Mafiascum.net

In post 809, Enchant wrote:Knowing BM expireince, it would be fabricated. But i really not sure, BM would save his teammate with easy.

Hmm well whether or not I could have saved A50 in that scenario, I'd certainly have understood the setup enough to know that bussing your scumbuddy on Day 1 is effectively game-throwing. Hence I don't believe anyone would do it, hence my preference that we work through the off-wagon pool before looking at people on the scum-elim.

Fine then.

I will (or you, if someone other if wish) punch when we have 1-2 days. There's no haste, and i am a bit paranoid with feeling we killing townie (which is possible with 1/7 chance to find Mafia). We probably should speak more.

Just in a case, i don't really need reason to not hammer, but there's really something off and i can feel it.

In post 850, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 809, Enchant wrote:Knowing BM expireince, it would be fabricated. But i really not sure, BM would save his teammate with easy.

Hmm well whether or not I could have saved A50 in that scenario, I'd certainly have understood the setup enough to know that bussing your scumbuddy on Day 1 is effectively game-throwing. Hence I don't believe anyone would do it, hence my preference that we work through the off-wagon pool before looking at people on the scum-elim.

Well. It possible, especially if mafia would choose "No Kill" tactic.

In post 810, yessiree wrote:

In post 809, Enchant wrote:Knowing BM expireince, it would be fabricated. But i really not sure, BM would save his teammate with easy.

It could be fabricated, sure, but it's a numbers game. And I think the chances of mafia not bussing A50 is higher than bussing A50. Speaking from experience, A50 also isn't a player you should get a strong read on early game, especially day 1, so from that logic, the wagon should be mostly town-driven. Also, mafia has daytalk, so I would assume any S-S interaction from A50 to be somewhat deliberate and have some direction, which isn't the case if you read A50-BM interactions, which tend to be more spontaneous.

Yeah and from my experience, A50 is not high on the list of players you'd wanna bus, even outside of the mechanics here. I don't think Nono does it (intentionally). Actually I'm not sure Nono-scum would even go as far as a soft distancing vote for A50, given the latter's character.

In post 852, Enchant wrote:

In post 850, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 809, Enchant wrote:Knowing BM expireince, it would be fabricated. But i really not sure, BM would save his teammate with easy.

Hmm well whether or not I could have saved A50 in that scenario, I'd certainly have understood the setup enough to know that bussing your scumbuddy on Day 1 is effectively game-throwing. Hence I don't believe anyone would do it, hence my preference that we work through the off-wagon pool before looking at people on the scum-elim.

Well. It possible, especially if mafia would choose "No Kill" tactic.

yeah but if mafia are forced to adopt no-kill tactic for 3 cycles, that's 3 mis-elims they need to secure off the bat, before they can NK. I guess it's possible they did it without thinking it through, but occam's razor etc. is they just didn't do it.

In post 822, T-Bone wrote:It would honestly be easier if you all treated my posts as coming from confirmed town without needing my flip. I am so transparently town in everything I say and do. I've laid out my thoughts and reads very clearly. I'm the first person to realize how negative utility the doctor is in this set-up, when the scum-thing to do would be to not point that out. I was the one who wanted to use the council to try and narrow down the elimination pool, and it is definitely my fault for not fighting harder for that for the sake of harmony on the council. That's where I went wrong, and that's on me. But at least I'm trying to solve the game. You look at Battle Mage's posts and you can clearly see he is not interested in a solve. You watch him in the council tonight, and if you make me flip green, it would behoove you not to let him make any decisions.

I'll admit I chuckled at this. remind me next time I roll scum to defend myself with the argument "just treat all my posts as coming from confirmed town, and then you don't need to flip me".

As noted earlier, T-Bone, your 'case' on me is entirely based on a different view of what optimal night actions would have been, and subsequent tunnelling. However, it has the following critical weaknesses:

1. Raya was also in agreement with my approach last night, but you've focussed solely on me, and instead channelled your energy into buddying Raya.
2. The protect/not protect decision is itself not AI. There's no scum motivation for me to be a proponent of protecting over not protecting, given I have been the strongest advocate (besides Enchant) that scum are likely to No-Kill. And although you suggested I advocated for protecting myself specifically, Raya has confirmed I did not do so - and certainly that it wasn't part of my initial support for the principle of protecting.
3. In contrast to 2, your proposed night actions do come with a scum motive, as I laid out in post 848, and more generally the idea of not using the tracker to try and catch scum killing beggars belief.

To summarise, your case on me is not grounded in anything which actually suggests I'm scum, and lacks even the most superficial credibility of an objective and impartial case.

Furthermore, to refute a few falsehoods in your post above - I've seen little evidence of you genuinely trying to "solve the game". You've scarcely engaged with anybody outside of me in a meaningful way - besides a recent attempt to run up Nono in an effort to save yourself. I don't recall any scumhunting at all from you on Day 1. Your contribution has been characterised substantially by revisionist history and bold hypocritical claims which don't stand up to even minimal factual scrutiny. In contrast to you, I've been actively scumhunting on Day 1 and Day 2 whilst being elected to council on both days, and have critically appraised a range of players - not solely working off a simply presumption of your guilt.

In post 842, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 839, Raya36 wrote:The problem with that is now T-Bone knows he's being tracked so if we keep him alive and he's scum then he just no kills and were back to where we started. Or scum choose to no kill to frame T-Bone. I do agree town-confirmed T-Bone would be very powerful.

Town is in a really good position right now with a lot of near confirmed town, a flipped scum, and a very small pool. If we're wrong on T-Bone then we use the info gained and I'm sure we can find the right person next day

I struggle to imagine that T-Bone scum would be killing tonight regardless, given he chose not to kill last night when he was on the council and knew he wasn't being tracked.

Yeah, you're probably right. So I guess in that sense it wouldn't really matter but it still leaves us with less new info

In post 845, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 801, yessiree wrote:

In post 716, Raya36 wrote:

In post 711, T-Bone wrote:Raya, for what it's worth, I am a straight forward player. WIFOM is a bad tool and I don't set out to create it. Do with that information what you will.

I at least don't want you to be the elim today anymore I don't think. I'd rather go elsewhere and see what we can come up with with the info we get next night.

I can't seem to get rid of the thought that BM and T-Bone is TvS in some order and I'm being manipulated by one of you but that could just be my paranoia speaking.

If Moz doesn't make that much sense, and T-Bone is actually just town. And yessiree has a higher chance of being clear because scum could have killed then maybe nono is the best choice.

call me prejudiced against women but I just can't see this coming from a cold, calculating and cunning woman, pitting T-Bone against Battle Mage just so she can look like a paranoid townie trying to navigate through the destruction in its wake - it's notably genuine indecisiveness that stems from a lack of information on either party's alignment, which points to town!rayas for me

I think that's a small leap. Raya had generally tried to stay out of that dispute, and when she had been involved, it was generally to agree with whoever was posting at the time. It was only later when she was brought into focus herself, that she was more actively engaged. So I don't think a hypothetical scum-Raya would have been required to do anything cold, calculating or cunning here - just use the obvious battle in progress as a route to 2 mis-elims. What stood out to me was her request that I volunteer to be elimmed tomorrow if T-Bone flips town - which fits that profile, and the narrative of scum who require mis-elims on the A50 wagon to win.

That's a fair analysis but you turning it around on me only swaps our positions and now what you said about me applies to yourself to some extent

In post 848, Battle Mage wrote:

In post 804, Enchant wrote:Yeah, protecting no one was sane decision.

No matter how good and town someone looks, he could be mafia, even BM. So trading life of Townie-Townie for life of confirmed by track is insanely useful, so i don't understand what BM had.

eh fine, if i was wrong, i'll own it. my sense last night was that this game should be pretty easy, with a majority pool of probable town and a narrow scumpool, and my main thought was about blocking a kill to keep 1 more probable townie in the game to maximise our day-elims. The way today has played out so far, with the wagon on Nono, it doesn't seem that there is such a clear consensus about the townpool/scumpool, so perhaps it was wrong in hindsight. Although from my own perspective, if the decision last night had any impact, it was to save my own life, and I think my contribution today has been a net benefit to the town - especially if T-Bone is the final scum.

I don't think the protect decision has much bearing in any case, and I feel much more strongly about using the track on someone where it might result in a red-check.

Thinking back to the discussion last night, T-Bone's original proposal was for No protect, track T-Bone. Which is consistent with the idea that T-Bone never intended to kill anyway, but wanted 100% confirmation that no kill was attempted - to enable him to push the bogus rhetoric of "scum no-killing is inconceivable, T-Bone would never do that" as a means to secure some much needed towncred.

Enchant, look at this post. He's manipulating you.

He's appeasing to you by saying you might be right. And then he's doing some incredible mental gymnastics to confirm his false scum read.

Do not let this scum manipulate you.

Raya. In post 855 BM once again suggested that I didn't want to use the track. Can you confirm or deny this as truth? Did I at any point ever suggest not using the track action?

The answer is of course not. This is the second time he's boldly stated this lie. Why are you voting with him?

Actually Enchant, flip me after Raya confirms this. I want the last thing you all there is BM lying about my intentions. He's trying to manipulate you all into believing I was against using both actions because I didn't want to use the doctor action. His ploy in 855 is plain to see. Flip him tomorrow and we win.

In post 859, T-Bone wrote:Raya. In post 855 BM once again suggested that I didn't want to use the track. Can you confirm or deny this as truth? Did I at any point ever suggest not using the track action?

You wanted to use the track but that's not what BM said in 855

In post 855, Battle Mage wrote:more generally the idea of not using the tracker to try and catch scum

In post 855, Battle Mage wrote:3. In contrast to 2, your proposed night actions do come with a scum motive, as I laid out in post 848, and more generally the idea of not using the tracker to try and catch scum killing beggars belief.

Right here, let this be a monument to BM's scum game. I apologize for all the posts in a row. This did not happen. I never suggested not using the track action. In fact my suggestion was more likely to catch scum than what we ultimately did. BM is trying to imply that I suggested using no actions, right here. He's gonna post and claim this isn't what he meant in a moment. But this is what he posted, he can't take it back.

So Enchant, let Raya confirms these facts for you. Let Raya confirm once again, I know she won't use language to suggest this is the flat out lie that it is, but she'll probably say something like "T-Bone is right, he never said or suggested this." Once she does that, feel free to hammer.

Then of course, ignore everything BM says in council tonight. It's unfortunate that he conned his way in, but it is what it is. The way council works is that anyone can confirm the actions. The last person to confirm an action is what sets the action. You don't need BM's consensus. Do whatever you think is best with the night actions to force his hand, and feel safe and secure in the fact that you do not need his cooperation, you just need to ensure either you are Arte are the last person to confirm the council's action.

In post 862, Raya36 wrote:

In post 859, T-Bone wrote:Raya. In post 855 BM once again suggested that I didn't want to use the track. Can you confirm or deny this as truth? Did I at any point ever suggest not using the track action?

You wanted to use the track but that's not what BM said in 855

In post 855, Battle Mage wrote:more generally the idea of not using the tracker to try and catch scum

He's trying to tie the idea that I didn't want to use any actions because I didn't want to use the doctor action. It is in plain language if you don't take the segment fragment.

Either way I've caught BM in enough falsehoods, misrepresentations, and manipulations that you all should have no problem eliminating him tomorrow.

Say it with me class. 'T-Bone, we will have no problems eliminating Battle Mage tomorrow'.

Please and thank you.

In post 864, T-Bone wrote:

In post 862, Raya36 wrote:

In post 859, T-Bone wrote:Raya. In post 855 BM once again suggested that I didn't want to use the track. Can you confirm or deny this as truth? Did I at any point ever suggest not using the track action?

You wanted to use the track but that's not what BM said in 855

In post 855, Battle Mage wrote:more generally the idea of not using the tracker to try and catch scum

He's trying to tie the idea that I didn't want to use any actions because I didn't want to use the doctor action. It is in plain language if you don't take the segment fragment.

What he said is not a lie. What he may or may not be hoping is interpreted would be misleading. But I think this point has been elaborated on enough that those outside the council understand what happened now, but I can't fully speak to that.

Raya you didn't say it with me!

In post 867, T-Bone wrote:Raya you didn't say it with me!

ok
T-Bone, we will have no problems eliminating Battle Mage tomorrow

Well yes, I cannot play the game for you after I'm dead.

But nonetheless class I want to hear it in unison!

no, just kidding VOTE: t-bone

let's wrap this up)

In post 855, Battle Mage wrote: 3. In contrast to 2, your proposed night actions do come with a scum motive, as I laid out in post 848, and more generally the idea of not using the tracker to try and catch scum killing beggars belief.

Aren't his idea was to use Track on T-Bone and No-Protect?

In post 865, T-Bone wrote:Either way I've caught BM in enough falsehoods, misrepresentations, and manipulations that you all should have no problem eliminating him tomorrow.

Say it with me class. 'T-Bone, we will have no problems eliminating Battle Mage tomorrow'.

Please and thank you.

Well. You know BM better than me if you claim he is your masonbuddy 1d, so if you say he is mafia with great chances, then it's possible.

We will consider this.

In post 815, mozamis wrote:

In post 792, yessiree wrote:Woke up to 4 more pages of content, oh boy. Skimmed through, saw quite a bit of walls, so I need some caffeine in my system before continuing

Looking forward to it, oh scum suspect