Mafiascum.net

In post 918, Dunnstral wrote:

I wouldn't fake claim

, no worries.

Were Titus to flip non-Mason, this would not bode well for you.

In post 925, Wake1 wrote:

In post 918, Dunnstral wrote:

I wouldn't fake claim

, no worries.

Were Titus to flip non-Mason, this would not bode well for you.

That's not going to happen

Also it was a jokey joke for Zach but none of those allowed, right?

In post 924, Titus wrote:

In post 923, Wake1 wrote:

In post 915, Titus wrote: Third,

you'd have to be exceptionally dumb

to seriously think I'd fakeclaim mason day 1 as scum.

Don't even.

I'm sure you and I in the past have tried ridiculous things that did pay off.

Nothing can be put past a skilled Scum player.

A skilled deceiver would want people to think he or she wouldn't/couldn't do something outrageous.

This is a strawman.

No it's not.

People aren't dumb to think you could do something outrageous like fakeclaim mason Day 1 as Scum.

I may not know how your inner gears spin, but I know they're usually spinning quite intricately.

You saying you couldn't/wouldn't do something... does not mean you could not or would not do that very thing.

In post 926, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 925, Wake1 wrote:

In post 918, Dunnstral wrote:

I wouldn't fake claim

, no worries.

Were Titus to flip non-Mason, this would not bode well for you.

That's not going to happen

Time will tell.

In post 927, Wake1 wrote:

In post 924, Titus wrote:

In post 923, Wake1 wrote:

In post 915, Titus wrote: Third,

you'd have to be exceptionally dumb

to seriously think I'd fakeclaim mason day 1 as scum.

Don't even.

I'm sure you and I in the past have tried ridiculous things that did pay off.

Nothing can be put past a skilled Scum player.

A skilled deceiver would want people to think he or she wouldn't/couldn't do something outrageous.

This is a strawman.

No it's not.

People aren't dumb to think you could do something outrageous like fakeclaim mason Day 1 as Scum.

I may not know

exactly

how your inner gears spin, but I know they're usually spinning quite intricately.

You saying you couldn't/wouldn't do something... does not mean you could not or would not do that very thing.

That's the thing. Any obvtown reaction is obvtown because it would be ridiculous for scum. You can argue any townie is scum with this method.

Titus wrote:Zach
Implosion pushes Zach early wanting him to be the "first wagon of the game" 8481 says that Zach is scummy but has no reasons. 165 and surrounding are hostile to Zach questioning VLAs (which town shouldn't do anyway but the point here is Implosion is hostile to Zach. VOICE OF MOD: 236 is a filler question. 239 Zach is close to townreading Zach (doesn't say why). 258 implosion says that Zach's response in 227 is consistent with town being improperly wagoned. Again, no reason.

This is in fact a timeline of my Zach read... you don't appear to see any of the context around anything though. I often say things without reasons early on in the game, and am always willing to supply those reasons if asked. Although you should have been able to glean from my 78 my reason for thinking he was scum at that point (that he was overstating how active the game was). 82 didn't give me a townread, but it did give me an inkling that putting Zach under pressure would allow me to read him better; hence, I asked for a wagon. I also hardly see how you're getting a tone of "hostility" from my posting; I think from 165 it's fairly clear that I felt I was misinterpreting him and was trying to figure out how. 236 is hardly a "filler question"; I still hadn't gotten an answer for how I was misinterpreting him, and I needed to be sure that I wasn't interpreting it correctly because that interpretation didn't make sense and it was legitimately the main thing that was giving me scummy vibes from him at that point (contingent on me not misinterpreting it). I would say that calling something consistent with town being improperly wagoned is a reason; it's not an in-depth reason, but it is a reason. Again, I'm always happy to elaborate on any reasoning I may have given; in this case, I felt like the emotional content of 227, in particular the extent of outrage at his being wagoned, felt consistent and like it wasn't being manufactured.

Saying that me pushing Zach was "mirroring a popular opinion" is kind of objectively wrong? I was the one to vote Zach after shannon's rvs (so me calling him scummy is in no way whatsoever me mirroring a popular opinion). After me, Nos, Dunn, you, and Performer voted Zach. And IMMEDIATELY after that wagon reaches 6 people, by far the largest in the game, I say that I'm starting to townread Zach. I honestly have no idea what game you're reading, Titus, in which all of my stances apart from my sickofit stance are "mirroring popular opinions."

With regards to you, my opinions did somewhat follow popular opinion. Sue me. I have no idea what you're saying when you say "I'm one of the closest players that he's given reasons for in this game," either. Me talking about AGar had nothing to do with you, either; you just happened to be the subject of his post. I'd be criticizing that post no matter who it was attacking, I'm not criticizing it for attacking someone who is town, i'm criticizing it for the content. The timing of it with me townreading you/your mason claim are coincidental; I had some motivation to do something with this game, so I went back to my list of people I was townreading and started looking to sort the people I hadn't yet sorted. I looked at boem's iso and nothing stuck out and then I looked at AGar's iso and saw the wall post, looked at it, and saw a lot of lines of "this is bad" with no explanation, so I looked at it in more depth.

In other news Zach is really, really transparently town.

16 pages worth of votes yowee

vc 1.09

Zachstralkita (1):

Mirhawk

Sickofit1138 (1):

PeregrineV

Dunnstral (3):

Sickofit1138, Varsoon, Wake88

podoboq (1):

Performer

Titus (5):

podoboq, AGar, shannon, Transcend, Lapsa

Mirhawk (1):

implosion

Varsoon (1):

Dunnstral

implosion (2):

Zachstralkita, Titus

PeregrineV (1):

ALmost50

Not Voting:

Airick10, Nosferatu, Boem_u_dusi

With

19

votes,

10

to lynch.

Deadline: (expired on 2016-07-05 23:38:55)

Airick10 is

V/LA

until

6/27

.
AGar is

V/LA

until

6/27

.

Implosion town btw, just wanted to reaafirm

Nope, Waketown

Perhaps, dumb but town

In post 935, Dunnstral wrote:Perhaps, dumb but town

You can personally attack someone all you want but it's not doing you any favors.

Wake, what's the ETA on that updated reads list?

In post 937, Zachstralkita wrote:Wake, what's the ETA on that updated reads list?

When I feel like it.

If you consider dumb a personal attack, maybe you should stop being dumb.

Dumb also is not a personal attack. If someone is being dumb, should we have a special word so you're feelings don't get hurt when you are indeed being dumb?

In post 939, Titus wrote:If you consider dumb a personal attack, maybe you should stop being dumb.

Dumb also is not a personal attack. If someone is being dumb, should we have a special word so

you're

feelings don't get hurt when you are indeed being dumb?

I hope you're on your phone.

It's okay, I knew someone that always said wan't.

My autocorrect is evil.

In post 939, Titus wrote:If you consider dumb a personal attack, maybe you should stop being dumb.

Dumb also is not a personal attack. If someone is being dumb, should we have a special word so you're feelings don't get hurt when you are indeed being dumb?

If this is Scum-Titus, it's very subtle Scum-Titus. Looking past the ironic illiteracy I see Scum-Titus very cautiously trying trying to get a dig in... in hopes of stirring division. Town-Titus I doubt would try to miscontrue 'dumb' as something other than a personal attack, while at the same time trying to play the 'feelings angle' to try and rile someone up. She did something similar in that Gundam game where she was Scum but played peace-maker yet tried to sow little seeds of discontent. At the moment I feel comfortable with this not for her words but for her subtle behavior.

VOTE: Titus

Wake is like, policy lynch material with these cases

I honestly have no idea how to read anything Wake has posted as alignment-indicative.

Wake88 wrote:

In post 939, Titus wrote:If you consider dumb a personal attack, maybe you should stop being dumb.

Dumb also is not a personal attack. If someone is being dumb, should we have a special word so you're feelings don't get hurt when you are indeed being dumb?

If this is Scum-Titus, it's very subtle Scum-Titus. Looking past the ironic illiteracy I see Scum-Titus very cautiously trying trying to get a dig in... in hopes of stirring division. Town-Titus I doubt would try to miscontrue 'dumb' as something other than a personal attack, while at the same time trying to play the 'feelings angle' to try and rile someone up. She did something similar in that Gundam game where she was Scum but played peace-maker yet tried to sow little seeds of discontent. At the moment I feel comfortable with this not for her words but for her subtle behavior.

VOTE: Titus

In post 944, implosion wrote:I honestly have no idea how to read anything Wake has posted as alignment-indicative.

There's no way to. That's why I said I had no desire to talk to Wake and he's a vig/lynch.

Wait a second










Implosian's avatar is a gif

In post 947, Dunnstral wrote:Wait a second










Implosian's avatar is a gif

UNVOTE: implosion