Mafiascum.net

it was a shitty push and you could've pushed literally anywhere else and it would've been better

have we played any games together except cats and the mu game you subbed out of

In post 75, Chisa Yukizome wrote:it was a shitty push and you could've pushed literally anywhere else and it would've been better

have we played any games together except cats and the mu game you subbed out of

None that are finished. And just because you don't get info the same way I do doesn't make it shitty, but you're entitled to your subjective opinion.

I think it was a dumb push because I think pushing on things that are town doesn't get you anything

pushing on things that are scummy is good because duh

pushing on things that are nai is sometimes good because you can see reactions to you pushing on something nai + it can believably be seen as scummy

but pushing on towny things is bad because towns responses aren't any more consistent than mafia

and yes ofc I didn't include finished ones

In post 59, lucca261 wrote:

In post 35, Aubrey wrote:

In post 34, lucca261 wrote:VOTE: CommKnight

hey people, what's up?

I knew your name looked familiar. You were in that unpleasant Watchman game.

was that the one that Grey got force replaced and everybody was fighting everyone? I think I remember that. it made me quit mafia, for like, six months. so, how are ya? any reads so far?

VOTE: Cheeky

serious vote.

Yea. That was the one. Cheers to hoping this one is better.

--
as for reads, I don't have anything super sufficient yet.

I'm not overly keen on Jamie right now as everyone else is. 36, asking for a vote count after two pages in, just reads as an attempt to seem productive and concerned about the general game state. 3 scrolls & a back-space button would have given him the info he needed. His most recent post, 71, also rubs me the wrong way a bit. It makes me wonder if he is trying to figure out the site meta, so that he doesn't step on toes later, when he should just play the game as he sees fit naturally. When I transitioned to MS from my home site, I don't remember being really concerned with the site meta, and began to understand it through my own experiences.

I also don't see his vote overly towny either as everyone is saying it is. Scum know town wants to get out of RVS, so naturally they will also be looking for reasons to vote someone with stronger reasoning than RVS.

--

Chisa I like simply because they are being open & throwing out reads in 68. Haven't done a deeper read on whatever they and cheeky are currently arguing about.

tldr is we're probably both town arguing over something stupid

cheeky could be scum but idts now

In post 77, Chisa Yukizome wrote:I think it was a dumb push because I think pushing on things that are town doesn't get you anything

pushing on things that are scummy is good because duh

pushing on things that are nai is sometimes good because you can see reactions to you pushing on something nai + it can believably be seen as scummy

but pushing on towny things is bad because towns responses aren't any more consistent than mafia

Yeah but how do you know that Awoo is town? I didnt find what he did was clearly town and how dumb can my push be when it's created all this content? It got me a read on Awoo, Jamie and you. So keep calling it dumb whatevs.

You being so sure of people's alignments and you not trolling are giving me bad vibes.

I think awoo is town for l-1 vote and response to Jamie over it

me not trolling = me scum is a dumb thing

not gonna elaborate for obvious reasons

(but seriously please don't say things like that given that I can't respond to it for said obvious reasons)

In post 82, Chisa Yukizome wrote:I think awoo is town for l-1 vote and response to Jamie over it

me not trolling = me scum is a dumb thing

not gonna elaborate for obvious reasons

I don't agree with the L-1 and jump but I agree with the reaction to Jamie.

I don't think the jump is townie but it's also not scummy

it was actually l-2 but I think making the vote in that situation and the way they did it is townie

In post 72, CheekyTeeky wrote:

In post 64, Awoo wrote:I hopped off of a random wagon onto a serious vote. Got a problem with that, collegeboy?

Not to mention jamiett has a towny vote on me. Even though he's completely wrong about the site meta, it's a town thought process.

So you're voting quick for being too precious? Agree Jamie feels town this time.

VOTE: lucca serious omgus vote.

This is a horrible vote. Like you didn't even talk about Lucca in this post and yet you "seriously OMGUS" them.

VOTE: CheekyTeeky

In post 59, lucca261 wrote:

In post 35, Aubrey wrote:

In post 34, lucca261 wrote:VOTE: CommKnight

hey people, what's up?

I knew your name looked familiar. You were in that unpleasant Watchman game.

was that the one that Grey got force replaced and everybody was fighting everyone? I think I remember that. it made me quit mafia, for like, six months. so, how are ya? any reads so far?

VOTE: Cheeky

serious vote.

Uh Quick have you read this? Maybe have a little think about why instead of being so opportunistic. I want a response from Lucca so I'm not moving my vote so FoS Quick.

In post 87, CheekyTeeky wrote:

In post 59, lucca261 wrote:

In post 35, Aubrey wrote:

In post 34, lucca261 wrote:VOTE: CommKnight

hey people, what's up?

I knew your name looked familiar. You were in that unpleasant Watchman game.

was that the one that Grey got force replaced and everybody was fighting everyone? I think I remember that. it made me quit mafia, for like, six months. so, how are ya? any reads so far?

VOTE: Cheeky

serious vote.

Uh Quick have you read this? Maybe have a little think about why instead of being so opportunistic. I want a response from Lucca so I'm not moving my vote so FoS Quick.

OK. What did you want Lucca to answer?

In post 88, Quick wrote:OK. What did you want Lucca to answer?

That kinda defeats the purpose of the excercise.

In post 89, CheekyTeeky wrote:

In post 88, Quick wrote:OK. What did you want Lucca to answer?

That kinda defeats the purpose of the excercise.

What information could you possibly get for a naked OMGUS?

In post 90, Quick wrote:

In post 89, CheekyTeeky wrote:

In post 88, Quick wrote:OK. What did you want Lucca to answer?

That kinda defeats the purpose of the excercise.

What information could you possibly get for a naked OMGUS?

You're just rephrasing your original question. I get my best reads from OMGUS reactions. Your continued interference is weird. Why aren't you scum hunting instead of calling me scum for scum hunting? Do you even have any reads?

In post 91, CheekyTeeky wrote:

In post 90, Quick wrote:

In post 89, CheekyTeeky wrote:

In post 88, Quick wrote:OK. What did you want Lucca to answer?

That kinda defeats the purpose of the excercise.

What information could you possibly get for a naked OMGUS?

You're just rephrasing your original question. I get my best reads from OMGUS reactions. Your continued interference is weird. Why aren't you scum hunting instead of calling me scum for scum hunting? Do you even have any reads?

I think you could be Scum. Besides that, no I don't really have any reads. Should I have reads at this stage?

jfc

please don't have arguments like this

quick is very very probably town

cheeky is probably town

go channel your excess hostility at people more likely to be scum

VOTE: commknight

also quick the tldr of rvs wagons since I just reread #49

announce your l-1s and policy lynch anyone who hammers

In post 94, Chisa Yukizome wrote:VOTE: commknight

also quick the tldr of rvs wagons since I just reread #49

announce your l-1s and policy lynch anyone who hammers

Like I said, I have seen someone claim "oops" and got away with it. Its easy to say the correct theory, but the correct theory doesn't necessary get implemented.

:/ he started it. Who do you think is scum Chisa?

Pedit why Commknight?

random name from my not townread list

well not random it's cause of the weeb comment

In post 97, Chisa Yukizome wrote:random name from my not townread list

well not random it's cause of the weeb comment

-_-' so you criticise my argument which is founded on someone being intentionally obtuse/opportunistic and then direct our attention back to RVS reasoning?

At least this is more in line of my expectations of town you lol.

I mean when said list is about 3 people it hardly counts as rvs reasoning tbh