Mafiascum.net

In post 269, CultOfAthena wrote:Texcat has done nothing to make me remember that he is in this game.

Care to have actual reads?

I feel like most of your opinions/reads have been sheeped and you're just pointing things out and not making conclusions on them. It's like you're deliberately remaining neutral to keep your options open.

In post 274, mozamis wrote: main thing thast pinged me abotu beef was tha tbig reads list post of his, that just looked so effing vague and empty.

You realize that every player who has posted reads has been pretty vague and empty, right? (most of them offer just a few sentences after each read) Try again.

I'll take the vague accusation proudly because I'm an intuitive big-picture kind of guy. It takes a while for me to figure out how to describe things and details bore me.

I'm sorry, real life went to shit, prod dodging for now. If I can't contribute by tomorrow I'll replace

Sorry.

Beefster, I don't think you have a very good perception of what a vague and empty read is.

In post 276, Beefster wrote:It takes a while for me to figure out how to describe things and details bore me.

a kindred spirit! me too, i like the overview approach!

gonna UNVOTE:
i was really flying on the caffiene when i voted him and there is a chance i was simply talking out of my ARSE.
he has responded well- i think its a fair point to say all reads are quite vague at this stage.
anyway, its all good for P.O.E!
Beef into town pile.

EP, I think 183 should answer your question.

In post 260, mozamis wrote:P.O.E town: Moz, thor, swims,money,flubber,maxous and cult.

Lynch in: Penguin (drops out of town bloc because no scumhunting yet),Bella, Beef, errant,klick,tex
so we got to the coin flip stage!
my scum team is prob. bella, beef and ??? atm

Town= Moz, beef, thor, swims, money, flubber, max and cult.
Lynch in: penguin, bella, errant, klick and tex.
more likely to hit scum than not!

VOTE: Bellaphant

In post 277, Bellaphant wrote:I'm sorry, real life went to shit, prod dodging for now. If I can't contribute by tomorrow I'll replace

Sorry.

can we get a wagon on bella going befor eshe does replace? Ideally lynch her asap?
All those "talk to me about xyz posts"...complete scum BS.

In post 270, CultOfAthena wrote:

In post 188, Klick wrote:Go into detail on that please? I'm very curious where you're getting a scumread on me from Bella.

Why did you completely ignore everything I said in 186 to ask Bella about why she agreed with me? Am I a leper or something?

You gave reasons for your suspicion. Bella didn't. I also have a lot of experience with Bella as a person and didn't expect her to be scumreading me at this stage.

Mozamis, how is wagoning her going to help at all if she's just said real life went to shit and she will try to post tomorrow? If your goal is just outright lynching her now that makes sense, but if you want pressure on her I don't see how that will help.

In post 219, Thor665 wrote:

In post 213, Maxous wrote:uhhhhhhh
this is a poor vote

why exactly is he voting flubber?

Why is it a poor vote?

Also, if you dislike my vote, why are you totally fine with Beefster's 210?

the highlighted quote answers the question.
i don't see a concise, clarified reason for the vote. It's jumbled up into wall posts that people have to struggle to figure out.

In post 177, Beefster wrote:Scum Lean:
Flubber - general sentiment, gut. I'm not really sure how to describe what it is that pings my scumdar with him. Maybe just that he comes off as manipulative, trying to run the show and gather towncred. *shrug*

i don't see a reason i would have a problem with Beefster's vote.

In post 284, Maxous wrote:

In post 219, Thor665 wrote:

In post 213, Maxous wrote:uhhhhhhh
this is a poor vote

why exactly is he voting flubber?

Why is it a poor vote?

Also, if you dislike my vote, why are you totally fine with Beefster's 210?

the highlighted quote answers the question.
i don't see a concise, clarified reason for the vote. It's jumbled up into wall posts that people have to struggle to figure out.

Didn't you have a problem with HeWhoSwims for skimming and not reading?

hmm finished.
Still saying no to a flubber wagon. Also no to a beefster wagon

for clarity:
my two scumreads are Penguin & Bella.
Two null-scum reads in Thor & Texcat

everyone else is fine

@money: I did but the point i'm getting at is that Thor might be doing it on purpose.

if your reasoning is hard to dig out from a bunch of wordy wall-posts then it's harder for town to call you out on it yes?

i've used that tactic before myself

Ah I better see what you are saying. I misunderstood, apologies.

Do you have any remarks on what I have said about Flub? It should be able to be gathered from my ISO. No one else has really had anything to say about it. I'd appreciate another opinion.

If it's about Flubber adapting his behaviour... I guess it's scum-ish to be very self conscious, but I'm not seeing it as that strong an argument right now. I find it hard to comment on. I'm not really seeing it as much as you seem to, either.

I think Flubber was being brash and a bit clumsy in the early game and changed his approach when he got a bit of flak for it.
I don't think it was particularly scum.

In post 290, Maxous wrote:I think Flubber was being brash and a bit clumsy in the early game and changed his approach when he got a bit of flak for it.
I don't think it was particularly scum.

Yeah I guess this puts it well. If he's town why would he not change his playstyle if it's not helping his game / his WC?

Mmm. I guess that's an equally valid interpretation. I think between this and reading too much into Beef I need to step back and maybe re-read some stuff.

In post 214, Klick wrote:I'm not comfortable with this Flubber wagon. This feels misguided and fishy.

Looking into this later today.

@Klick -- Did you look into this? What did you find?

In post 284, Maxous wrote:the highlighted quote answers the question.
i don't see a concise, clarified reason for the vote. It's jumbled up into wall posts that people have to struggle to figure out.

Okay, so to get this straight;

1. You didn't understand the reason for my vote.
2. You agree I have expressed issues with Flubber and you find them difficult to piece out.
3. So you have an issue with my info not being clear and easy to understand.
4. So you complain that the entire Flubber case is bad, and that my vote is poor instead of just asking me to state my reasoning.
5. You don't reveal this until I ask for you to clarify your stance.
6. Your beef with me is that you think I'm trying to intentionally be hard to understand - ignoring that I'm the one getting actual info out of you by asking direct questions.



What's your issue with the Flubber wagon again?
I feel like I'm missing something here.

In post 286, Maxous wrote:hmm finished.
Still saying no to a flubber wagon. Also no to a beefster wagon

You are aware that the Beefster wagon just died and I killed it, right?

In post 286, Maxous wrote:my two scumreads are Penguin & Bella.
Two null-scum reads in Thor & Texcat

everyone else is fine

I like your scumreads fine.
I can understand null on Tex, and even though I have a vast amount of info to parse for my alignment I understand that people get lazy and refuse to read me.
But you're fine on *everyone* else?
Like, they're all decent town reads for you?

Can you explain why Errant and HeWhoSwims are decent reads for you?
Because I'm not there with either of them.

In post 291, HeWhoSwims wrote:Yeah I guess this puts it well. If he's town why would he not change his playstyle if it's not helping his game / his WC?

Yeah I guess this puts it well. If he's why would he not change his playstyle if it's not helping his game / his WC?

Why is your sentence valid and mine isn't?

Well, that makes sense too. It's just that I don't consider it necessarily incriminating towards Flubber to change his tone if it's not helping his WC. Sure, he can do the same as scum, so that would make it NAI. I wasn't saying (or trying to say) that it was towny; it just doesn't look like something necessarily scummy for me.

I would make the suggestion that, as town, theoretically you're playing the game to scumhunt and when as scum you're playing the game not to get lynched.
Therefore, if your scumhunting style involves you getting some dirt on you - then if you've been playing as long as Flubber you are already aware of this and have accepted it.
So why the change?

Seems a reasonable point of suspicion to talk about to my mind.

I don't quite get the "getting dirt on you" part, is that about me or Flubber?

As town you scumhunt yes, but also townhunt. Playing town is not just scumhunting at least for me... it's also making sure you're game solving where you can, in whatever way.

Oh wait. Get it.

You have a point there. That definitely makes it more suspicious.

In post 275, Beefster wrote:

In post 269, CultOfAthena wrote:Texcat has done nothing to make me remember that he is in this game.

Care to have actual reads?

I feel like most of your opinions/reads have been sheeped and you're just pointing things out and not making conclusions on them. It's like you're deliberately remaining neutral to keep your options open.

Which of my opinions have been sheeped? If anything, other people have been sheeping me this game on things I've pointed out. Also, again, a playstyle point rather than an alignment point – anyone actually reading my posts can tell that I have actual reads.

In post 283, Klick wrote:

In post 270, CultOfAthena wrote:

In post 188, Klick wrote:Go into detail on that please? I'm very curious where you're getting a scumread on me from Bella.

Why did you completely ignore everything I said in 186 to ask Bella about why she agreed with me? Am I a leper or something?

You gave reasons for your suspicion. Bella didn't. I also have a lot of experience with Bella as a person and didn't expect her to be scumreading me at this stage.

Are you planning on responding to those reasons that I gave?