Mafiascum.net

A collection of yessirree's most suspicious posts.

In post 114, yessiree wrote:Anyone else noticed Nobody Special has not posted a serious comment, other than the one where he randomly pointed finger to someone without even giving out the reasons?

Nobody Special posted this a few pages earlier:

In post 62, Nobody Special wrote:I should give reasons to be a Good Example.

gene is probscum because he didn't answer whether he was mafia or not, plus the whole "trying to look townie" thing.

yessirree because he's using stats to avoid scumhunting.

so that's simply untrue. I was going to exclude the next one because it involves me so I'm probably biased, but it's a really stupid accusation:

In post 112, Bicephalous Bob wrote: Gene doesn't seem to be very self-aware. Because of that, it's hard to read him, but I don't think he's a Mafioso. I agree yessirree is suspicious and I'm totally down for brutally murdering him, but I still think Channel is the scummiest.

In post 116, yessiree wrote: Did you just declare your night kill target?

But this is his scummiest post:

In post 171, yessiree wrote:

So many "maybe"s and question marks in your last post. Starting to feel uncertain, are you?

Trying to word everything carefully in a question format so you are held less accountable for what you've said. I suspect anyone and everyone equally, and the more information I have, the better I can sort through the logic. If you actually READ all of my last post, you will note that I didn't actually label you as scum, I simply put the possibility out there. However, from the way you responded to my post, I'm starting to grow more suspicious of you. It looks like you are the one who jumped out of his chair and went "holy shit, how did this guy know?" And then you proceeded to write me 2 garbage paragraphs that didn't make a single logical statement.

And for your information, I read all of your arguments, but it is YOU who didn't read all of my posts.

Your vote switch on me, on the surface, looks like a good move in general.

Almost too good.

I voted him because I sensed gene's scum slip, whether that was indeed a scum slip or just inexperienced play, I was determined to put my vote on him to find out. It doesn't hurt the town to lynch someone like that.

So of course I'm not gonna sit idly and let you and JKM plot my lynch on day 2. That models the standard scum play; by making someone else the "common enemy". In this case that "common enemy" is me.

But this is a survival game.

And I am town.

So I will not be lynched today

, I will not be lynched tomorrow, and I will not be lynched on any day thereafter. You can waste your vote on a townie if you like, or you can get off your lazy ass do some actual scum-hunting.

The first bold part is plain dumb, the second bold part doesn't make any sense and the third part shows you aren't reasoning from a town perspective.

yessiree wrote:"Lol, you actually thought those weren't rhetorical questions? (In case you didnt know, this was also a rhetorical question, L2R). You think I was asking you if I was online 24/7? Wow. Misrep."

If that is a rhetorical question, then you just said I thought those were rhetorical questions.

No, that is the exact opposite of what DoctorPepper's question implied.

VOTE: yessiree

It is a survival game for both parties, in my opinion. I want to survive and win.

@Bob,

Bob, you need to do your homework before spouting nonsense.

Go back and re-read every post from nobody, from #98, his FoS is Rikablu, not gene, not me. And he did not give reasons why Rikablu is his FoS.

Therefore I am correct, and you are wrong.

You don't need to survive to win

In fact, often dying can be good for your win condition (as town) as people will see that your posts are coming from a town perspective, and can remember your opinions

If people can do that, then that's cool.

Still, I feel like dying to prove one's innocence should be the last resort. Should always fight with logic first.

I'm wondering why you think its more important to survive than to catch scum?

Usually the better you catch scum the faster you die, but thats not a bad thing.

If me dying will help town catch scum faster, then that's fine by me.

I just want to be alive when town wins, because there will be a greater sense of accomplishment that way.

You're doing it wrong.

In post 177, yessiree wrote:@Bob,

Bob, you need to do your homework before spouting nonsense.

Go back and re-read every post from nobody, from #98, his FoS is Rikablu, not gene, not me. And he did not give reasons why Rikablu is his FoS.

Therefore I am correct, and you are wrong.

You didn't say Nobody Special hadn't explained why he pointed a finger at Rikablu, you said he hadn't posted a serious comment yet. The post I quoted was serious.

^So you are saying I'm wrongfully accusing someone for posting 1 serious comment, then proceed to not participating as much as possible in scum-hunting?

PS: that post looks semi-serious at best.

PSS: I did say NS hadn't explained why he pointed fingers to Rikablu, #114, "he randomly pointed finger to someone without even giving out the reasons?"

In post 181, yessiree wrote:If me dying will help town catch scum faster, then that's fine by me.

I just want to be alive when town wins, because there will be a greater sense of accomplishment that way.

Yeah this is all wrong

Usually in my games I aim to be doing SO WELL that the scum HAVE to nightkill me on n1

thats how I get my greatest sense of accomplishment

being alive at the end of the game means that scum thought you were bad, and the most likely to vote incorrectly at the end

Whoa! That exploded. I may or may not have wasted my day off playing Civ 5 but I'm going to read the last few pages in between games of Skype mafia.

Hey CDB, what did you get from your read?

In post 179, yessiree wrote:If people can do that, then that's cool.

Still, I feel like dying to prove one's innocence should be the last resort. Should always fight with logic first.

Two posts later

In post 181, yessiree wrote:If me dying will help town catch scum faster, then that's fine by me.

I just want to be alive when town wins, because there will be a greater sense of accomplishment that way.

Look, we dont need you to die, we need you to help town. Survival is not the win condition for town and thinking that is scum mentality. In fact, by dying, people use the death as a scumhunting method, to see why you were probably night killed, or to see who lead to your lynch.

That's what I've been trying to do all this time. But not much is happening right now. People aren't posting as much as I'd like them to. So I'm doing my best to try and pry from those lurkers.

On that thought, ***@gene***, I want you to make a vote decision on your next post.

^coaching much?

In post 186, ChannelDelibird wrote:Whoa! That exploded. I may or may not have wasted my day off playing Civ 5 but I'm going to read the last few pages in between games of Skype mafia.

And?

The end of page 7 is confusing me, starting around post 169. Around then is when I get the feeling that Pepper and Yessiree aren't necessarily arguing logic, but rather are just feeding off each other's suspicions, intentionally or not, to become increasingly aggressive towards each other.

In post 171, yessiree wrote:If you actually READ all of my last post, you will note that I didn't actually label you as scum, I simply put the possibility out there. However, from the way you responded to my post, I'm starting to grow more suspicious of you. It looks like you are the one who jumped out of his chair and went "holy shit, how did this guy know?" And then you proceeded to write me 2 garbage paragraphs that didn't make a single logical statement.

And for your information, I read all of your arguments, but it is YOU who didn't read all of my posts.

This is intentionally aggressive. I don't see another way to interpret it. In a vacuum, I'd guess that this would be scummy in nature, because it's fueling competitive fire towards another player without really digging in to post details to find incriminating evidence. But, in tandem with my previous question directed toward yessiree, are you just aggressively hasty? I understand that you want post content, but what I'm pulling from your little argument with Pepper is a debate structure of:

Pepper: You said this, which is wrong.
Yess: I did this, read me better.

Do you see a problem here? Pepper is trying to find flaws in your posts. Your rebuttals are needlessly aggressive, and more importantly do not prod deeply in to Pepper's attacks on you. You dismiss them straight out. That's not conclusive.

Other players have already picked apart your posts for potential scumminess (and I agree that the expoused need to survive is quite scummy in nature), so I don't feel like I can add much more to that approach.


On a separate note: NS, is it your nature as a player to post compressed and short texts? I am under the impression that you might be the type to keep your thoughts mostly to yourself until it's necessary to push players towards your line of thinking. I don't see anything wrong with that, but it's difficult to get a read on you without knowing for sure. Assuming that this belief is correct, I think you're town on the basis that each time you posted, it's presented some form of constructive argument. I even consider the vote on me to be constructive, because frankly speaking no one else has voiced an opinion on my actions, and that's either weak, lazy, or overpowering fixation on gene at the time. On the other hand, if your concise nature isn't part of your standard play, my followup question would be 'why is this different', and what's otherwise a town read becomes a lot weaker.

Going to use this opportunity to fix my , so that it's properly official. I want more pulled out of him. Of the two major wagons thus far, gene has been far too defensive, and now suicidal. I don't think that easing pressure off a suicidal player, scum or town, is a good thing. I don't like the possibility of a suicidal player getting a free ride on the basis that they've thrown in the towel. While yessiree is also deserving of a vote due to Post 171's lack of aggression (compared to his other posts at the time), as well as the analysis on his use of the word 'survival', he at least ISN'T suicidal.

Gene, do you want to play this game anymore? If you do not, I recommend getting a replacement. You don't do your character slot justice by voting yourself. Extreme circumstances aside, doesn't it go against the philosophy of very nearly every wincon?

^^I like this post, the only thing I'm worried about is that if Gene really is a townie who is buckling under the pressure, then I'd rather ease up that pressure to help him scumhunt. He had said previously that the votes on him were impeding his ability to scumhunt, and I want to see what he does when he's actually looking for scum.

You bring up a fair point. I didn't think about the fact that most of us are new players, and that not everyone is going to handle pressure adequately with a lack of experience. This forum is also rather intimidating compared to other Mafia sites.

I'll trust your judgment on this one, because of your experience, but gene needs to shape up somehow. It's not good to be defeatist.

I agree, but if we end up deciding to lynch gene we have more than enough time to unvote him, and allow him to scumhunt first.

Of the top wagons, I agree with the votes on gene the most, and I'm still somewhat confused by the yessiree slot. Though he is being deliberately anti-town by using methods that are not better at finding scum than random (such as statistics), and also by playing to a "survivalist" strategy, I'm not sure that a mafia would be so candid about playing to such a variant style. My top suspicions after these two slots are CDB and Bicephalous Bob.

I'm not sure why I'm suspicious of Bob, call it gut.

But CDB has been promising to contribute without doing so, and sort of hiding in the shadows. I'd love to give him some motivation to scumhunt

VOTE: CDB

I request replacement.

I'm so confused as to why everyone is attracted to my stats posts like flies. Look at how many posts I have in this thread. Then count how many posts I have about stats. Then note when and where said posts are. I think using that to label me as anti-town is ridiculous, and it shows the lack of motivation to find better reasons.

And to answer your confusion Rika, I am an aggressive poster. When I see something that clearly goes against logic, I will get to the bottom of it. I don't think the game has progressed to the point where you can safely trust anyone YET. The approach I took then is to question everyone, especially their motivations to vote someone.

There are too many lurkers, it's slowing down the pace of this game. I think that's what hinders scum-hunt the most. Usually the scums would benefit from this since they have the advantage in information, and they are perfectly fine with keeping that gap.

Nonetheless, we still have more than a week to sort this out, so I'm fine with waiting for some of these lurkers to post for now.

@gene, "If you need to get the mod's attention, either PM me, or bold the text you wish to draw to my attention."