Mafiascum.net

Albert B. Rampage wrote:

Mr. Flay wrote:I cannot fathom of calling somebody scummy because they call themselves town. "Obvtown", maybe, but just because they put themselves lower than anybody else? Puh-lease.

If they are calculating the % chance of lynching scum for example and include themselves in a town list that is barred from lynching along with the claimed power roles, that is scummy

Not really. You don't include yourself in a list of possible lynches unless it's a "for sake of completeness" kind of list.

Albert B. Rampage wrote:You're wrong. It's the opposite. Removing yourself out of the equation as a lynch target for no reason people can distinguish, that is a little scummy. Maybe you need to re-read my post. I would make my town list along the lines of this:

"People we should definitely lynch today:

GreyICE
Yosarian
Mr. Flay

Players we could lynch today:

ABR
Faraday

Players we should not lynch today:

Terrion (claimed cop)
Vi (cop has innocent result on Vi)"

See, if you put yourself on equal footing with, claimed masons for example, that is a red flag. You should put yourself in the pro-town group or neutral group, but not in the "should not lynch" group. I hope that clarifies what I'm saying for you.

Try this.

Need to die because they are scum:
ABR
Faraday

I wouldn't be crazy about lynching, but still in the lynch pool:
GreyICE
Yosarian
Mr. Flay

Definitely town and shouldn't be lynched:
Sleepless Assassin (dur)
Terrion (cop)
Vi (innocent result)

In LOTR mafia i got into a heated debate/argument with Katsuki-scum over her including herself on her town list. My argument was essentially that town has no good reason to include themself on the list, while scum do. ISO me for some pretty in depth thoughts on this topic.

This is different from the OP's example, since that was VC analysis and as such, there is certainly a mathematical reason to include yourself as town in that scenario.

So, for the purpose of VC analysis, as long as the player says up front that the analysis is from their POV and reflects all the information they have, I'm fine with it. But for just straight "TOWN/SCUM" lists, putting yourself on your town list is scummy.

Mr. Flay wrote:Wow, I could hardly disagree with ABR more. If you're approaching lists from the sense of "we could do this", you're doing it wrong. Lists are for what YOU think, and you should never think you're scum (even if you are).

That's interesting, because I think this is one of the fundamental reasons for NOT putting yourself on your town list either. Why do you need a list of what you think about your own alignment? If you don't put yourself on your own town list are you going to somehow forget you're town? That's pretty much the crux of my argument against Katsuki-scum in LOTR.

I have a problem when people color code themselves along with dead townies in vote count analyses. You're making an argument based on publically available information, so keep it that way. People considering themselves pro-town in scumlists or for lynching preferences are okay in my book.

It's the kind of dumbass pseudo-scumtell that towns seem to waste an inordinate amount of time on.

CrashTextDummie wrote:I have a problem when people color code themselves along with dead townies in vote count analyses. You're making an argument based on publically available information, so keep it that way. People considering themselves pro-town in scumlists or for lynching preferences are okay in my book.

When I do a VC Analysis I don't color myself confirmed Town like dead Townies but I also don't include myself in the pools of suspicion developed from the VC Analysis.

CrashTextDummie wrote:I have a problem when people color code themselves along with dead townies in vote count analyses. You're making an argument based on publically available information, so keep it that way. People considering themselves pro-town in scumlists or for lynching preferences are okay in my book.

This is what I'm talking about!!! Listen to CTD.

LynchMePls wrote:

Mr. Flay wrote:Wow, I could hardly disagree with ABR more. If you're approaching lists from the sense of "we could do this", you're doing it wrong. Lists are for what YOU think, and you should never think you're scum (even if you are).

That's interesting, because I think this is one of the fundamental reasons for NOT putting yourself on your town list either. Why do you need a list of what you think about your own alignment? If you don't put yourself on your own town list are you going to somehow forget you're town? That's pretty much the crux of my argument against Katsuki-scum in LOTR.

Well, when I used to actually do these sorts of lists, I just left myself off entirely, or put an (obv) by my name. Lately I see the trend seems to be to include yourself, and if you do THAT, you should absolutely be evaluating yourself as 100% town (from your own POV).

I do it half the time, and not the other half.

Depends on what I think I can get away with, mostly based on which players are present and how hostile they have been to the idea beforehand.

Personally I don't mind it when people do it.

The manner is often a good scum/town tell though, so I actually like when people do it because it helps me solidify my reads.

In post 33, ReaperCharlie wrote:I do it half the time, and not the other half.

Depends on what I think I can get away with, mostly based on which players are present and how hostile they have been to the idea beforehand.

Personally I don't mind it when people do it.

The manner

in which they do it

is often a good scum/town tell though, so I actually like when people do it because it helps me solidify my reads.

There's nothing to get away with. No one is going to town read you for it. It's going to get scum read or not read at all. You're not gaining anything so the only reaon to do it is because "fuck it, I can". The best play is probably to avoid doing it though.

did a poster which used to post in this 5 year old thread just necro this 5 year old thread

huh

tldr aren't we all

In post 35, McMenno wrote:did a poster which used to post in this 5 year old thread just necro this 5 year old thread

huh

while responding to a banned user

which we are not all, yet

I didn't look at the dates and i was excited at yos. Thanks

Interestingly enough I just never do because I prefer using the third person, people know I know that I know my alignment, and that my focus is on other people. I'm not going to include myself just so others see I'm being un-biased. I see the point with the VCA since it's more about statistics. I'm trying to become a writer and I prefer third person because it sounds better.

I usually do it because I copypaste the alive list when doing reads

I dont include myself at all in readlists, as i dont have a read on myself

Including yourself as town feels like a manipulative move to get others to think you are town, thats why it gets people scumread

Nobody will read you as town because you listed yourself as town tho

If I'm breaking a setup, I add mechanisms in the breaking strategy to hedge against me being scum (unless there are necessarily going to be some slots that can't be hedged and I'm widely townread). This is to encourage other people to adopt the strategy I suggest. It's not so much an "I could be scum" as "this strategy works even if I'm scum, thus you have no reason not to follow it even if you're suspicious of me and so not following it (without an explanation given well in advance) would be scummy".

If I'm giving reads, I omit myself entirely. Reading myself wouldn't be a useful exercise as I already know my alignment, and in most games, claiming my alignment is pointless because everyone knows I'd claim Town regardless of my actual alignment.

Five years later, I'm pretty sure including yourself has been so common that people have a hissy fit if you don't


it's kinda like, whether you do or you don't, someone will give you shit for doing it / not doing it

In post 44, kuribo wrote:Five years later, I'm pretty sure including yourself has been so common that people have a hissy fit if you don't


it's kinda like, whether you do or you don't, someone will give you shit for doing it / not doing it

Why would someone get offended at you NOT including yourself in town lists?!

WHY DIDN'T YOU INCLUDE YOURSELF YOU MUST BE SCUM


or

AHA YOU DIDN'T INCLUDE YOURSELF JUST TO MAKE US THINK YOU WERE TOWN

i have seen this stupid argument before

Enough times that I'm having dark flashbacks

In post 46, kuribo wrote:WHY DIDN'T YOU INCLUDE YOURSELF YOU MUST BE SCUM


or

AHA YOU DIDN'T INCLUDE YOURSELF JUST TO MAKE US THINK YOU WERE TOWN

i have seen this stupid argument before

Just laugh at the guy and continue with actual scumhunting, it's my standard response to tinfoil hats

Unless they're newbs, then I have to patiently explain what is an isn't alignment-indicative(this is where the NAI acronym is useful, take that haters)

As with every action in a post you read, the important part is the likely motivation for that player's behavior.

Most meta conscious players will either always include themselves or won't, I'm with Grey Ice on this and I always use the fact I am town in my lists without explicitly mentioning it, but our rationale for why we think it's best is meaningless for you when you're scum hunting us, it just means that it's null (the same goes for ABR if he always includes himself and his explanation of why).

If a player deviates from his usual meta or if you can find a reason for why scum would rather present the list by including or omitting that information (if that's what they always do it would have to be a really good reason and that's why this is in general a pretty weak tell) it's a valid question to ask.