There's Re: Chain of Memories! And absent silouhettes if you count those.
VOTE: Larxene
Investigative-immune, eh?In post 9, XII Larxene wrote:We're in the same boat, Vexen. At least they remembered me for my winning personality~
VOTE: Lexaeus
I'm Investigative-Immune, losers.
That you're scumIn post 14, XII Larxene wrote:They fail. Like a roleblock. What else would it mean?
Yes, I understand what you mean.In post 17, XII Larxene wrote:Sounds like someone doesn't know what I'm claiming! If I was a Godfather a cop would get a town result on me~
And sure, if you want to say it in a totally confusing way. Immune to investigations, that's it. They just fail.
Sorry, my bad. They are full fledged scum, I just meant traitor as in the flavor.In post 21, II Xigbar wrote:Wait why are they a traitor as opposed to a full fledged scum member?In post 20, V Lexaeus wrote:Yes, I understand what you mean.In post 17, XII Larxene wrote:Sounds like someone doesn't know what I'm claiming! If I was a Godfather a cop would get a town result on me~
And sure, if you want to say it in a totally confusing way. Immune to investigations, that's it. They just fail.
My point is, semantics aside, Cops are useless on you, just like on a GF, albeit somewhat less powerful.
How does that help a loyal member of the Organization? It doesn't.
Therefore, you're a traitor.
A valid point.In post 23, XII Larxene wrote:Have you, like, heard of Millers, or...In post 20, V Lexaeus wrote:Yes, I understand what you mean.
My point is, semantics aside, Cops are useless on you, just like on a GF, albeit somewhat less powerful.
How does that help a loyal member of the Organization? It doesn't.
Therefore, you're a traitor.
It wasn't entirely not the case.In post 38, X Luxord wrote:There's really very little to say about it. At the end of the day it doesn't really make 12 townier or scummier. Although past experience makes a claim like that tend slightly more towards town, to just assume so would be potentially devastating.
I immediately wrote it off as a non-issue. I had assumed 5 Lex to be pushing it just for reactions, and was quite surprised to see that apparently was not the case.
Agreed. I'd actually like to see secret alt games become a common category for that reason.In post 42, IV Vexen wrote:which thank god by the way. Ive always thought the whole meta thing was bullshit and people spent way to much time analyzing it.In post 41, V Lexaeus wrote:in a game like this where meta is absolutely impossible
SecondedIn post 72, IV Vexen wrote: Dude Im begging you, please stop doing this. Just use the name, its going to make it easier on everyone involved.
I actually find myself agreeing with most of this, please try to post these thoughts as you have them unless you have a reason to hold off on some.In post 64, X Luxord wrote:You're right, my ISO has been basically all ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
I can copy all of my thoughts on everyone here, but my heart really isn't into anything regarding scumhunting yet. Like, I won't be proactive now but I think it can be assumed that I will be eventually? I really don't think there are any motivations to be found by my lack of productivity.
Here's a direct (reformatted from Excel) copy of my notes, with one omission. (Only noting this so if I want to bring it up later, people know.)
2 Xigbar:Reaction to a relatively calm voteswitch by me in RVS. Weird "if you were scum" Q to 12 in P26. Other than this, gut strongly says town mindset-- but based on not much concrete.
4 Vexen:Flavor entrance, very standard, empty ISO, voteable.
5 Lexaeus:Pushes 12 for inv-immune. Probably just in a frivolous/reac-test way. I tend towards townreading. (Okay, nvm. It seemed genuine.) P53 seems pretty town at first glance, feeling strongly as towniest post in the game.
6 Zexion:Lots of content. Pushes 5 for noisemaking which at face value makes no real sense but is a believable push for town to make. Votes 13 for bad reasons. Overall P47 makes me feel just a little bit weird, entertaining possible narrative of scum with strong presence? Unsure how much conviction he actually has (the less the better, honestly). P56 is towny.
12 Larxene:Claiming inv-immune. Not impressive but claim tends towards town.
13 Roxas:Asks to be checked, says will claim if needed. Opens with scumread me and townread 12.
I don't know if this is a post restriction or if whoever you just happen to be the coolest person ever, but please don't stopIn post 79, I Xemnas wrote:Good tidings, friends. Today is a momentuous day.
Today, we uncover the traitors among us.
VOTE: Demyx
Why, why, and why?In post 94, IX Demyx wrote:Dance, water, dance!
VOTE: Vexen
I believe both Xigbar and Zexion to be loyal.
Weekend's over buddy.In post 63, VII Saix wrote:Hi...Tomorrow busy. Will read and post over the weekend.
In post 428, VII Saix wrote:Do you realise that at this point with your unabashed antipathy for Xaldin, an alive scum!Xaldin could be the only reason that you would be spared on N1?
In post 510, VII Saix wrote:I have nothing more substantial to contribute at this point.
Yes you do.In post 459, V Lexaeus wrote:In post 428, VII Saix wrote:Do you realise that at this point with your unabashed antipathy for Xaldin, an alive scum!Xaldin could be the only reason that you would be spared on N1?
Explain this please. How does not liking a dead scum member make him a target? Why would that scum member living make him not a target?
Because it's too late now, isn't it?In post 602, VII Saix wrote:Why didn't you unvote?
In [url=https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?p=9566094#p9566094]post 758[/url], V Lexaeus wrote:I'm not lying.
I know the role exists and has been used, but I cannot recall a game I personally have been in with one
Not unless I really really have to, because I just don't think he's scum.In post 797, VI Zexion wrote:Lexaeus, be a darl and vote Axel would you?
Fucking hell, that's it. I'm switching to MafTigers since apparently ScuMobile isn't enough.In [url=https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?p=9569845#p9569845]post 882[/url], Not Radical Rat wrote:In post 874, VII Saix wrote:Mod, do scums have a day chat?
Was the scum PT open before the game began?
I think people need to realise that what Axel did (or didn't) do can't be proven. I would believe his claim only if the answers to both the questions above were negative.
So uh. The gif of Axel, the ability flavor title being a quote from Axel, and the "ground on fire" bit being one of Axel's powers in canon don't count as proof?
While it technically could be a scum ability, scum has little motivation to actually USE it. And all flavor and mod text points toward Axel being the one to cast it.In post 890, VII Saix wrote:Nope.In [url=https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?p=9569845#p9569845]post 882[/url], Radical Rat wrote:In post 874, VII Saix wrote:Mod, do scums have a day chat?
Was the scum PT open before the game began?
I think people need to realise that what Axel did (or didn't) do can't be proven. I would believe his claim only if the answers to both the questions above were negative.
So uh. The gif of Axel, the ability flavor title being a quote from Axel, and the "ground on fire" bit being one of Axel's powers in canon don't count as proof?
Coz wiping a night could still be a scum ability, and scum!Axel could have either done it himself or could have shared the message from his teammate if the scum pt is open throughout.
If he is a town, he is now effectively a vt. If he is a scum, he is a scum. He is useless to the game. Best to lynch him.
A world where Saix is scum and needs lynched perhaps?In post 916, VIII Axel wrote:Can someone explain to me a world where Saix will tunnel down my throat for "not posting enough in-game content" but doesn't say shit about Marluxia other than calling him a SR once and forgetting about him the entire game?
I'm sorry, but are you implying you're NOT another Town lynch?In post 972, II Xigbar wrote:I would rather be lynched to make a point about how badly this town is playing than allow another town lynch.
Alright, I understand the terrible Town bit now, but about you being a Town lynch...In post 980, II Xigbar wrote:I absolutely am another town lynch.I'm sorry, but are you implying you're NOT another Town lynch?
And that you weren't responsible for Larxene's mislynch?
I was responsible for Larxene's mislynch. I'm not calling town terrible because we lynched town yesterday, I'm calling town terrible because well there's a bunch of people not doing anything at all and a bunch of people tunneling me for absolutely no reason.
It was less that you didn't reaffirm your own Town status and more what I've articulated much better above. This line was also written while I mistakenly believed you meant Town was terrible because they lynched Larxene, which was a much stronger point in my mind.In post 980, II Xigbar wrote:Because I didn't specifically say another non-me town lynch? That's your reason to doubt your read on me?I am... Not sure about that townlean anymore.
I did not mean to imply that I would be okay sheeping due to Saix and Xaldin. In fact, I specifically stated Saix's vote on you is what KEPT me from voting you as well.In post 980, II Xigbar wrote:Sorry, but the implication of this post is that fucking Saix and Xaldin can read me. It doesn't take you being a super invested player to realize that neither of them are skilled players nor has the scumread on me any merit. And no fuck you this is exactly what you said in our last game together to justify pushing on me and I find it incredibly unlikely that you wouldn't learn your lesson from last game when my slot was literally a totally free mislynch because people have a complete inability to deal with my slot in a rational manner.About the rest of that post, just because I can't read you doesn't mean no one else can. And even then, unless my memory is fucking with me like the strongman thing, I believe I misread Scum!you as Town!you far more than the other way around.
"Too scummy to be scum" then?In post 1031, VII Saix wrote:What i don't like abt rox's recent posts is that it gives an impression that he has logically arrived at conclusions after vca and various posts. But in reality, he is picking and choosing arguments and posts that justify his already formed views. The insincerity in reversing the cause and effect relationship (between his views and peoples votes n posts) is really scummy, but it is such an obvious attempt of misinterpretation that it is likely to come from a town.
He did:VII Saix wrote:Why didn't he say that till now, and why are you defending on their behalf?
In post 869, VIII Axel wrote:Can only use once and only if there's more than 9 players alive - I think that might be a clue in hindsight
I also REALLY don't like how you're trying to shut up Xemnas here. Even if he is just dodging a prod, making a statement is better than not, and telling the one absolute conftown we have to go back to hibernation is.... Well, questionable at best.I am assuming you felt like dodging the prod, so you came and made a statement. You can go to your hibernation.
Except that if we let people we believe to be too scummy to be scum go, then scum just has to act blatantly scummy to not get lynched.VIII Axel wrote:1) Too scummy to be scum is totally a thing