Mafiascum.net

Sujimichi/PM/Flubber I want to get shoved into the spotlight a little more post wise.
The way Aaron wagon went away magically when he has done barely anything to change the reason he's originally scumread makes my read even stronger. But I know no one is going to listen to me. Unless I feel like changing my playstyle and at the moment I don't. Maybe Day 2.Depends on the flip

In post 873, Xayah wrote:Who are the scum driving this wagon in your eyes? Just saying you don’t like a wagon that much isn’t really going to do much to stop it.

Funnily enough I think you're the scummiest person on that wagon, as I said earlier. You feel off.

In post 859, Sirfetchd wrote:@skitt: Yeah we've played a few times. But it's a HUGE SECRET who I am.

My playstyle has changed a lot
I dont know when u were active but i do a lot more real time and a lot less wallposting (although that's starting to come back too)

In post 869, Billy Pilgrim wrote:looked like to me she was characterizing my vote on her as an OMGUS vote when it felt much more accurate to call her vote on me that.

I dont think i ever called your vote on me omgus
My vote on you was not omgus

In post 871, Billy Pilgrim wrote:@Skitt - you keep saying I came to opposite conclusions from your 50. Show me that. Show me where I ever liked your 50? I thought Suji had a bad response (side note, wtf happened to Suji?) Why is it a flip in positions for me to be concerned about a bad response to a bad post?

In post 60, Billy Pilgrim wrote:

In post 59, Sujimichi wrote:

In post 57, skitter30 wrote:Ok, what was your reasoning?

I'd rather not discuss it overtly at the moment, though I think it should be somewhat easily inferred. Happy to discuss a bit further down the road.

Had a minute during my lunch break. God I hate posts like this. I was initially confused by Skitter's post that your RVS was scummy,

but the explanation made alot of sense.

You then shade Skitt for assuming a scummy motivation rather than asking your reasons. Skitt then asks your reasons and you do this vague appeal to some reasoning that you will provide down the road? What can you possibly gain by holding it back? You're not informed unless you're scum, someone's already talked about the draft numbers. There wasnt a n0 action. Wtf are you talking about here?

VOTE: Suji

You go from saying my explanation made sense to voting me for my part of this interaction

In post 876, nomnomnom wrote:

In post 873, Xayah wrote:Who are the scum driving this wagon in your eyes? Just saying you don’t like a wagon that much isn’t really going to do much to stop it.

Funnily enough I think you're the scummiest person on that wagon, as I said earlier. You feel off.

Go on. Anyone can say 'you feel off' that's not really a reason. It's just buzzwords. If you think I'm the scummy person on the wagon go into my iso and case why I feel so off.

I would be interested in wagoning maria

I don't think you have any way to point me as scum right now so I would also be interested in seeing a wagon attempt on me.

Do I need to write a novel everytime I suspect someone? You just feel off with your posts and votes.

I'm unsure about taking my vote off Kerset though.

In post 882, Xayah wrote:I don't think you have any way to point me as scum right now so I would also be interested in seeing a wagon attempt on me.

For starters, your billy vote felt band-wagon-y and oppurtunistic

Hey I'm still alive college has been kicking my ass this week. I'll get to this later this afternoon.

You don't need to write a novel. But I at least thought you'd give a sentence or two. Your reasoning holds no water until you can give that. I think the only reason people can 'suspect' me is because of the playstyle I'm choosing to go with this game. But, I'll wait and see.
pedit: See that's a start. To answer your point: A) Yes it was apart of a bandwagon B) If I was scum-mmm I won't go down that path it's wifom and not many people care to listen.
What makes me wanting to jump onto the wagon scummy? Do you not believe my reason?

For the record, I legitimately scumread Billy now.

@Maria - it was zero escape Mafia mini 2089. I mean I survived all of one day, and we didnt have a whole lot of communication in that pt, so maybe that's why you forgot it.

@S_S care to explain?

Your posts from 868 onward seem way more focused on justifying yourself than on actually forming reads. As in, you're not saying "this is what I think and this is why I think it," you're saying, "look at everything I'm doing and why it could be coming from town."

In post 868, Billy Pilgrim wrote:Man, I was thinking you were town earlier, but now I'm not sure.

This is one of the worst lines in the entire string of posts, because it sets your previous reasoning aside and frames Luca as untrustworthy because he made a subjective comment that incriminates you.

In post 879, skitter30 wrote:

In post 871, Billy Pilgrim wrote:@Skitt - you keep saying I came to opposite conclusions from your 50. Show me that. Show me where I ever liked your 50? I thought Suji had a bad response (side note, wtf happened to Suji?) Why is it a flip in positions for me to be concerned about a bad response to a bad post?

In post 60, Billy Pilgrim wrote:

In post 59, Sujimichi wrote:

In post 57, skitter30 wrote:Ok, what was your reasoning?

I'd rather not discuss it overtly at the moment, though I think it should be somewhat easily inferred. Happy to discuss a bit further down the road.

Had a minute during my lunch break. God I hate posts like this. I was initially confused by Skitter's post that your RVS was scummy,

but the explanation made alot of sense.

You then shade Skitt for assuming a scummy motivation rather than asking your reasons. Skitt then asks your reasons and you do this vague appeal to some reasoning that you will provide down the road? What can you possibly gain by holding it back? You're not informed unless you're scum, someone's already talked about the draft numbers. There wasnt a n0 action. Wtf are you talking about here?

VOTE: Suji

You go from saying my explanation made sense to voting me for my part of this interaction

Yeah, I think my later exchange with you was probably based on a misunderstanding now. I did like your explanation for why Suji's naked vote was scummy. I never said I didn't like your explanation. What I said was that I didnt like how you were pushing Suji without voting him, and then it seems like our exchanges since then appear to be based on not understanding each other.

I feel like I'm off this game and I need to re-read. I can try and get to it tonight.

@S_S - that feels like a fair characterization.

It's a fair characterization? Do you disagree that the behaviors I described are scummy?

In post 890, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 868, Billy Pilgrim wrote:Man, I was thinking you were town earlier, but now I'm not sure.

This is one of the worst lines in the entire string of posts, because it sets your previous reasoning aside and frames Luca as untrustworthy because he made a subjective comment that incriminates you.

Maybe I dont know how he's using the term "good" to describe my town game, but I cant see how hes making that claim. We've got three overlapping games. In one newbie, I got scum D1 and I drove the lynch, and it was based off an under the radar sheep on someone when there was equally valid reason to hop onto someone else. Then I ate the NK.

In my scum game - I got townread by everyone but tchill on D1 for faking two different reaction tests. I then replaced out on D1 when the posting activity picked up too much and I had a pretty important work thing. People used my slot's play later on that day to continue town reading LUV who had replaced into my slot.

In my other town game, Luca was masons with Profii and I strongly opposed lynching scum Kraeg D1. In fact I helped drive a lynch wagon off of Kraeg onto Mohab. I was still looking for a way that Kraeg could be town after there was a jail keeper counterclaim on D2 but I think I ultimately voted there. D3 i was lynched, but I tried to figure out who the last scum was and I directed everyone onto Garmr and basically excluded the last scum from my suspect pool.

Those are the three games I played with Luca. Please tell me how he subjectively interpreted that as good. And tell me how that wasnt an attempt to think that my bad playstyle, which is my norm, was somehow off from my normal game. That's why I made that comment S_S. Because my game isnt good. And I actually have experience with Luca, and I dont know how he reaches that conclusion.

In post 892, Something_Smart wrote:It's a fair characterization? Do you disagree that the behaviors I described are scummy?

It's a fair characterization. I dont disagree that they're scummy behaviors. I wasnt being sarcastic, sorry if you thought I was.

To be clear, my issue is with your 890, not 889. I think 889 was c ok completely fair.

I'm town reading S_S. I want to reread other folks tonight, but this interaction felt genuine.

In post 893, Billy Pilgrim wrote:Those are the three games I played with Luca. Please tell me how he subjectively interpreted that as good. And tell me how that wasnt an attempt to think that my bad playstyle, which is my norm, was somehow off from my normal game. That's why I made that comment S_S. Because my game isnt good. And I actually have experience with Luca, and I dont know how he reaches that conclusion.

The problem wasn't that you disagreed with him. You're perfectly entitled to your own opinion and so is he.

The problem is that you immediately jumped to "he's suspicious for saying something that I disagree with" and even worse, you discarded a previous townread for something completely unrelated. That doesn't help anyone read him better, and it also makes it harder to discuss the issue because now it's a question of you challenging his motives instead of trying to understand his perspective. In short: it's anti-town.

In post 894, Billy Pilgrim wrote:It's a fair characterization. I dont disagree that they're scummy behaviors. I wasnt being sarcastic, sorry if you thought I was.

I didn't think it was sarcastic, I was just confused. If you agree that you did them and you agree that they were scummy, why not endeavor to fix that?

Alright so after rereading here's what I got.

I've moved skitter up to a townlean. In the mini I played with her about a month ago where she was scum, she was a lot more reserved and didn't actively push people as much as she's doing here. She feels like she has a genuine interest in finding scum and her pushes feel natural.

I'm not sure why I was scumreading rb so much? I think I initially disliked the way they came after me upon their entrance and had a few weird plays early on, but a lot of their points against Kerset are valid. I still stand by my statement of rb/Kerset are probably never scum together, but a lot of the things rb is doing feel townie enough.

SS, Sirfetchd and Luca are still townreads.

I think Xayah and Kerset are both good lynch options today. Xayah's hop on the Billy wagon was veeeery fishy and 875 pinged the shit out of me as well. I don't like how she hasn't pushed me at all despite supposedly being one of her stronger scumreads. Why hop on the Billy wagon if that's not your preferred lynch today? And why not do more to convince the everyone else to vote me if you think I'm scum?

Kerset's vote on Billy, while not as bad as Xayah's, feels like it was done reluctantly. Why exactly did you vote for Billy anyways? 856 is super sketch. No one is forcing you to do anything so I'm really confused why you feel pressured into joining a wagon that you might not even agree with (you haven't really given a proper stance on Billy, but the *sigh* followed by the vote on him makes it seem like you are reluctant to vote there).