In post 287, keyenpeydee wrote:Tbh I don't find Eric that scummy. As I stated in Post 159, I am convincing him to form a case or reads because he simply wants the game to quicken. If he wants that, then why don't he form a case rather than complaining such things. That's what I'm trying to point out. I also stated that I can see him as newbtown but also stated that he has a high percent chance of being scum. Of course, I didn't vote because I still consider the newbtown thing.
Alban, is that your laundering case on me?
And I also find Aubrey as my first real town read.
Not laundering. I have already put forth my suspicion and vote on you.
See this is what I don't like. You giving another town-cred. Not coz it's to a player I suspect, but why no reasons, especially if he is your first real town read. Surely that guarantees a reason?
In post 298, alban wrote:LQ, why are you so engrossed in people's mafia playing experiences? Explain please.
You should be more interested in their expertise. And there's no correlation between the two. The q you should be asking is if anyone has played a game before with the player you are suspecting, and if there's anything different about them.
Honestly, I think meta reads are mostly shit. The reason I want to ask about things
such as(!)
experience is because it gives me a glimpse into how they play. A player like keyen is going to play differently than someone who has played very little short forum mafia games. The difficult part is trying to understand how these differences affect play and how you can read a player knowing their experience they have going forward in the game.
I'll give you an example that should be easy to understand.
keyen plays games that are likely very fast paced. This means that reads also need to be made at a faster pace than places like this one where days are spread out over weeks instead of hours. This is why I am a little weary of keyen, because he has really only given us a single substantial read (to my knowledge). It seems at least uncharacteristic for keyen to sit back and formulate reads at a slow pace when he is used to making reads at a much faster pace.
I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!
You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.
In post 287, keyenpeydee wrote:Tbh I don't find Eric that scummy. As I stated in Post 159, I am convincing him to form a case or reads because he simply wants the game to quicken. If he wants that, then why don't he form a case rather than complaining such things. That's what I'm trying to point out. I also stated that I can see him as newbtown but also stated that he has a high percent chance of being scum. Of course, I didn't vote because I still consider the newbtown thing.
Alban, is that your laundering case on me?
And I also find Aubrey as my first real town read.
Not laundering. I have already put forth my suspicion and vote on you.
See this is what I don't like. You giving another town-cred. Not coz it's to a player I suspect, but why no reasons, especially if he is your first real town read. Surely that guarantees a reason?
Do you even imply gut feeling to yourself or?
And maybe it's in the person, like you need no explanations to town read someone. It's just how you feel you read the person.
|| Mini Normal 1848 || The Hogwarts Mafia || Valentine's Day || The Divergent Series || Another Mafia || Cities & Beaches || Moonlight || 13 Reasons Why ||
Maybe you're right. Maybe it's because people there are posting more and I can form a read fast. Unlike here, Some people are inactive or just lurking or being silent and that's maybe I can't form a read as fast as I can.
|| Mini Normal 1848 || The Hogwarts Mafia || Valentine's Day || The Divergent Series || Another Mafia || Cities & Beaches || Moonlight || 13 Reasons Why ||
If it's a gut feeling, how can it be a 'first real town read'? A gut feeling would leave some scope for a scum!flip, which your post doesn't convey. This is contradictory.
In post 298, alban wrote:LQ, why are you so engrossed in people's mafia playing experiences? Explain please.
You should be more interested in their expertise. And there's no correlation between the two. The q you should be asking is if anyone has played a game before with the player you are suspecting, and if there's anything different about them.
Honestly, I think meta reads are mostly shit. The reason I want to ask about things
such as(!)
experience is because it gives me a glimpse into how they play. A player like keyen is going to play differently than someone who has played very little short forum mafia games. The difficult part is trying to understand how these differences affect play and how you can read a player knowing their experience they have going forward in the game.
I'll give you an example that should be easy to understand.
keyen plays games that are likely very fast paced. This means that reads also need to be made at a faster pace than places like this one where days are spread out over weeks instead of hours. This is why I am a little weary of keyen, because he has really only given us a single substantial read (to my knowledge). It seems at least uncharacteristic for keyen to sit back and formulate reads at a slow pace when he is used to making reads at a much faster pace.
So you trust a player's words about their experience vis-a-vis their documented meta? Meta could a shit, but a scum's statement about their experience could be simply false.
|| Mini Normal 1848 || The Hogwarts Mafia || Valentine's Day || The Divergent Series || Another Mafia || Cities & Beaches || Moonlight || 13 Reasons Why ||
|| Mini Normal 1848 || The Hogwarts Mafia || Valentine's Day || The Divergent Series || Another Mafia || Cities & Beaches || Moonlight || 13 Reasons Why ||
In post 298, alban wrote:LQ, why are you so engrossed in people's mafia playing experiences? Explain please.
You should be more interested in their expertise. And there's no correlation between the two. The q you should be asking is if anyone has played a game before with the player you are suspecting, and if there's anything different about them.
Honestly, I think meta reads are mostly shit. The reason I want to ask about things
such as(!)
experience is because it gives me a glimpse into how they play. A player like keyen is going to play differently than someone who has played very little short forum mafia games. The difficult part is trying to understand how these differences affect play and how you can read a player knowing their experience they have going forward in the game.
I'll give you an example that should be easy to understand.
keyen plays games that are likely very fast paced. This means that reads also need to be made at a faster pace than places like this one where days are spread out over weeks instead of hours. This is why I am a little weary of keyen, because he has really only given us a single substantial read (to my knowledge). It seems at least uncharacteristic for keyen to sit back and formulate reads at a slow pace when he is used to making reads at a much faster pace.
So you trust a player's words about their experience vis-a-vis their documented meta? Meta could a shit, but a scum's statement about their experience could be simply false.
Its not usually something people lie about because most people don't even factor in experience as a metric to read people by! My whole philosophy on reading people is based on the
person
behind the action. You cannot always play by the book because some people do not play that way. If everyone played by the book then the game would be about who plays by the book the best. This game is just as much about psychology as it is about optimal play. To ignore the facets that make up the personality of the player is a grave mistake! Playing optimally only works when there is psychological factors that are accounted for. You cannot play the game on mathematics alone! The game the players and the stances people would make could literally never get started without some catalyst for understanding the motive of the player behind the action.
I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!
You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.
Maybe you're right. Maybe it's because people there are posting more and I can form a read fast. Unlike here, Some people are inactive or just lurking or being silent and that's maybe I can't form a read as fast as I can.
IDK about you, but because of my experience playing fast paced games, I try to make reads even in RVS. I think this game has had enough content and been a fast enough pace for you to make reads after I entered the thread and the activity skyrocketed.
I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!
You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.
In post 307, keyenpeydee wrote:Didn't I tell everybody that I town read everyone by default? And yes, Aubrey is my first real town read. The rest are just null town.
I don't think you are getting my point.
I understood that Aubrey is your town read. I want to know the reason.
If it's a gut feeling and you can't provide a reason, how is it 'real' anymore?
Or is your gut always right?
In post 298, alban wrote:LQ, why are you so engrossed in people's mafia playing experiences? Explain please.
You should be more interested in their expertise. And there's no correlation between the two. The q you should be asking is if anyone has played a game before with the player you are suspecting, and if there's anything different about them.
Honestly, I think meta reads are mostly shit. The reason I want to ask about things
such as(!)
experience is because it gives me a glimpse into how they play. A player like keyen is going to play differently than someone who has played very little short forum mafia games. The difficult part is trying to understand how these differences affect play and how you can read a player knowing their experience they have going forward in the game.
I'll give you an example that should be easy to understand.
keyen plays games that are likely very fast paced. This means that reads also need to be made at a faster pace than places like this one where days are spread out over weeks instead of hours. This is why I am a little weary of keyen, because he has really only given us a single substantial read (to my knowledge). It seems at least uncharacteristic for keyen to sit back and formulate reads at a slow pace when he is used to making reads at a much faster pace.
So you trust a player's words about their experience vis-a-vis their documented meta? Meta could a shit, but a scum's statement about their experience could be simply false.
Its not usually something people lie about because most people don't even factor in experience as a metric to read people by! My whole philosophy on reading people is based on the
person
behind the action. You cannot always play by the book because some people do not play that way. If everyone played by the book then the game would be about who plays by the book the best. This game is just as much about psychology as it is about optimal play. To ignore the facets that make up the personality of the player is a grave mistake! Playing optimally only works when there is psychological factors that are accounted for. You cannot play the game on mathematics alone! The game the players and the stances people would make could literally never get started without some catalyst for understanding the motive of the player behind the action.
Though I agree with you to a certain extent, it's all too vague.
Let's talk about me.
So, before joining MafiaScum, I played about 10 games of mafia, 5 face-to-face (dayphase of 20-30 minutes) and 5 whatsapp games (dayphase of 48-120 hours, pre-decided at the start of the game). I have finished games here in last 9 months (all with a 2 week dayphase).
How have you read me so far, and how do you see my personality? And how does my experience factor in to make reads on my personality?
In post 281, chilledtea wrote:
The comparison of arguments. It is meaningless unless you know for certain that one set of argument has to be correct.
Meaning, say alban's arguments are correct/consistent because he is town.
You comparing your set of arguments to his, either to solidify your set of arguments in his eyes (silly since he could be scum) or to weaken his set of arguments (not possible since that would mean you are scum). There is not much point to be made with that comparison in my eyes.
Alban seems to be voting me cause we differ in a few reads, and because I went against Eric for reasons he considered thin. In my POV his arguments were just as thin as mine were against Eric. Hell, LQ even AGREES with me for the pushes I made yet here you two are throwing a hissy fit over it. I've already explained that my read wasn't a strong damnable reason to vote him, but it was questionable and worth pushing. Bite me. As I said the Dave argument did not interest me, and keeping my shit vote on Gamma wasn't really worth anything.
In post 279, alban wrote:
About Eric, no, sorry there was nothing obviously scummy. He just wanted to quicken the game, and I kinda see his pov. You can say the same thing (about me feeling Eric was trustworthy coz he echoed my thoughts), and justify your town read about Dave, but the thing is his reads follow yours, where it is easy for him to sheep you, whereas Eric was alone then..in any case, it's a minor point. Just that don't given him towncred coz his thoughts appear similar to yours (I am comforted by reading your 2nd para - that it could come from either alignment).
I never said he was obviously 100% scummy. I said his activity was questionable, and a few people agreed with me. From memory, others just passed him off as easy lynchbait and went on their marry way. Fine, but that wasn't going to stop me from pursuing him.
The two of you not liking Day 1 and thinking it a bore is not the same as Dave suspecting Transcend for the same exact reasoning I did in my 658 town game. Anybody can sit there and say "
Omg day one is so lame, lets just lynch someone and move onto day 2. Omg day 1 sucks. lets get a move on and leave RVS. I'ma sit on my ass and do nothing useful
" That totally comes from scum or lazy ass noob town who doesn't know how to gather reads other than by NK analysis and a few other simple ways to try and find scum. Furthermore that action/attitude doesn't lead me to believe him possible town. Dave pushing Transcend for the exact same reason (literally) that I pushed him in 658 is a stronger way to begin determining his alignment however for myself. Hell, anybody pushing anybody would be a better tool to figure out one's alignment than what Eric was doing.
Regarding Keyen, my town lean is a good deal weaker than my Dave town lean. Needless to say he echoes my thoughts a bit regarding a few players and activities. Again, different than you and Eric finding day 1 a bore and useless. I maybe using the wrong words about how the two of you feel about day one, but I'm roughly in the right ball park here.
In post 279, alban wrote:
Keyen was definitely not lurking. I felt he was doing active-lurking. I am sure you know what it means. For me active lurking is more suspicious than just lurking.
I'm not going to fight you here. Yes I understand the difference, and I can kinda see where you are coming from here. That being said, I don't feel like Keyen is alone here which is why I'm a bit shocked you are only focusing on him.
In post 279, alban wrote:
About Gamma, well, 'shitting' on Keyen doesn't mean Gamma gets to go scot-free. It's just that I don't think Gamma did any fluffing. I found his playstyle normal.
Gamma hasnt impressed me and is full of fluff posts, or posts that dont expand into why he thinks or does X. Dave (though I townread him right now) could be placed in this position I think as well. This is why I'm questioning why you are only attacking Keyen. Do you townread those slots? What makes you not as suspect of them? Then we also have accounts that are straight up lurking, the Hydra even admitting to actively lurking. Surprised you haven't voiced concerns.
In post 249, chilledtea wrote:Initially the timing felt as if you were trying to derail the wagon on dave. It could also have been a vote, while not for derailing, for distancing.
Sometimes scum try to stay away from the topic at hand. Even if they don't want to directly influence the said topic.
Do you still find eric's slot scummy?
I've basically skimmed the last 3-4 pages. On a skim, I'm much happier with the slot. As I said, my major issue with him was his contraditive attitude. "
Hey guys lets narrow down some lynch options right out the gate and get a move on, while I go sit in the corner and do nothing but complain!
" When BTD said he asked for a replacement, I basically nulled the spot of its ever so light scum lean since it is so early in the game.
Regarding Dave, I just found his early posts playful shitty early day 1 activities. Eh. The argument that town would never vote themselves is farfetched, and a lie. Yea. Not a very interesting wagon in my eyes right out the gate.
--
Holy shit this game is on fire this morning.
Your case against Eric was thin. Which is why I wrote 134.
Either what you are saying is true or you are backtracking coz you realised LQ is more active and persistent than Eric.
Also your backtracking and explanation appears defensive, and hence, suspicious.
And your case against Keyen or I is that much thicker?
My argument: X person looks as if they maybe attempting to be faking a proactive town stance.
Your arguments: X person is pushing a thin argument early game. X person is lurky-ish,
but I'll ignore other players who are also lurky-ish
.
Why would I ignore? What incentive do you see for me to do that? Unless you are implying I am scum or that I am scum with 'other players who are lurky-ish', why would I ignore them? And if you are implying I am scum and that's why I am doing it, you have no case on me, but you are using my arguments against me to build a case on me. That's a bit of a stretch.
btw, why those small size comments?
Why would you ignore? hmm. From my POV you are attacking Keyen for actively lurking, but I see other slots that dont seem to be doing much more than him overall. Incentive? Either a townie who is trying to find scum or scum trying to push a lynch based on a lurking argument, but might have friends who are lurking as well. I haven't decided which you fall into. If anything I'm just trying to understand where your coming from. as for the twisting your arguments against you, notice how I haven't voted you. Notice how I'm not calling out to people to vote you and building a "
LYNCH HIM
" argument against you. All I'm doing is defending myself and trying to understand you.
In post 276, Aubrey wrote:I also un-voted the MOMENT Eric requested a replacement, not after he was replaced and LQ displayed immense activity. So scratch this crap of me backtracking cause
"I realized LQ is more active and persistent than Eric."
I agree with this. I had forgotten about the positioning of your unvote.
But that brings me to another q.
If you really thought Eric was scummy, you shouldn't have unvoted before clearing his successor. I am not saying you are scummy or townie for doing that, but you can't use that argument in your favour either.
Again, I thought Eric was questionable. 100% scum, hell 75%, not so much. I basically let go of those suspicions because I understood that, and wanted to see what the new replacement would do. I've always found it kinda silly to force people to have to answer for someone else's actions. Now of course if the slot had a lot of suspicious activity that I thought had a good chance of being scum driven, and we were a few days ahead in the game, then i wouldn't be so quick to erase previous doubts.
In post 307, keyenpeydee wrote:Didn't I tell everybody that I town read everyone by default? And yes, Aubrey is my first real town read. The rest are just null town.
....saying "
I town-read everyone and work from there
" is a bit different than "
I null town read and work from there
" I think your sending mixed signals, and basically work from nulls to X in a very slightly different way. It's like your taking the proven till innocent idea into account but you understand that the "innocent" really isn't innocent until proven so as well. Basically you work form null to X.
--
All this jibber jabber about which is better: taking into account skill level and time played seems pointless to me.
Lastly and most importantly to answer your question about small text Alban. Flair and drama!
In post 102, Toto wrote:Well, I didn't buy his response. He says that his two votes were meme. But I don't see how the second self vote is a meme vote.
If he is lynch bating he is doing a good job.
Why would scum vote for themselves seriously?
I saw it as a (bad) attempt to stall his own wagon by putting on a suicidal show. So they are not seriously trying to lynch themselves but the vote has some agenda behind it.
This is the second time I have seen an excuse for misinterpreting by this slot.
Are you talking about me here? I don't understand.
In post 298, alban wrote:LQ, why are you so engrossed in people's mafia playing experiences? Explain please.
You should be more interested in their expertise. And there's no correlation between the two. The q you should be asking is if anyone has played a game before with the player you are suspecting, and if there's anything different about them.
Honestly, I think meta reads are mostly shit. The reason I want to ask about things
such as(!)
experience is because it gives me a glimpse into how they play. A player like keyen is going to play differently than someone who has played very little short forum mafia games. The difficult part is trying to understand how these differences affect play and how you can read a player knowing their experience they have going forward in the game.
I'll give you an example that should be easy to understand.
keyen plays games that are likely very fast paced. This means that reads also need to be made at a faster pace than places like this one where days are spread out over weeks instead of hours. This is why I am a little weary of keyen, because he has really only given us a single substantial read (to my knowledge). It seems at least uncharacteristic for keyen to sit back and formulate reads at a slow pace when he is used to making reads at a much faster pace.
So you trust a player's words about their experience vis-a-vis their documented meta? Meta could a shit, but a scum's statement about their experience could be simply false.
Its not usually something people lie about because most people don't even factor in experience as a metric to read people by! My whole philosophy on reading people is based on the
person
behind the action. You cannot always play by the book because some people do not play that way. If everyone played by the book then the game would be about who plays by the book the best. This game is just as much about psychology as it is about optimal play. To ignore the facets that make up the personality of the player is a grave mistake! Playing optimally only works when there is psychological factors that are accounted for. You cannot play the game on mathematics alone! The game the players and the stances people would make could literally never get started without some catalyst for understanding the motive of the player behind the action.
Though I agree with you to a certain extent, it's all too vague.
Let's talk about me.
So, before joining MafiaScum, I played about 10 games of mafia, 5 face-to-face (dayphase of 20-30 minutes) and 5 whatsapp games (dayphase of 48-120 hours, pre-decided at the start of the game). I have finished games here in last 9 months (all with a 2 week dayphase).
How have you read me so far, and how do you see my personality? And how does my experience factor in to make reads on my personality?
I think you are trying to play the "correct" way too much. I understand wanting to read the wikis and getting info from them, but IMO (and I prolly say this as a minority) the game is best played by figuring shit out yourself. If you are smart enough, then eventually you will begin to get an intuitive grasp of what is happening itt. I have a lean Town on you because I don't think you know enough about the game to be using things from the wiki as a scum tactic. I think its more common for people that are relatively new to the game to go hog wild on looking shit up on the wiki and then not being able to use it as a scum tactic. Besides, most people don't even directly reference the wiki and I think that the substance you are giving by using the wiki looks Town given it is not used accurately. That's not a jab, I just think that keyen is saying more than you are giving him credit for. Although this looks like a contradiction, it is not. Keyen is still Scum hunting and that is not something that should be discarded, however, he is not really doing anything with his Scum hunting. He's made few stances and none of them look like anything solid. But its early, so for now, I rather look at other people like deer who have done jack all this game.
I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!
You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.
In post 102, Toto wrote:Well, I didn't buy his response. He says that his two votes were meme. But I don't see how the second self vote is a meme vote.
If he is lynch bating he is doing a good job.
Why would scum vote for themselves seriously?
I saw it as a (bad) attempt to stall his own wagon by putting on a suicidal show. So they are not seriously trying to lynch themselves but the vote has some agenda behind it.
This is the second time I have seen an excuse for misinterpreting by this slot.
Are you talking about me here? I don't understand.
Yes, I was talking about you. I can't be arsed to go find the other quote that you did this. I will say you do seem a little opportunistic like someone (forgot who) said. The jump on Dave wasn't a good look for you. I wouldn't argue the point if I was you cuz that would not be smart. I haven't seen you really make any kind of impact on this game as well.
I have a lot of people I am looking at right now. I wish I had like 4 votes.
I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!
You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.
In post 320, LicketyQuickety wrote:Yes, I was talking about you. I can't be arsed to go find the other quote that you did this. I will say you do seem a little opportunistic like someone (forgot who) said. The jump on Dave wasn't a good look for you. I wouldn't argue the point if I was you cuz that would not be smart. I haven't seen you really make any kind of impact on this game as well.
Let me get this straight. You throw a shade on me and I should just let it go without asking you to explain what you meant?
Also, like 5 people voted or wanted to vote him after I RVS voted and asked him a simple question which he refused to answer. If Dave is town, why am I the opportunistic one here? Why are you and Trascend (that's who you forgot, btw) not looking at anyone else in that wagon?
And how can you say I have no impact when that has been the only large wagon in this game. Now please do explain where I was 'excusing myself for misinterpreting things'.
In post 320, LicketyQuickety wrote:Yes, I was talking about you. I can't be arsed to go find the other quote that you did this. I will say you do seem a little opportunistic like someone (forgot who) said. The jump on Dave wasn't a good look for you. I wouldn't argue the point if I was you cuz that would not be smart. I haven't seen you really make any kind of impact on this game as well.
Let me get this straight. You throw a shade on me and I should just let it go without asking you to explain what you meant?
Also, like 5 people voted or wanted to vote him after I RVS voted and asked him a simple question which he refused to answer. If Dave is town, why am I the opportunistic one here? Why are you and Trascend (that's who you forgot, btw) not looking at anyone else in that wagon?
And how can you say I have no impact when that has been the only large wagon in this game. Now please do explain where I was 'excusing myself for misinterpreting things'.
We have not got a flip yet. Pre-flip, for shame.
In other words, you can base pretty much nothing on BW at this stage of the game. You do not pass go, you do not collect $200.
I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!
You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.
I've already explained that my read wasn't a strong damnable reason to vote him, but it was questionable and worth pushing. Bite me. As I said the Dave argument did not interest me, and keeping my shit vote on Gamma wasn't really worth anything. 
![:]](./images/smilies/icon_smiling.png "Cheerful Smile"){kind=icon}