Mafiascum.net

In post 778, jjh927 wrote:Like, you could save us lynching whoever the lynch target is each day if they're town but we still follow through if they're scum

That's pretty damn useful

In post 779, Wh4t wrote:How can a read "change drastically" when you never had a read on me initially mastina?

I'm wolf af atm and

you're the only one who's taken the bait so thanks for outting.

Please do explain your newly compiled readslist so I don't mislockscum you.

In post 787, mastina wrote:

In post 747, jjh927 wrote:But can you elaborate on how Skygazer has good content, especially early on being enough to justify calling it a very bad vote

The very bad vote comes from the meta townread on Skygazer more than the good content, but sure. 16 is the towniest possible entry into the game. 31 builds on it.

In post 749, Randomnamechange wrote:VOTE: porkens
weak questioning, overconfident scumreads not backed up my a vote at any point this game

That's par for the course for Porkens.

In post 790, NicoRobin wrote:Those who agree that mastina is scummy, say 'aye'. If we have enough, we can lynch her.

In post 796, Invisibility wrote:for slayers gambit claim

In post 810, Nero Cain wrote:

In post 806, Gamma Emerald wrote:Also @Nero I think mastina is right about inactivity meaning different things for different people, like my Wh4t scumread shows.

I absolutely agree. I'm just saying that in such an early phase of the game differentiating between scum that's lurking and town that just hasn't posted yet seems like a futile endeavor.

In post 835, Wh4t wrote:I'm lost in such a big game so figured it was easier to wait for people to interact with me to get reads. It's fine I think you might be genuine in your push on me. Currently ISOing people.

Mastina is pretty borderline nullscum so far in that the majority of her posts are fluffy, teach-y, lamisty and discuss her role. Her one post with content - the readslist wall is nothing great either. I really dislike how her chick scumread started as a passing comment to someone else scumreading them which was then followed up by chick being her biggest scumread in her list. When you consider the climate was ripe for a chick quickwagon it looks worse. I noticed IC pointed out the lack of resistance to the chick wagon so I give them slight town points for that.

When we look at mastina's role it would be quite a powerful role as scum in that it ensures a town lynch when used - what confuses this is mastina clarifying that town can no-lynch and use the role as investigative. I don't see why town would be given a gladiate role that ensures a town lynch (or no-lynch) unless the set-up were bastard? So overall the role claim gives me the null-scum lean. When she can explain her read change on me I'll be able to update this.

Chick seems fine? As mentioned her wagon was the first to pop up with little resistance however she hasn't done herself many favours to get town read (which usually points to town imo). I like her confidence in her read on Vax and someone else I can't remember.

In post 836, Wh4t wrote:Oh christ Vax is scum.

VOTE: Vaxkiller

I thought it wouldn't make sense with mastina as SvS as he keeps calling her claim fake but then he goes on about how chick is obv scum and was the best vig. Usually when someone calls a claim fake they are implying that player is scum - half sitting on the fence about mastina's alignment whilst egging her on to use a pro-scum ability does not prevent vax and mastina from being SvS. It's feasible distancing imo.

In post 837, Wh4t wrote:Wheme is ????

Not sure why he points out scummy things about chick but doesn't vote there...he then overconfidently votes invis before randomly voting porkens. Hmmm. No clue what this dude is up to or why.

In post 843, Wh4t wrote:

In post 703, Innocent Children wrote:

In post 700, Wh4t wrote:Is it bad that I want to vote IC for his nonsensical walls?

Yes. And wt actual f is “nonsensical” about them? Is this even a serious thought?

I wonder if I voted you, would FA consider that a scummy omgus? Lol

Because seriously, you really do look like you’re trying to solve based on little to none content.

Just saw this. Hi. I think you're scummy.

In post 844, Wh4t wrote:

In post 712, Innocent Children wrote:

In post 553, Wh4t wrote:

In post 552, Invisibility wrote:wheme that slot could be scum but i'd like to hear a case

What slot could be scum? And why not present your own case instead of waiting for others to create the scumread for you?

Please tell the class about

your

cases.

Feel free to comment on my hard efforting today

In post 860, Innocent Children wrote:

In post 843, Wh4t wrote:

In post 703, Innocent Children wrote:

In post 700, Wh4t wrote:Is it bad that I want to vote IC for his nonsensical walls?

Yes. And wt actual f is “nonsensical” about them? Is this even a serious thought?

I wonder if I voted you, would FA consider that a scummy omgus? Lol

Because seriously, you really do look like you’re trying to solve based on little to none content.

Just saw this. Hi. I think you're scummy.

These omgussy type of posts, really do you no favours. Do you seriously disagree with this? Nero also noticed it.

In post 862, Ginngie wrote:dont vote mastina

im sheeping her this game

In post 861, Innocent Children wrote:I was liking your posting today better but then you ruined it by sr me for calling you out on your yesterday null content posts. So you sr me and then you want props? What?

In post 863, Wh4t wrote:

In post 860, Innocent Children wrote:

In post 843, Wh4t wrote:

In post 703, Innocent Children wrote:

In post 700, Wh4t wrote:Is it bad that I want to vote IC for his nonsensical walls?

Yes. And wt actual f is “nonsensical” about them? Is this even a serious thought?

I wonder if I voted you, would FA consider that a scummy omgus? Lol

Because seriously, you really do look like you’re trying to solve based on little to none content.

Just saw this. Hi. I think you're scummy.

These omgussy type of posts, really do you no favours. Do you seriously disagree with this? Nero also noticed it.

What? I don't think you understand the meaning of omgus. Can you show me where nero commented on my behaviour and how that relates to your definition of omgus?

In post 865, Wh4t wrote:Ginngie/mastina do not feel like the same alignment or at the very least not svs based on posts like the above. One is hoodwinking the other my spideysenses tell me.

In post 866, Wh4t wrote:

In post 861, Innocent Children wrote:I was liking your posting today better but then you ruined it by sr me for calling you out on your yesterday null content posts. So you sr me and then you want props? What?

So you like me until I say you're scummy but you tell me I'm omgusing? Saying I think you're scummy != saying I scumread you.

In post 836, Wh4t wrote:Oh christ Vax is scum.

VOTE: Vaxkiller

I thought it wouldn't make sense with mastina as SvS as he keeps calling her claim fake but then he goes on about how chick is obv scum and was the best vig. Usually when someone calls a claim fake they are implying that player is scum - half sitting on the fence about mastina's alignment whilst egging her on to use a pro-scum ability does not prevent vax and mastina from being SvS. It's feasible distancing imo.

In post 868, Innocent Children wrote:I was sussing you for your null content posts and even mentioned possibly voting you and you respond to that by calling me “scummy” for that. How is it scummy, when it’s true? Your posts yesterday did in fact lack content. Nero also commented on them being “meatless”, so you sr me for that makes 0 sense And why would you ask for props for stepping it up today?

In post 871, Innocent Children wrote:Please link or quote the post where he does this, kthanx.

In post 865, Wh4t wrote:Ginngie/mastina do not feel like the same alignment or at the very least not svs based on posts like the above. One is hoodwinking the other my spideysenses tell me.