Mafiascum.net

In post 821, joges wrote:

In post 758, Kanna wrote:Agree Gjt's vote was bad but jojes vote was opportunistic uhhh

Which vote?

This one. Kinda ties into what I said earlier; I personally don’t agree with Gjt vote/logic at all but it could still be a genuine thought process. The fact you’re voting him cause he looked bad was kinda opportunistic

In post 739, joges wrote:

In post 734, Gjt wrote:I would've thought you would have already checked their ISO when you took over. It's not a stupid question, but then if your Scum you wouldn't need to I guess as you would know who is Town and can just call it your own reads

Here's a theory. This is a scum point of view. Why would a town player need to read what their replacement has done? I would think scum replacing in would want to see what kind of BS the previous player in their slot has posted or thought. People lying will care what their spot has said, people not lying will just start from their entrance and go.

Gjt asking this makes me think they have a scum point of view as I feel only scum would want to read the previous player said.

VOTE: Gjt

Rex please come back soon, I’ll even unvote you :c

In post 802, nomnomnom wrote:me first me first

sorry, all booked up

In post 804, Ankamius wrote:

In post 778, Nicholai wrote:

In post 725, Looker wrote:Do you TR ankamius like you TR wimpy?

i townread the slot, slight town pings from Ank calling omnom town in the way she did it but otherwise nothing on her

In post 745, Ankamius wrote:lmao nomnomnom is town

nice

i know it's slightly contradictory to read this post as town and then question it, but i'm TRing it's tone(?) rather than the read itself. why did you call omnom town after her interaction with gjt? can her frustration not come from scum?

Nom tends to struggle keeping her tone and thought processes consistent with each other as scum

She's already showing consistency

I’m just gonna pull the newb card and say I’m not sure what you mean; can I have an example?

In post 820, joges wrote:

In post 749, Ankamius wrote:this should be a fun time

I can't wait to hear why people scumread this slot

I wonder if it would be possible to somehow show at the top of a post that "x player replaced in for y player" I always forget who they replaced and have to go look it up.

Ank, are you town?

Idk am I?

In post 807, Ankamius wrote:btw how important is it that I read the entire thread

just the little I've seen indicates there's minimal anything I can get from it

I actually think it’s not that necessary. You can probably go back and read if things from back there come up

In post 776, Nicholai wrote:VOTE: Gjt for now

his reaction to looker questioning his real life commitments: i think he'd be a little more outraged as town. his scumhunting on omnom recently and his retort to kanna reads as fake to me

No Nicho; we were supposed to be psychic masoning :c

But what about his scumhunting on nomnom and reply to me seems fake?

In post 824, Kanna wrote:

In post 819, joges wrote:

In post 742, TheFuzzylogic99 wrote:Jorge
ok but you cant judge guilt of someone else by what you would do or not do. This is fuzzy logic and only i can have fuzzy logic

What I do as town, and how I act as town, and what I expect of town is exactly what I should, and you should (and everyone else should), base their reads off of. ESPECIALLY D1. I mean, what else am I supposed to go off of?

But not everyone is...you? People can have different thought processes and that still be valid

Pedit: I’ll try and remember Joges from now on :>

Well, for me then, I look at people from the concept of "Would I say/do/act/react (and whatever else) like that, if I were them, and town". That's where I start. -shrug-

In post 825, Kanna wrote:

In post 821, joges wrote:

In post 758, Kanna wrote:Agree Gjt's vote was bad but jojes vote was opportunistic uhhh

Which vote?

This one. Kinda ties into what I said earlier; I personally don’t agree with Gjt vote/logic at all but it could still be a genuine thought process. The fact you’re voting him cause he looked bad was kinda opportunistic

In post 739, joges wrote:

In post 734, Gjt wrote:I would've thought you would have already checked their ISO when you took over. It's not a stupid question, but then if your Scum you wouldn't need to I guess as you would know who is Town and can just call it your own reads

Here's a theory. This is a scum point of view. Why would a town player need to read what their replacement has done? I would think scum replacing in would want to see what kind of BS the previous player in their slot has posted or thought. People lying will care what their spot has said, people not lying will just start from their entrance and go.

Gjt asking this makes me think they have a scum point of view as I feel only scum would want to read the previous player said.

VOTE: Gjt

I don't see how starting a wagon on someone is opportunistic. Being the second vote, or putting someone on L1, is more of where I would check my "Is this opportunistic?" meter. I don't see how explaining my theory/reasoning behind my action can be deemed as opportunistic. I really feel like you're trying to say "scum hunting is opportunistic"...

In post 829, Ankamius wrote:

In post 820, joges wrote:

In post 749, Ankamius wrote:this should be a fun time

I can't wait to hear why people scumread this slot

I wonder if it would be possible to somehow show at the top of a post that "x player replaced in for y player" I always forget who they replaced and have to go look it up.

Ank, are you town?

Idk am I?

Well the odds are in your favour currently. It's D1 and games start with more town than scum. So... Probably?

In post 828, Kanna wrote:

In post 804, Ankamius wrote:

In post 778, Nicholai wrote:

In post 725, Looker wrote:Do you TR ankamius like you TR wimpy?

i townread the slot, slight town pings from Ank calling omnom town in the way she did it but otherwise nothing on her

In post 745, Ankamius wrote:lmao nomnomnom is town

nice

i know it's slightly contradictory to read this post as town and then question it, but i'm TRing it's tone(?) rather than the read itself. why did you call omnom town after her interaction with gjt? can her frustration not come from scum?

Nom tends to struggle keeping her tone and thought processes consistent with each other as scum

She's already showing consistency

I’m just gonna pull the newb card and say I’m not sure what you mean; can I have an example?

Its more precise to say congruent rather than consistent

It basically means that when her thoughts follow a particular path, the emotion in each post matches how the thoughts progress

Its hard to go into in detail but generally players that can't keep them consistent sound like they're reading from a script rather than acting a part

In post 833, joges wrote:

In post 825, Kanna wrote:

In post 821, joges wrote:

In post 758, Kanna wrote:Agree Gjt's vote was bad but jojes vote was opportunistic uhhh

Which vote?

This one. Kinda ties into what I said earlier; I personally don’t agree with Gjt vote/logic at all but it could still be a genuine thought process. The fact you’re voting him cause he looked bad was kinda opportunistic

In post 739, joges wrote:

In post 734, Gjt wrote:I would've thought you would have already checked their ISO when you took over. It's not a stupid question, but then if your Scum you wouldn't need to I guess as you would know who is Town and can just call it your own reads

Here's a theory. This is a scum point of view. Why would a town player need to read what their replacement has done? I would think scum replacing in would want to see what kind of BS the previous player in their slot has posted or thought. People lying will care what their spot has said, people not lying will just start from their entrance and go.

Gjt asking this makes me think they have a scum point of view as I feel only scum would want to read the previous player said.

VOTE: Gjt

I don't see how starting a wagon on someone is opportunistic. Being the second vote, or putting someone on L1, is more of where I would check my "Is this opportunistic?" meter. I don't see how explaining my theory/reasoning behind my action can be deemed as opportunistic. I really feel like you're trying to say "scum hunting is opportunistic"...

You know I’m not saying “scumhunting is opportunistic”. What I’m saying is at that moment, Gjt looked kinda bad and nomnomnom could potentially be open to voting him so you jumped in first.

Also thank you Ank

I’m not totally convinced but will keep an eye out for that

In post 822, joges wrote:

In post 760, bob3141 wrote:VOTE: Non

Start talking. If your town we need to see content so we can deduce that. Otherwise you become a player town simply cant afford to take to lylo

I don't like this interaction. We are a long way off of a LyLo, and you're already thinking about the set up of it. I'm fine with you voting him, but I'm not okay with your reasons for it. Especially the "if you're town" part. I would think you would need to see content so you can decide their alignment, but you're suggesting they only post if they're town. Seems weird.

The longer we let him lurk the hard it will to read him as the game goes on. And infact may even cause him to simply do it in next game and the game after that. Either he is scum and will fly under the radar or if he is town then it will be hard to rightly read him. Thus leaving that slot vulnerable to mislynch if he isnt scum. As it very hard to read a player if they only start posting late and half of teh way I read players is by there responses to my own questions


oh when i say if you are town. That me prety sayign this applies if your alignment matches. So if he is town i want him to show it. Give us content were every player can react too. And players can react to those reactions . just like any other player

In post 836, Kanna wrote:

In post 833, joges wrote:

In post 825, Kanna wrote:

In post 821, joges wrote:

In post 758, Kanna wrote:Agree Gjt's vote was bad but jojes vote was opportunistic uhhh

Which vote?

This one. Kinda ties into what I said earlier; I personally don’t agree with Gjt vote/logic at all but it could still be a genuine thought process. The fact you’re voting him cause he looked bad was kinda opportunistic

In post 739, joges wrote:

In post 734, Gjt wrote:I would've thought you would have already checked their ISO when you took over. It's not a stupid question, but then if your Scum you wouldn't need to I guess as you would know who is Town and can just call it your own reads

Here's a theory. This is a scum point of view. Why would a town player need to read what their replacement has done? I would think scum replacing in would want to see what kind of BS the previous player in their slot has posted or thought. People lying will care what their spot has said, people not lying will just start from their entrance and go.

Gjt asking this makes me think they have a scum point of view as I feel only scum would want to read the previous player said.

VOTE: Gjt

I don't see how starting a wagon on someone is opportunistic. Being the second vote, or putting someone on L1, is more of where I would check my "Is this opportunistic?" meter. I don't see how explaining my theory/reasoning behind my action can be deemed as opportunistic. I really feel like you're trying to say "scum hunting is opportunistic"...

You know I’m not saying “scumhunting is opportunistic”. What I’m saying is at that moment, Gjt looked kinda bad and nomnomnom could potentially be open to voting him so you jumped in first.

Well let me just sit back and wait for someone to get to L1 and I'll hammer them. I won't bother you with any more of my input or decision making.

In post 824, Kanna wrote:

In post 819, joges wrote:

In post 742, TheFuzzylogic99 wrote:Jorge
ok but you cant judge guilt of someone else by what you would do or not do. This is fuzzy logic and only i can have fuzzy logic

What I do as town, and how I act as town, and what I expect of town is exactly what I should, and you should (and everyone else should), base their reads off of. ESPECIALLY D1. I mean, what else am I supposed to go off of?

But not everyone is...you? People can have different thought processes and that still be valid

Pedit: I’ll try and remember Joges from now on :>

So how would you describe your own thought process.

I do find it bad to approach every player with cookie cutter mindset. You need to know there own thought process so you can tell if there actions match a town mind set. As each player will be different

In post 841, bob3141 wrote:

In post 824, Kanna wrote:

In post 819, joges wrote:

In post 742, TheFuzzylogic99 wrote:Jorge
ok but you cant judge guilt of someone else by what you would do or not do. This is fuzzy logic and only i can have fuzzy logic

What I do as town, and how I act as town, and what I expect of town is exactly what I should, and you should (and everyone else should), base their reads off of. ESPECIALLY D1. I mean, what else am I supposed to go off of?

But not everyone is...you? People can have different thought processes and that still be valid

Pedit: I’ll try and remember Joges from now on :>

So how would you describe your own thought process.

I do find it bad to approach every player with cookie cutter mindset. You need to know there own thought process so you can tell if there actions match a town mind set. As each player will be different

My thought process is like, trying to see if someone’s thought process is genuine (I’m not good but oh well) and yea exactly

@joges; if I upset you, I’m sorry? There’s no reason to be like that though

In post 841, bob3141 wrote:

In post 824, Kanna wrote:

In post 819, joges wrote:

In post 742, TheFuzzylogic99 wrote:Jorge
ok but you cant judge guilt of someone else by what you would do or not do. This is fuzzy logic and only i can have fuzzy logic

What I do as town, and how I act as town, and what I expect of town is exactly what I should, and you should (and everyone else should), base their reads off of. ESPECIALLY D1. I mean, what else am I supposed to go off of?

But not everyone is...you? People can have different thought processes and that still be valid

Pedit: I’ll try and remember Joges from now on :>

So how would you describe your own thought process.

I do find it bad to approach every player with cookie cutter mindset.

You need to know there own thought process

so you can tell if there actions match a town mind set. As each player will be different

Sorry, but I am not paying the fee required to become a mind reader. I would NEVER try to act like I know someone else's thought process. That is an exercise in futility. I just play from my own head.

In post 831, Kanna wrote:

In post 776, Nicholai wrote:VOTE: Gjt for now

his reaction to looker questioning his real life commitments: i think he'd be a little more outraged as town. his scumhunting on omnom recently and his retort to kanna reads as fake to me

No Nicho; we were supposed to be psychic masoning :c

But what about his scumhunting on nomnom and reply to me seems fake?

you don't agree that that his reasoning for scumreading omnom is a little bizzare? regarding his reply to you, i'm not really sure actually, upon reconsideration, the perspective of thinking portrayed in that post is more likely to come from town
hmm actually i can see the reasoning for his omnom scumhunting being a little too out of left field to be scum too

scum are more likely to check over their predecessor's ISO to check for fake claims and such, town have far less reason to do it. does this change your opinion of omnon?

In post 803, Ankamius wrote:Wait... are you somebody I know?

wow, you don't recognise me? well that'd be expected since this is an alt lol

looker... i'm confused at what you were trying there in that interaction with omnom. what was the goal? as far as i can tell, she has put out reads

do you think invis is actually scum? have you played with him before?

VOTE: Looker

let's hear some reads from you, looker. i've seen a lot of questions, some of which i thought were quite useful, but i don't see you making good of the answers you're receiving. also; please do clarify whether your gjt "i don't believe you" and attacking omnom for not having reads were serious or not

In post 818, Ankamius wrote:Well that was certainly an engagement

So classy, such a joy to play with.

In post 847, Nicholai wrote:looker... i'm confused at what you were trying there in that interaction with omnom. what was the goal? as far as i can tell, she has put out reads

I didn't agree. Asking for clarification was met with venom and spleen.

In post 848, Nicholai wrote:VOTE: Looker

let's hear some reads from you, looker. i've seen a lot of questions, some of which i thought were quite useful, but i don't see you making good of the answers you're receiving. also; please do clarify whether your gjt "i don't believe you" and attacking omnom for not having reads were serious or not

• theFuzzyLogic and FlavorLeaf are town
  
• Define "making good". What are your expectations?
  
• No, I
  didn't
  believe that Gjt would be back soon
  
• I think we have different views of the word "attack". Calling someone "stupid" or "dumbass" would be an attack. Swearing at someone would be an attack. Asking someone if my view of them is correct is not an attack.

Interesting approach. I'm surprised.