town, while the people that have optimized numbers have more chances to be scum. That is unless scums are one step ahead, but yeah. That seems like a decent theory in my mind.

Well, given that the rules for draft numbers were never stated, it is possible that this is the case. However, this is implying that even just one of them had a chance of knowing the rules for draft numbers, which as of the time the game started, the wiki page that was linked didn't have the rules in place, not even how the draft system works, a crucial thing to point out for future mods of this game. It's unlikely, but possible. Because of it being unlikely in nature, I wouldn't consider this a good method for scumhunting.

In post 617, rb wrote:it's like looking at night and day differenc

verified town!kerset: has thoughts, pushes in the direction of those thoughts, calls people out when they think they are being poor town members and then PUTS THEIR VOTE ON THEM

nup, no fucking way do you read their previous games of town!kerset and then get town!kerset here

kerset is scum and skitter is coaching them

lynch both

I saw this, and while I never played with kerset, I have played with skitter when she was Mafia. In that game, Robb was the other scum and he went out and did his own thing. So, scum Skitter wouldn't really coach per-say. So, that theory alone falls flat on its face. Although, in that game, there was an argument between Skitter and Robb on Day 3 which was forced due to one of them mass claiming and the other refusing to claim. It wouldn't be farfetched to say that something like that was happening here since rb and skitter seem to be arguing a lot. So, in general, I think that if skitter were to be scum, then rb would be as well. This argument, just seems forced, and I have gotten cases of deja vu happening in recent games (I will not go into specifics for obvious reasons), so I wouldn't be surprised if something similar to that is happening right before my eyes.

In post 712, skitter30 wrote:

In post 698, AaronFrost wrote:a) Fair criticism. I am playing differently than I did in 2099.

a) why are you playing differently?

People sometimes just like to change up their playstyle depending on past experiences. If someone were to constantly be wrong about lynches, maybe they'd take a backseat and try not to push things out that could be wrong. If someone were to be a bit too vocal to the point it hurts them, maybe they'd be quiet in order to prevent anything from slipping out. It is possible something happened in 2099 that caused him to change how he plays the game.

This is another reason why I don't like rb's claims on kerset, especially since kerset is a newer player on the site compared to most of us here. Kerset is still developing, so lynching based on a playstyle change for a newer player is not only unfair for the player getting lynched, but also unfair for everyone that wants to see this newer player succeed or stay around.

In my opinion, changing playstyles is not AI, especially on newer players that might not have their playstyle figured out yet. The one thing about wanting to "assume", is that is makes an ass out of u and me, which is what I'm seeing here.

VOTE: rb

In post 752, PMysterious wrote:Well, given that the rules for draft numbers were never stated, it is possible that this is the case.

Rules were stated and I knew them. Before i signed for this game i searched "Venrob's PYP X/Y" in wiki search tool.

Or at least they were stated from my POV and perhaps s_s. That would be more accurate.

who are the cool kids voting?

Hm, the Billy wagon isn't bad. Not my first choice from my notes but the information is good enough for me to join
VOTE: Billy

I don't like this Billy wagon, it comes out of nowhere and is lacking in substance, at least the way I see it. The argument is completely meta-driven as well so I am unconvinced, why are people joining this wagon?

In post 728, skitter30 wrote:

In post 726, Something_Smart wrote:Another question.

In post 684, skitter30 wrote:it looks like he reread the game and forgot what his original position was, and made up a new one.

Why is this something scum are more likely to do than town?

Makes me feel like the thoughts arent real

This some bs right here.

Speaking from my own experience. I have so so many games where I end up coming up with reads on the spot bc I have forgotten the entire game.

In post 757, nomnomnom wrote:The argument is completely meta-driven as well so I am unconvinced

Do you see meta arguments as necessarily unconvincing?

In post 756, Xayah wrote:Hm, the Billy wagon isn't bad. Not my first choice from my notes but the information is good enough for me to join
VOTE: Billy

What other notes do you have?

What do you think of Kerset? It pings me how you’ve just ignored this slot considering the attention it’s received.

In post 759, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 757, nomnomnom wrote:The argument is completely meta-driven as well so I am unconvinced

Do you see meta arguments as necessarily unconvincing?

I think meta arguments are good when they are supporting a theory that someone is scummy. Meta arguments themselves hold no water. That's how I see it. If you have a case on Billy and that on top of that you have meta arguments to support your positions I'm likely to listen to them, like with Kerset. But here? Nah.

I think Billy is scummy regardless of the meta. His play lacks substance and his questions appear ‘for show’ rather than having any meaning. This is very different to his last Town game I experienced and much closer to his scum game.

Problem is I there are so many other scummy individuals in this game as well.

In post 762, Luca Blight wrote:I think Billy is scummy regardless of the meta. His play lacks substance and his questions appear ‘for show’ rather than having any meaning. This is very different to his last Town game I experienced and much closer to his scum game.

Problem is I there are so many other scummy individuals in this game as well.

Show me examples of that. I don't see that in his posts.

How do we have 5 people on this wagon???

It's the Slaughterhouse-Five

S_S didn't you say you parked your vote to stop being pestered about voting someone? Why are you still on Billy?

Xayah's been pinging me a bunch lately as well. These plays make me uneasy.

In post 760, Luca Blight wrote:

In post 756, Xayah wrote:Hm, the Billy wagon isn't bad. Not my first choice from my notes but the information is good enough for me to join
VOTE: Billy

What other notes do you have?

What do you think of Kerset? It pings me how you’ve just ignored this slot considering the attention it’s received.

473 I think that she gave the most eloquent read.

It’s so refreshing to see an updated vote count.

UNVOTE:

VOTE: Kerset

Because the wagon does have a bad feel to it. I think SS could be Town but the other three on the wagon are all scum-leans of mine.

In post 767, nomnomnom wrote:S_S didn't you say you parked your vote to stop being pestered about voting someone? Why are you still on Billy?

Luca's argument is easy to understand and moderately compelling, and with four days left, it's better to have a wagon than to not have one.

Oh that's a timely pedit.

Now we have two wagons. I guess in a sense that's better.

In post 769, Kerset wrote:

In post 760, Luca Blight wrote:

In post 756, Xayah wrote:Hm, the Billy wagon isn't bad. Not my first choice from my notes but the information is good enough for me to join
VOTE: Billy

What other notes do you have?

What do you think of Kerset? It pings me how you’ve just ignored this slot considering the attention it’s received.

473 I think that she gave the most eloquent read.

There’s been hundreds of posts since then. I expect updated opinions on suspected slots.