Mafiascum.net

elimination

KittyTacky [2]:

Battle Mage, Vasex

floo [1]:

KittyTacky

Not voting [4]:

floo, FBJim, Happy Unbirthday Boon, team rocket queen

mod notes

~ battle mage v/la until monday
~ the vc is unchanged

flavour

In post 852, Battle Mage wrote:for what it's worth, I wouldn't describe HUB as relaxed - maybe the opposite. HUB was absolutely frantic to get the mis-elim over the line yesterday, and has been very quiet since.

I reread HUB, it was relaxed AF especially in the beginning, when it came with voting Kitty, talking about anything, giving sides to players, making jokes about avatars, Russiablock etc.
The only question I have to it is about Kitty, because I neither at the start, nor in the end of the day cannot understand how he can be sure, that Kitty is townie. Especially in the beginning so fast making opinion about the unknown player.
"has been very quiet since" we just need to wait it to talk, this says nothing about it, you cannot judge it on this argument.

Is it very common here to destroy your mafia scum partner to look more townie after his death?
What is more fake here? Or maybe there are no fakes?
FBJim scumreads KT
KT scumreads Floo (and FT)
Floo scumreads KT (and Ydra)
BM scumreads KT and HUB

I'll see if I can get some posts in during dnd today

In post 876, Vasex wrote:

In post 852, Battle Mage wrote:for what it's worth, I wouldn't describe HUB as relaxed - maybe the opposite. HUB was absolutely frantic to get the mis-elim over the line yesterday, and has been very quiet since.

I reread HUB, it was relaxed AF especially in the beginning, when it came with voting Kitty, talking about anything, giving sides to players, making jokes about avatars, Russiablock etc.

Yeah HUB is an experienced and capable player. I don't think that player will ever going to be rattled or nervous in the very early stages of a newbie game. So what relevance does that really have? I think the bigger hurdle to overcome is whether HUB scum really goes all out to mis-elim a townie on Day 1. It's a brazen play. But in the scenario HUB is scum and did make that play, I absolutely wouldn't see his early, relatively more laissez-faire, approach to diminish that argument. I understand the read in isolation, but think it's basically a moot point in solving HUB's alignment.

In post 876, Vasex wrote: The only question I have to it is about Kitty, because I neither at the start, nor in the end of the day cannot understand how he can be sure, that Kitty is townie. Especially in the beginning so fast making opinion about the unknown player.

tell me more!

In post 876, Vasex wrote: "has been very quiet since" we just need to wait it to talk, this says nothing about it, you cannot judge it on this argument.

I don't disagree we should let players talk - but aren't you the one who was saying we should elim people for being quiet? i also think, in the lurking scale, being low activity throughout a game is less scummy than only avoiding the thread once you get heat.

In post 877, Vasex wrote:Is it very common here to destroy your mafia scum partner to look more townie after his death?
What is more fake here? Or maybe there are no fakes?
FBJim scumreads KT
KT scumreads Floo (and FT)
Floo scumreads KT (and Ydra)
BM scumreads KT and HUB

entirely depends on the situation, but I'd say it's much more common than it should be (i.e. scum are generally far too eager to eliminate their team-mates).

I'd be concerned more than satisfied with Kitty's sacrificial comment, in that a town!Kitty should recognize the difficulty of winning 5p ELO. Multiple players have already concluded that Kitty is a forced policy elim. I see a scum!KittyTacky trying to buoy up the partner or trying to desperately stay alive. Actually there is a desperate save-my-ass play that has a good chance of working here, which is pushing me - there are 2 other voters who have also expressed interest in voting me.

Kitty in particular lost a lot of your credibility when you pushed flow trap. The other players who are suspecting me (Vasex + TRQ) also lost some credibility when voting flow, though less because their voting/suspecting posts were less awkward. I'm not saying that Kitty+Vasex+TRQ cannot be right this time. Honestly, I've wanted to defend myself without tying myself too much to flow, since that might be a disingenuous smear on the townies that are suspecting me. But I must warn that you must recognize my playing style just as much as you should have recognized flow trap's. And I must warn myself that at least one person who suspects me is town.

In post 880, Battle Mage wrote:Yeah HUB is an experienced and capable player. I don't think that player will ever going to be rattled or nervous in the very early stages of a newbie game. So what relevance does that really have? I think the bigger hurdle to overcome is whether HUB scum really goes all out to mis-elim a townie on Day 1. It's a brazen play. But in the scenario HUB is scum and did make that play, I absolutely wouldn't see his early, relatively more laissez-faire, approach to diminish that argument. I understand the read in isolation, but think it's basically a moot point in solving HUB's alignment.

When I talk about relaxing I mean not any nervous reaction on some events, I mean that mafia usually have some difficulties to talk on any ever topic. He was ready to talk the whole game and this is the style of townie.

In post 874, Vasex wrote:If Kitty is townie, than mafia Floo and BM/Jim.

i know you don't want to veer from your reads, but I really don't like this. If you're town, and Kitty is town, and you survive until tomorrow, you need to be looking at EVERYBODY. - otherwise we're essentially in ExLo today because if you're wrong, scum will just keep you around to help secure the win. Being open-minded is absolutely imperative.

In post 880, Battle Mage wrote:tell me more!

I don't understand what do you want to hear from me more on this topic

In post 880, Battle Mage wrote:I don't disagree we should let players talk - but aren't you the one who was saying we should elim people for being quiet?

Strange joke, because you are trying to make HUB's and Floo's activity equal to each other, which is absurd.

In post 863, KittyTacky wrote:Where I come from, fucking around like FT was and then waiting a long time to give a claim is... Practically an instant hang. Okay I admit the E-1 post was badly-written but how am I scummy for pushing on a borderline-trolling player who turned out to be a townie? Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

why would FT not have stalled on the claim? I mean yes, it was an ill-advised approach, but the idea of mafia isn't normally that you elim people for making dumb plays if they are highly likely to be town. A policy elim on a newbie who messed up and then gave 200% to try and redeem it? No thanks!

Also, it goes without saying, but this hard-line approach contrasts STARKLY with your E-1 vote which rather implied you weren't convinced about joining the wagon at all. Your defence concerns me (for transparency, a better defence would be something like "I had genuine reservations because...", rather than "I actually had no hesitation but I inexplicably wrote a post where I pretended to do so").

In post 885, Vasex wrote:

In post 880, Battle Mage wrote:tell me more!

I don't understand what do you want to hear from me more on this topic

In post 880, Battle Mage wrote:I don't disagree we should let players talk - but aren't you the one who was saying we should elim people for being quiet?

Strange joke, because you are trying to make HUB's and Floo's activity equal to each other, which is absurd.

On the contrary, your position is absurd to me. You are suggesting that Floo is scum because they are a newbie who don't post much, irrespective of the gamestate, but HUB is town despite lurking only when the pressure is on them. The latter is surely scummier than the former, but you ignore the latter and overplay the former.

i'm not putting huge stock in HUB's activity level, but considering you seem to think activity is the be-all and end-all, your defence of HUB in spite of the lack of activity is baffling.

In post 883, Vasex wrote:

In post 880, Battle Mage wrote:Yeah HUB is an experienced and capable player. I don't think that player will ever going to be rattled or nervous in the very early stages of a newbie game. So what relevance does that really have? I think the bigger hurdle to overcome is whether HUB scum really goes all out to mis-elim a townie on Day 1. It's a brazen play. But in the scenario HUB is scum and did make that play, I absolutely wouldn't see his early, relatively more laissez-faire, approach to diminish that argument. I understand the read in isolation, but think it's basically a moot point in solving HUB's alignment.

When I talk about relaxing I mean not any nervous reaction on some events, I mean that mafia usually have some difficulties to talk on any ever topic. He was ready to talk the whole game and this is the style of townie.

I don't think that's true - scum generally find it easy to talk about a load of utter crap, especially in the early part of the game where it's less likely they will be held to account (because towns normally take longer to find their way on Day 1)

In post 860, KittyTacky wrote:Honestly if you hang me I don't mind that much, gives town more info. But get floo next if I'm hanged today.

what info do we get?

if you do actually flip town, I will obviously look at Floo tomorrow (although I'll be looking at everyone as noted)

In post 869, Vasex wrote:Floo, I was your main suspect. Has anything changed? Why?

I'm still suspecting you, but there are some other players I suspect. I want to question players somewhat before placing my votes clearly.

Let's start with you, why did you vote flow trap?

In post 465, Vasex wrote:VOTE: flow trap

In post 466, flow trap wrote:

In post 465, Vasex wrote:VOTE: flow trap

How confident are you

Unexplained vote (I haven't read the vote explanation in another post) + dodging the question for an explanation?

In post 888, Battle Mage wrote:in spite of the lack of activity

lack of activity only during this weekend (it warned about it) and during your v/la...
And I can easily ignore it both with activity of Floo today for some time...
I talked about their activity in the first day.
And this is not main point for me but if imagine situation that I have no idea about who of them is more townie and more scummie I can use at least the argument about their activity which is usually works, according to my experience and hundreds of games. This is even doesn't require to know the language. Rissky but working in most of the situation Especially if we are talking only about a side of HUB

In post 859, KittyTacky wrote:Floo is scummy to me because they are lurking hard. See Vasex's post count. Only 16 posts in the whole game. That's sus AF if I have to say.

Sorry but, as noted, that case is weak AF. And it gets weaker the more people say it, because I can understand 1 person being really obsessive over activity levels, but here we have: Vasex, TRQ and KittyTacky all saying that on Day 1, we have to elim someone solely on the basis they have the lowest post total. There is tons of the info in the game, and you even claim we'll get more info when you die - but then you actually don't seem to care about any of this info because your only scumread is the guy with the lowest post number, and even that is only something you took from Vasex.

Like, lurker-scum is a thing, but Floo has mis-elim written all over.

In post 893, Vasex wrote:

In post 888, Battle Mage wrote:in spite of the lack of activity

lack of activity only during this weekend (it warned about it) and during your v/la...

HUB just got prodded, so presumably wasn't V/LA? Or it's a Mod error.

In post 893, Vasex wrote: And I can easily ignore it both with activity of Floo today for some time...
I talked about their activity in the first day.
And this is not main point for me but if imagine situation that I have no idea about who of them is more townie and more scummie I can use at least the argument about their activity which is usually works, according to my experience and hundreds of games. This is even doesn't require to know the language. Rissky but working in most of the situation Especially if we are talking only about a side of HUB

yes I do appreciate it's not easy with the language barrier, but I believe we can do better than a random punt based on post tally. Like, if there's an actual case for Floo being scum based on those posts, I'm listening. But at the moment, I see a near majority of players quite content to see Floo die for no good reason, which makes me think Floo is very likely to be town.

In post 892, floo wrote:Let's start with you, why did you vote flow trap?

In post 892, floo wrote:Unexplained vote (I haven't read the vote explanation in another post) + dodging the question for an explanation?

He was annoying and made difficult to understand his side, usually townies should behave in other way and not to create problems.
I had no strong explanation for my voice in ft. I wanted to hang you more than FT (maybe even Ydra), but my townies HUB and TRQ decided to hang FT, and I decided to play with them, because I trust them and they should understand the game better than me. Nothing has changed much by the way. Maybe only Kitty as mafia will shade a bit HUB, but we need to hear him before that and after that to make an output

In post 894, Battle Mage wrote:Vasex, TRQ and KittyTacky all saying that on Day 1, we have to elim someone solely on the basis they have the lowest post total.

Wait a minute, this is not true. This is day two. On the first day nobody hanged anybody for the amount of posts

In post 882, floo wrote:I'd be concerned more than satisfied with Kitty's sacrificial comment, in that a town!Kitty should recognize the difficulty of winning 5p ELO. Multiple players have already concluded that Kitty is a forced policy elim.

I agree KittyTacky's willingness to be elimmed today without much fight isn't pro-town. Although it's not a policy elim at all - we're just elimming the scummiest player.

In post 897, Vasex wrote:

In post 894, Battle Mage wrote:Vasex, TRQ and KittyTacky all saying that on Day 1, we have to elim someone solely on the basis they have the lowest post total.

Wait a minute, this is not true. This is day two. On the first day nobody hanged anybody for the amount of posts

ah that's just a typo. should be Day 2 - but point still stands.