Mafiascum.net

If I were pinned into it I'd be following you onto Fitz too

Like you keep seeing things that aren't there because they make you feel better at the game than you actually are

In post 1536, Flubbernugget wrote:I understand scum is hunting masons. I don't think suggesting a mass claim is the best way to do that.

My scum list is still jjh egg and wave and I like my vote

A) No you aren't pinned onto Fitz because you're not silly enough to put both your scumbuddies in the top three.

How's that chainsaw going for you btw?
It must be better than discussing Fitz's open hypocrisy.

Speaking of which what do you think about that?

Haven't had the chance to look at your meta dive yet. I've seen him make crazy claims before so I'm not particularly phased atm

BTW if you want to play the hypocrisy game your pre flipped associatives are significantly worse play than the Mason suggestion

And Fitz isn't the first one to suggest a Mason claim anyway but don't let that get in the way of your petulant ego

In post 1628, Flubbernugget wrote:Haven't had the chance to look at your meta dive yet. I've seen him make crazy claims before so I'm not particularly phased atm

It is simple.

As Town there is verifiable evidence Fitz only wants masons to claim if they are about to be mislynched. And Fitz tried to shut down mason talk.

Here he does no such thing despite all other things similar.

This means his role PM is red and he scumclaimed.

In post 1630, Flubbernugget wrote:And Fitz isn't the first one to suggest a Mason claim anyway but don't let that get in the way of your petulant ego

Again confidence isn't a sign of an ego issue.

I am pointing out a direct contradiction between his townplay and here.

It is also a matter of when. He asked for it when Town is and clearly didn't know who the masons were. He asked for a claim at such a point where it would be very anti Town to do so.

In post 1629, Flubbernugget wrote:BTW if you want to play the hypocrisy game your pre flipped associatives are significantly worse play than the Mason suggestion

Lol preflip associations are amazing in a setup like this.

Keep floundering.

The meta there is a nice bonus but I didn't like the things he said during or after that post so it's not the only thing either. No quicklynching though

This game has been nothing more than mislynches and town is ahead

In post 1635, Flubbernugget wrote:This game has been nothing more than mislynches and town is ahead

Yes because scum don't know who the masons are.

Look at Open 665.

If scum don't drop the masons they are gonna get wrecked and Fitz knows it.

You seriously don't understand the difference between Mason hinting and saying masons should claim?

Hunting

E Honestly there's so much wrong with your citation but I would rather see Fitz comment on it than me

The other people in this game could do with showing up. I want to talk with Egg. No rush though atm.

In post 1575, havingfitz wrote:

In post 1573, Egg wrote:I know this was probably supposed to be intentionally difficult, but it still kinda reeks

It was only partially difficult. There's a lot of uncertainty there too.

I still have suspicions towards my towniest reads and doubts towards my scummiest. So ranking them is useless imo. Just helps scum manipulate town towards a consensus on scum read townies.

Also conveniently leaves everyone else with no idea where you even stand and opens you up to hop anyone wagon you feel you need to if you are scum. What are you doing to try to sort the uncertainty?

sesq wrote:its smart to play pressure with scumhunting but if you try to criticize people's play without being specific you're just being a chungus

So you think you were being specific when you said someone's play (was it sun?) was ass and didn't say why?

math wrote:Anyone not on Fitz explain why they townread Fitz.

I don't. Just more confident in sesq being scum. If this turns into havingfitz vs wave, I'll vote havingfitz but I think a sesq lynch is still viable and I don't really like the names on the havingfitz wagon (sesq and bombcat are both there).

wave wrote:Had a light townread on Mantichora.

Did you ever say why? I don't remember that. Either way, can you explain it to me now?

flubber wrote:This game has been nothing more than mislynches and town is ahead

Yeah, this. We're down a mason and have yet to lynch scum. It's not going well and I don't see how math feels that "town is ahead". If math ends up being scum (I was townreading transcend so meh), I'll definitely be looking at people who have been wagoned already.

jjh wrote:there is plenty of area for meaningful discussion and we do not want to rush this

jjh wrote:The other people in this game could do with showing up. I want to talk with Egg. No rush though atm.

What's up

Fitz suggesting mason claiming is up. Where do you stand on that post and the one immediately after? Not so much the core concept but the posts themselves.

I don't like it but his logic sounds slightly more town-minded than sesq did when suggesting the same thing. I can understand wanting to avoid possible 1v1s between masons and scum, but I don't think masons claiming now is worth it. I can also see mathblade's arguement that scum would love to know masons and would be willing to take a chance to make it happen. Basically I see both sides of it and mantichora's play is still a big part of what pushes my read over the edge to scumreading havingfitz. And I realize I'm rambling about the concept when you wanted more on the actual posts, but that's where my head is at on this. The posts themselves, like I said, sound town-minded. Havingfitz is probably capable of deciding at night he'd make that move and then coming in and making it sound good though. There are reasons I'm more confident in sesq, and even bombcat, being scum. I feel very waffly on havingfitz.

Wait, Bombcat? Why is Bombcat scum? There's a whole pile of shit in his iso, but the parts where he actually says things are really town-minded.

@egg: ass as in scummy

Jjh, mason fishing.

Sesq, right. You consider that specific?

i dont have to be

read my posts

K.

sesq wrote:its smart to play pressure with scumhunting but if you try to criticize people's play without being specific you're just being a chungus

.