Newbie 2086 - Reaction GIFs | End!

[Cape90]

im awake

[Cape90]

I'm going to address the logical argument butter and Greeting had, because I find arguments like that interesting. It's one of the few times in a mafia game where town can get irrefutable facts. Also, butter was curious and nobody else really tackled the issue.

I think this is the beginning of the logical argument butter and Greeting are having, so I'll quote it for reference.

Somewhat suspicious of Greeting already from what I mentioned in 243 and 245. I would think that scum currently would be pretty excited due to the cop kill and generally being at an advantage at the moment, so I was thinking that at least one of them would be posting early and would want to control the narrative of things from the start of the day. Cape and greeting's posting early today both fit that bill, to some extent. Also still never was particularly satisfied by cape's answer to my line of questioning in 175, especially now that we know notscience was town. Would not be surprised for town catboi to be somewhat discouraged, feeling relatively neutral there.

Scum could also aim to lay low here. Would like to hear more from dunnstral especially, since his first post he's given a few opinions but with little to back them up.

Looks like I failed spectacularly to control the narrative then, because my

catboi

vote was ignored by almost everyone, and even

catboi

himself paid very little attention to it.

Butter says, "Greeting did -

X

- (make an early Day intro post to highlight suspicion on someone) with the intention of -

Y

- (controlling the narrative)"

Greeting says, "I

failed

to do -

Y

-. It's obvious I failed because I did -

X

- (make an early Day intro post to highlight suspicion on someone) but -

C

- (not getting traction on that suspicion, catboi) happened."

Butter's response:

Looks like I failed spectacularly to control the narrative then, because my

catboi

vote was ignored by almost everyone, and even

catboi

himself paid very little attention to it.

Results do not change intent. Second time you've used this argument or a similar one (244) when I would expect you to know it doesn't hold water.

Butter says, "-

C

- happening does not mean you did not have have -

Y

- intent."

Some time passes before the next reply tangentially referencing this argument:

@

butterchurn

That’s

your

interpretation of what I’m doing, so from my perspective your question has a thesis in it which is false. Might I add that this is has already happened in our last exchange. I already said what I’m doing and why I’m doing it and if you keep on interpreting this in a scum way then it’s on you and there’s nothing for me to discuss here.

Greeting says, "

You

(butter) say I had -

Y

- intentions, but from my perspective the

thesis

(actually a

premise

, but let's not get too nerdy here) is false."

Here is where logic begins to fall apart. This all sounds pedantic, but it is actually quite important. In scumhunting, logical errors can be honest mistakes. But, they can also be due to cognitive dissonance, which is impossible to 100% erase as scum. The town's job is to judge intent (which is at the crux of this argument I am commenting on).

The "thesis" Greeting is referring to is actually -

X

-

• Greeting acknowledges that -
  X
  - is true (which it is, the post is there for all to see)
  
• Greeting disputes that the conclusion -
  Y
  - is false, because
  
• If -
  Y
  - were true, then -
  C
  - would not have happened

The truth is, -

C

- (and

-not!C-

) have no correlation with -

Y

-. Using it as evidence against is faulty. I would normally err on the side of "honest mistake," because logic is hard and this site is not extremely logic heavy, but the following post makes me think otherwise:

If you're town, your most helpful response would be to point me to a time in another game where you sorted things out in a similar way, or if it is the first time, explain more about why you decided to do so in this instance.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I feel like me discussing your projections further is a waste of my time and an unnecessary source of frustration for me. If you think that I’m scum then just vote me and I’ll try to work with others.

After Butter calls out Greeting for faulty logic, butter later asks Greeting about a completely different topic and Greeting gets salty about the prior argument. Also, the "work with others" line has relevance to something else I noticed about Greeting that I will address further down.

Also, @catboi, @cape, @dunn and whoever else has a problem with my walls of text: you can go ahead and skip the entire post above if the logical argument is not interesting to you. It is mostly for myself and butter.

second quote makes zefiend obvtown

[Cape90]

Okay, a list, not necessarily exhaustive but these are things that are clearly unrelated to game theory:
- Your post 164 about notscience is phrased in an artificial-sounding way, and I talk about why it's suspicious more in detail in post 169

I don't really find this really compelling, but from where i am sitting 164 is really strange when there have been a whole bunch of posts explaining

why

notscience has been suspecting me. Like it has been most of notsciences' posts up to that point.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I saw this whole thing about me not really being versed in mafia theory, and this is quite true, I mean I know a little bit but a lot of my gameplay doesn't really revolve around it as much as I see from other MS players. I feel like if I tried that I would just end up keeping on overthinking things and not getting the right results out of it, plus I love talking mechanics as mafia because it is easy, when it feels kinda just more like a given as town. My dislike of killing fake/rescinded PR claims comes from my experience from chat mafia, though this usually comes from me seeing this type of play a lot thrown around lightheartedly in these less competitive style of games, so maybe they just died for the best even if I have had my disagreements, why am I back here

[Cape90]

@fferylt, is the Newbie queue player list verified as to whether each player occupies an appropriate slot of either Newbie or SE?

The original player lists are verified by the Newbie Listmod. Subsequent replacements are verified by the Game Mods. Errors occasionally happen in both parts, though.

Thanks for explaining. One could think of this as a genuine error, but it becomes relevant once is brought up as an argument. I will not remove

ɀefiend

out of my suspicions for this, specifically for the fact that they decided to use this as an argument to push their narrative when, confronted with the actual rulebook, is obviously incorrect.

I am just so confused on why you are having suspicion right on zefiend for being "experienced" at the game. How about you simply suspect them for the content they produce rather then an arbitrary "these players are newbies" "these players are SE's" like that type of thing?

[Cape90]

@

the post

I think the general theme of this text has already been answered by myself, but I'll requote with the bolded part being an explanation. And if you disagree then this is just simply an irreconcilable difference, and I'm not planning on playing to appease anyone.

I disagree.

I think having experience specific to this site, when playing a MafiaScum game counts more here than experience from playing on other forums.

Mafia varies by forum significantly. The vast majority of games I've played in and hosted were all pretty much a fun distraction from the general theme of those forums (which wasn't specifically playing the game). I've played with people who were in there just to have fun and things like mechanics coming from mafia theory were either non-existent or rarely brought up and didn't hold more merit than other argument that the players felt was right at the moment. In the mafia games I played in the past, players who rolled mafia wouldn't really do that much of power role hunting, but would rather focus on eliminating what they deemed to be the biggest threat to them at the moment. Role-hunting attempts were made, but it was something that would be considered more advanced play.

Here, the majority of players tend to use jargon and pay a lot of attention to game mechanics. Elements of game mechanics are even included in guidelines published in each Newbie thread (such as "don't fake claim a power role when you're town").

Although I did start to pay significantly more attention to mafia theory since I started playing here, I still had a rather fierce argument about it in the dead thread of my last newbie game, where I was strongly criticised for my actions in that game with excerpts from mafia theory being brought up as a counterargument. I'm visibly not part of the mainstream of this forum, for instance, I don't use a lot of mafia jargon and admittedly still often look it up.

In spite of all this, these games that I played were still the same sort of game we're playing right now - a game of mafia, but with a far more laid-back approach.

So yeah, mafia game =/= mafia game. And that is why I think there is an SE behind this. If it's not and it was

Cape90

, for instance, then it means that I'm strongly underestimating him.

On a side note, this heavy reliance on mafia theory is what I think was the source of my clash with butterchurn in this game, other townies in the aforementioned dead thread of Newbie 2084 and notably also Val89 in Newbie 2082. While I do take the general theory into consideration, I am not going to let it dictate my actions and I consider it to be my freedom to reach my winning goal in a way I see fit.

It's a fair conclusion but it's hollow. Literally anyone in this game can make that argument and go after anyone else in this game, so the argument is moot. If scum is equally likely as town to make an argument that can be valid, then the argument is worthless for scumhunting. Do you disagree with this sentiment?

Yes, I strongly disagree actually. This is such a simplistic take. If I agreed with it, I wouldn't have made such a point in the first place.

So let's recap. You give Cape a pass as town because his

current "strongest" push

on someone (me) shows "conviction," even though Cape acknowledges that his scum-lean on me "is not really a telling piece of information."

Please tell me if I have that right or wrong. And then tell me if that should pass as reasoning for town-reading someone who is scum-read by some degree to over half the players in the game.

No, that is incorrect. I already explained why I'm town reading

Cape90

. It hasn't been clumped in a single post, but can be seen scattered throughout many, especially my later ones.

On butterchurn, and others.

Besides nope-ing out of an argument that you lost with them, let's look at your more "positive" interactions.

You called butter the town's top town-read, but you also told him to just vote you and you will work with others elsewhere. Does that sound like someone who is trying to play the game based on associations?

You admitted that catboi is one of your scum-leans, but as soon as catboi calls out VOID, you immediately piggyback on the idea and say you're also fine limming VOID today.

So a player with 4 scum-reads on them (Cape) gets a pass because you trust them as town, and you like their suspicions on Dunn and myself.

But a player with 3 scum-reads on them (catboi), who you scum-read, and voted right out the gate, and commented multiple times how your push on them failing to get any pressure was a failure --

ALSO

gets a pass and suddenly you agree with this person about VOID?

Does that sound like someone who is trying to play the game based on associations? Or does that sound like someone who is opportunistically chasing whatever wagon they can?

I don't believe I lost an argument with

butterchurn

. I just felt, and still feel like that conversation had nowhere else to go. Like I said before, I'm not going to cater to the taste of other players with my gameplay. To tell the truth, I don't mind getting scumread for it and even voted out for it. If I have to take one for the team, I'll take it. Sometimes a townie's death can be beneficial to the game, and sometimes that townie is me. Plus people who voted me out might out themselves as scum for town the following Day.

Associations gave me harder data as to what are players stances in the game. If I chose to look for scum in that way then I can't just cherrypick data and post whatever I like. I posted what I considered to be the most relevant to me and my conclusions from it. If you have different conclusions then you're welcome to pour in your thoughts.

The other questions seem rhetorical or not meant for me. In case they are meant for me, as in the previous post you claimed that this would be something for me to respond, asking me to look at myself by the prism of what others may or may not perceive me is, quite simply, stupid, because I don't really need to convince myself that I'm town.

I am quite fine eliminating

V0ID

today, and I believe that I had expressed suspicion of that earlier - before

catboi

cast his vote, so the thesis that I'm piggybacking

catboi

is not factual.

It is also untrue that I'm being opportunistic with every wagon there is - the entirety of my actions Day 1 contradict that.

What I must, however, admit is that I didn't look into your past history and simply judged you were an experienced player due to your join date and, to be fair, your posts didn't sound like those coming from a complete newbie. I'll look into you more closely, but yes, you are right in pointing out that it is logically inconsistent for me to put you in with others in that pool.

That looks like an error of judgement due to an overly simplistic approach on my part and thank you for pointing it out.

which is weird because this has that thing I just said to a tea.
Not to mention it feels like some of these bottom lines are pretty weird and just feel like "I have to refute everything and if I refute all these things, that makes me town and the argument wrong".

I don't know if I am even making sense this game

[Cape90]

@

the post

I think the general theme of this text has already been answered by myself, but I'll requote with the bolded part being an explanation. And if you disagree then this is just simply an irreconcilable difference, and I'm not planning on playing to appease anyone.

I disagree.

I think having experience specific to this site, when playing a MafiaScum game counts more here than experience from playing on other forums.

Mafia varies by forum significantly. The vast majority of games I've played in and hosted were all pretty much a fun distraction from the general theme of those forums (which wasn't specifically playing the game). I've played with people who were in there just to have fun and things like mechanics coming from mafia theory were either non-existent or rarely brought up and didn't hold more merit than other argument that the players felt was right at the moment. In the mafia games I played in the past, players who rolled mafia wouldn't really do that much of power role hunting, but would rather focus on eliminating what they deemed to be the biggest threat to them at the moment. Role-hunting attempts were made, but it was something that would be considered more advanced play.

Here, the majority of players tend to use jargon and pay a lot of attention to game mechanics. Elements of game mechanics are even included in guidelines published in each Newbie thread (such as "don't fake claim a power role when you're town").

Although I did start to pay significantly more attention to mafia theory since I started playing here, I still had a rather fierce argument about it in the dead thread of my last newbie game, where I was strongly criticised for my actions in that game with excerpts from mafia theory being brought up as a counterargument. I'm visibly not part of the mainstream of this forum, for instance, I don't use a lot of mafia jargon and admittedly still often look it up.

In spite of all this, these games that I played were still the same sort of game we're playing right now - a game of mafia, but with a far more laid-back approach.

So yeah, mafia game =/= mafia game. And that is why I think there is an SE behind this. If it's not and it was

Cape90

, for instance, then it means that I'm strongly underestimating him.

On a side note, this heavy reliance on mafia theory is what I think was the source of my clash with butterchurn in this game, other townies in the aforementioned dead thread of Newbie 2084 and notably also Val89 in Newbie 2082. While I do take the general theory into consideration, I am not going to let it dictate my actions and I consider it to be my freedom to reach my winning goal in a way I see fit.

It's a fair conclusion but it's hollow. Literally anyone in this game can make that argument and go after anyone else in this game, so the argument is moot. If scum is equally likely as town to make an argument that can be valid, then the argument is worthless for scumhunting. Do you disagree with this sentiment?

Yes, I strongly disagree actually. This is such a simplistic take. If I agreed with it, I wouldn't have made such a point in the first place.

So let's recap. You give Cape a pass as town because his

current "strongest" push

on someone (me) shows "conviction," even though Cape acknowledges that his scum-lean on me "is not really a telling piece of information."

Please tell me if I have that right or wrong. And then tell me if that should pass as reasoning for town-reading someone who is scum-read by some degree to over half the players in the game.

No, that is incorrect. I already explained why I'm town reading

Cape90

. It hasn't been clumped in a single post, but can be seen scattered throughout many, especially my later ones.

On butterchurn, and others.

Besides nope-ing out of an argument that you lost with them, let's look at your more "positive" interactions.

You called butter the town's top town-read, but you also told him to just vote you and you will work with others elsewhere. Does that sound like someone who is trying to play the game based on associations?

You admitted that catboi is one of your scum-leans, but as soon as catboi calls out VOID, you immediately piggyback on the idea and say you're also fine limming VOID today.

So a player with 4 scum-reads on them (Cape) gets a pass because you trust them as town, and you like their suspicions on Dunn and myself.

But a player with 3 scum-reads on them (catboi), who you scum-read, and voted right out the gate, and commented multiple times how your push on them failing to get any pressure was a failure --

ALSO

gets a pass and suddenly you agree with this person about VOID?

Does that sound like someone who is trying to play the game based on associations? Or does that sound like someone who is opportunistically chasing whatever wagon they can?

I don't believe I lost an argument with

butterchurn

. I just felt, and still feel like that conversation had nowhere else to go. Like I said before, I'm not going to cater to the taste of other players with my gameplay. To tell the truth, I don't mind getting scumread for it and even voted out for it. If I have to take one for the team, I'll take it. Sometimes a townie's death can be beneficial to the game, and sometimes that townie is me. Plus people who voted me out might out themselves as scum for town the following Day.

Associations gave me harder data as to what are players stances in the game. If I chose to look for scum in that way then I can't just cherrypick data and post whatever I like. I posted what I considered to be the most relevant to me and my conclusions from it. If you have different conclusions then you're welcome to pour in your thoughts.

The other questions seem rhetorical or not meant for me. In case they are meant for me, as in the previous post you claimed that this would be something for me to respond, asking me to look at myself by the prism of what others may or may not perceive me is, quite simply, stupid, because I don't really need to convince myself that I'm town.

I am quite fine eliminating

V0ID

today, and I believe that I had expressed suspicion of that earlier - before

catboi

cast his vote, so the thesis that I'm piggybacking

catboi

is not factual.

It is also untrue that I'm being opportunistic with every wagon there is - the entirety of my actions Day 1 contradict that.

What I must, however, admit is that I didn't look into your past history and simply judged you were an experienced player due to your join date and, to be fair, your posts didn't sound like those coming from a complete newbie. I'll look into you more closely, but yes, you are right in pointing out that it is logically inconsistent for me to put you in with others in that pool.

That looks like an error of judgement due to an overly simplistic approach on my part and thank you for pointing it out.

which is weird because this has that thing I just said to a tea.
Not to mention it feels like some of these bottom lines are pretty weird and just feel like "I have to refute everything and if I refute all these things, that makes me town and the argument wrong".

I don't know if I am even making sense this game

[Cape90]

bro how am i sending messages twice like that

[Cape90]

Cape is obviously an experienced player, but your defense of Cape seems to rely specifically on the fact that they aren't officially labeled an SE

Thank You

[Cape90]

Digested that wall on Greeting, have thoughts but will wait to hear his response on it. Want to try to take a look and respond to some other things as well, have been less thorough than I ought to be.

I actually think it is a pretty solid wall and ze looks a lot better today

[Cape90]

Also greeting, you are looking far too much into the me being online vs my posting as a scum marker.

[...]

Is my playstyle THAT strongly reading scum to you, and greeting? Like I said in a previous post, "Like, I think I understand the principles behind the mistakes and why they are mistakes and why it could be seen as scummy but as for the actual content of my posts I don't see them as scummy when I try to view it from an objective outside perspective."

It seemed like a lot of people in day 1 started to read me as town after some initial scum vibes from most, I'd like to know what you think about me at the present time, and catboi's and greeting's votes on me.

My vote is on

Dunnstral

right now, not you.

My major issues with your play, other than the constant lurking are: parroting and lack of conviction. It is easy to say that "x is suspicious and I'll be looking into them" to get towncred for generating content in line with the game. But the content from you does not advance the game in any way. You haven't questioned anyone or even seriously voted anyone (I'm not counting your RVS vote as serious), which in my eyes looks insincere. Scums generally worry about anything that could put them in a bad light and a vote leading to a miselim is something that draws suspicion, so a possible solution here is to lay low and avoid taking definite stances. Your posts haven't contributed to solving the game and can all be easily manufactured.

Oh my mistake, misread your vote when you quoted catboi's post with his vote on me. I understand your points but I just am hesitant to vote and not because how I am afraid I will be perceived but just because I am cautious of voting town out. I don't know, there was time and I was not really convinced not known 15 was scum, and he was at e-1. Sure you could spin it the other way and say

I did not vote him because I did not want to be the hammer as scum

but... eh it was just simply as I put it before. And as for the lurking thing I would say to stop looking so hard into that as a marker as it is going to perhaps mislead you (in my specific case anyways).

okay actually what? Was this the right wording here V0id?

[Cape90]

I understand what butterchurn is saying, it does seem like a scum thing to put that list together in that fashion. Not to say town should not have their thoughts organized but I get what butterchurn is getting at in the post above.

But then again, if greeting did have a notepad file open with that as scum and was keeping track of people in that way for his scum motives would he really have posted it for all of us?

Once again, I see what butterchurn is saying and I am not ruling out that perspective. But,I could easily see that just as simply information gathered he is presenting to us to help both us and himself as town

. I guess it is kinda strange though.

I am also confused by this V0id post. I am not sure I am making sense of them as of late.

[Cape90]

or that I am scum

well, yeah lol?

[Cape90]

The potential candidates I see are: catboi, ɀefiend and Dunnstral.

I feel the same way with how I feel with cat being the weakest of these candidates.

VOTE: Dunnstral

This slot reads as really wolfy to me right now.

Given they were more towny in their hydra game they played with me where they were mafia, I am comfortable voting this

Is the bolded not an argument against me being mafia?

I am saying you are less towny this game, like significantly, but I could also be confusing you with Chelsea

[Cape90]

But looks like someone knew this was happening beforehand.

Wouldn't even be the first time town has gamethrown by fakeclaiming mason

The outcome of tonight shows that scums definitely know how to rolehunt, which points my attention towards the remaining more experienced players. I haven't seen half the enthusiasm from

catboi

this game I've seen in the other games, plus his earlier actions made me concerned about their motives.

VOTE: catboi

I took 356 as a response to 355, and not as revealing inside knowledge. And 355 was prompted by NK15's two posts right before it.

I don't think this interpretation is correct at all

What is your interpretation?

I kinda read them as separate comments, but looking back, I guess I could see it

[Cape90]

But looks like someone knew this was happening beforehand.

Wouldn't even be the first time town has gamethrown by fakeclaiming mason

The outcome of tonight shows that scums definitely know how to rolehunt, which points my attention towards the remaining more experienced players. I haven't seen half the enthusiasm from

catboi

this game I've seen in the other games, plus his earlier actions made me concerned about their motives.

VOTE: catboi

I took 356 as a response to 355, and not as revealing inside knowledge. And 355 was prompted by NK15's two posts right before it.

I don't think this interpretation is correct at all

What is your interpretation?

I kinda read them as separate comments, but looking back, I guess I could see it

A lot of questions were thrown at this comment I made and I was just thinking

"does this actually matter?"

[Dunnstral]

The potential candidates I see are: catboi, ɀefiend and Dunnstral.

I feel the same way with how I feel with cat being the weakest of these candidates.

VOTE: Dunnstral

This slot reads as really wolfy to me right now.

Given they were more towny in their hydra game they played with me where they were mafia, I am comfortable voting this

Is the bolded not an argument against me being mafia?

I am saying you are less towny this game, like significantly, but I could also be confusing you with Chelsea

If you are saying I was towny in the game where I was mafia, doesn't that mean me being "less towny" actually means that I am town?

[Cape90]

I don't think whether zefiend is technically a newbie or not really matters as much as how comfortable they are with the game. (The newbie rules are kind of wonky now that it's been brought up, though).

I think Cape is the better vote right now,

I don't see the 'conviction'

, I thought they were scummy day 1, and I don't think their arguments make sense on day 2.

VOTE: Cape90

this is gold because you literally just popped in ONCE and posted this, then just went away after you posted this. If you are going to argue that I lack conviction, how about you get some for yourself?
And apparently you are not mafia? Now that's the funny right there.

[V0ID]

I see, thanks for explaining more. Does zefiend's assessment of his uneasy feeling that butterchurn might be scum despite thinking butterchurn is most likely town and playing a town game also in that same vein? As in, does that also ring some scum bells for you? If I had said "I am willing to work with butterchurn, he seems more and more town the more the game goes on and as I re-read his old posts" but without (now looking back on it, unnecessary) bolded line of the "there is the obvious possibility that butterchurn is scum playing a very convincing game." made you feel not as bad about me as scum?
Sure I am struggling to produce reads maybe...it is my first game after all. I think it is worth noting that you also have been pointed out for a lot of "meh" "shrug" posts by at least 2 users, I noted but forget exactly when and who. The first person you seem to be going hard at is me, for reasons I understand but I don't find all that convincing.

I would be surprised if you admitted to finding my own reasons for scumreading you convincing. That does not really allay my suspicion.

As for the question, obviously without the line I bolded it's a less suspicious sentence. But I'm not here in this game to give you writing tips on how to appear less suspect. Asking me how to appeal to me does not endear you to me and in fact makes me feel like your primary concern is escaping my suspicion.

You gave a vague pushback against me but seemed to have dropped it. If you had to name a single player you believe to be most likely to be mafia right now, who is it, and why?

I'm not trying to appeal to you or endear myself to you. I was just asking cause I wanted to understand more what exactly made that statement suspicious to you.

It's a toss up between you, dunnstral, greeting, cape. I am pretty comfortable in trusting (or reading as town) butterchurn and I think I'm starting to do the same to zefiend. I'd probably be willing to join the greeting wagon and put my vote there since my townreads and the people I am willing to play with have their votes there for now. I was always a little suspicious of greeting from an emotional vibe sort of abstract way...and I did note that although greeting did not lead the wagon against notknown15 or hammered: he did seem very keen on voting him out. Also he has suspicions on me which I still find sorta weird, which goes for you too. Like I said before I could see you saying these are scum markers/mistakes but I still feel like thinking my posts are

very

scummy is a bit out of left field.

[V0ID]

Also greeting, you are looking far too much into the me being online vs my posting as a scum marker.

[...]

Is my playstyle THAT strongly reading scum to you, and greeting? Like I said in a previous post, "Like, I think I understand the principles behind the mistakes and why they are mistakes and why it could be seen as scummy but as for the actual content of my posts I don't see them as scummy when I try to view it from an objective outside perspective."

It seemed like a lot of people in day 1 started to read me as town after some initial scum vibes from most, I'd like to know what you think about me at the present time, and catboi's and greeting's votes on me.

My vote is on

Dunnstral

right now, not you.

My major issues with your play, other than the constant lurking are: parroting and lack of conviction. It is easy to say that "x is suspicious and I'll be looking into them" to get towncred for generating content in line with the game. But the content from you does not advance the game in any way. You haven't questioned anyone or even seriously voted anyone (I'm not counting your RVS vote as serious), which in my eyes looks insincere. Scums generally worry about anything that could put them in a bad light and a vote leading to a miselim is something that draws suspicion, so a possible solution here is to lay low and avoid taking definite stances. Your posts haven't contributed to solving the game and can all be easily manufactured.

Oh my mistake, misread your vote when you quoted catboi's post with his vote on me. I understand your points but I just am hesitant to vote and not because how I am afraid I will be perceived but just because I am cautious of voting town out. I don't know, there was time and I was not really convinced not known 15 was scum, and he was at e-1. Sure you could spin it the other way and say

I did not vote him because I did not want to be the hammer as scum

but... eh it was just simply as I put it before. And as for the lurking thing I would say to stop looking so hard into that as a marker as it is going to perhaps mislead you (in my specific case anyways).

okay actually what? Was this the right wording here V0id?

Read the words before the red part. This was in response to greeting saying that me not having voted anyone yet so far in the game is suspicious. I explained that I was hesitant to vote because I was not convinced notknown15 was scum. Greeting is implying that I might have not voted for him because I am worried about a miselim drawing suspicion to me if I was scum and I was the one to hammer.

[butterchurn]

Hm. Second-guessing a bit. Don't really see a reason for scum cape to flip opinion on zefiend like that, with things sitting as they are. And I tend to agree with why.

[Cape90]

Also greeting, you are looking far too much into the me being online vs my posting as a scum marker.

[...]

Is my playstyle THAT strongly reading scum to you, and greeting? Like I said in a previous post, "Like, I think I understand the principles behind the mistakes and why they are mistakes and why it could be seen as scummy but as for the actual content of my posts I don't see them as scummy when I try to view it from an objective outside perspective."

It seemed like a lot of people in day 1 started to read me as town after some initial scum vibes from most, I'd like to know what you think about me at the present time, and catboi's and greeting's votes on me.

My vote is on

Dunnstral

right now, not you.

My major issues with your play, other than the constant lurking are: parroting and lack of conviction. It is easy to say that "x is suspicious and I'll be looking into them" to get towncred for generating content in line with the game. But the content from you does not advance the game in any way. You haven't questioned anyone or even seriously voted anyone (I'm not counting your RVS vote as serious), which in my eyes looks insincere. Scums generally worry about anything that could put them in a bad light and a vote leading to a miselim is something that draws suspicion, so a possible solution here is to lay low and avoid taking definite stances. Your posts haven't contributed to solving the game and can all be easily manufactured.

Oh my mistake, misread your vote when you quoted catboi's post with his vote on me. I understand your points but I just am hesitant to vote and not because how I am afraid I will be perceived but just because I am cautious of voting town out. I don't know, there was time and I was not really convinced not known 15 was scum, and he was at e-1. Sure you could spin it the other way and say

I did not vote him because I did not want to be the hammer as scum

but... eh it was just simply as I put it before. And as for the lurking thing I would say to stop looking so hard into that as a marker as it is going to perhaps mislead you (in my specific case anyways).

okay actually what? Was this the right wording here V0id?

Read the words before the red part. This was in response to greeting saying that me not having voted anyone yet so far in the game is suspicious. I explained that I was hesitant to vote because I was not convinced notknown15 was scum. Greeting is implying that I might have not voted for him because I am worried about a miselim drawing suspicion to me if I was scum and I was the one to hammer.

oh yeah

never mind lol sorry

[Cape90]

The potential candidates I see are: catboi, ɀefiend and Dunnstral.

I feel the same way with how I feel with cat being the weakest of these candidates.

VOTE: Dunnstral

This slot reads as really wolfy to me right now.

Given they were more towny in their hydra game they played with me where they were mafia, I am comfortable voting this

Is the bolded not an argument against me being mafia?

I am saying you are less towny this game, like significantly, but I could also be confusing you with Chelsea

If you are saying I was towny in the game where I was mafia, doesn't that mean me being "less towny" actually means that I am town?

what are you talking about?

more towny

=/= towny

[Cape90]

The potential candidates I see are: catboi, ɀefiend and Dunnstral.

I feel the same way with how I feel with cat being the weakest of these candidates.

VOTE: Dunnstral

This slot reads as really wolfy to me right now.

Given they were more towny in their hydra game they played with me where they were mafia, I am comfortable voting this

Is the bolded not an argument against me being mafia?

I am saying you are less towny this game, like significantly, but I could also be confusing you with Chelsea

If you are saying I was towny in the game where I was mafia, doesn't that mean me being "less towny" actually means that I am town?

what are you talking about?

more towny

=/= towny

it should be clear I am saying you are more scummy this game then the game I have seen you (partially) as mafia.

[Greeting]

I don't see that with Greeting, who gives a very strong effort and clear scumhunting process every game and, for whatever reason, gets utterly nitpicked to death every time.

I agree with this. But Greeting has only been town in previous games. At some point he will roll mafia. Do you think, if he does in the future (or has this game), he will stop giving a strong effort and stop attempting to give an impression of scumhunting? I have a higher opinion of his abilities than that. My main suspicion of him is due to the fact that I feel like his approach to scumhunting and his interactions in general is not aligned with the approach that I've seen from him in previous games, and it feels like how scum!Greeting could attempt to imitate his usual style, while not quite hitting the mark. I understand you disagree on that point, but that's how I see it. I'm not trying to nitpick his arguments and his logic here, except for to see how he responds to that. I can see a world where this is just town Greeting, and some of his actions do read to me that way, but there's enough that just doesn't sit right for me to be willing to drop it completely.

You're right about the early posting today though, that certainly is not a scumtell on its own. That was more indicating that I would be keeping an eye on those two, because the way they started off the day drew my attention. I certainly was not expecting that alone to convince anyone of anything, I just wanted to share my thought process.

So what is your vote on me for, exactly?

[Greeting]

I see, thanks for explaining more. Does zefiend's assessment of his uneasy feeling that butterchurn might be scum despite thinking butterchurn is most likely town and playing a town game also in that same vein? As in, does that also ring some scum bells for you? If I had said "I am willing to work with butterchurn, he seems more and more town the more the game goes on and as I re-read his old posts" but without (now looking back on it, unnecessary) bolded line of the "there is the obvious possibility that butterchurn is scum playing a very convincing game." made you feel not as bad about me as scum?
Sure I am struggling to produce reads maybe...it is my first game after all. I think it is worth noting that you also have been pointed out for a lot of "meh" "shrug" posts by at least 2 users, I noted but forget exactly when and who. The first person you seem to be going hard at is me, for reasons I understand but I don't find all that convincing.

I would be surprised if you admitted to finding my own reasons for scumreading you convincing. That does not really allay my suspicion.

As for the question, obviously without the line I bolded it's a less suspicious sentence. But I'm not here in this game to give you writing tips on how to appear less suspect. Asking me how to appeal to me does not endear you to me and in fact makes me feel like your primary concern is escaping my suspicion.

You gave a vague pushback against me but seemed to have dropped it. If you had to name a single player you believe to be most likely to be mafia right now, who is it, and why?

I'm not trying to appeal to you or endear myself to you. I was just asking cause I wanted to understand more what exactly made that statement suspicious to you.

It's a toss up between you, dunnstral, greeting, cape. I am pretty comfortable in trusting (or reading as town) butterchurn and I think I'm starting to do the same to zefiend. I'd probably be willing to join the greeting wagon and put my vote there since my townreads and the people I am willing to play with have their votes there for now. I was always a little suspicious of greeting from an emotional vibe sort of abstract way...

and I did note that although greeting did not lead the wagon against notknown15 or hammered: he did seem very keen on voting him out.

Also he has suspicions on me which I still find sorta weird, which goes for you too. Like I said before I could see you saying these are scum markers/mistakes but I still feel like thinking my posts are

very

scummy is a bit out of left field.

What has the bolded and underlined sentence have to do with anything? What is its' relevance? Who "leads" a wagon?