Moderator: Community Team
The fact that you know forum inactivity/submarining as a scumtell but don't know trying to end the day quickly as one makes me even more suspicious...Dibbler wrote:I mean God Emperor Q has only posted once, That seems a much clearer scum tell to me. He really doesn't want to get noticed. I bet many of you have forgotten he is even in this game.
Vote God Emperor Q
Very good point Vote Dibblerslowreactor wrote:The fact that you know forum inactivity/submarining as a scumtell but don't know trying to end the day quickly as one makes me even more suspicious...Dibbler wrote:I mean God Emperor Q has only posted once, That seems a much clearer scum tell to me. He really doesn't want to get noticed. I bet many of you have forgotten he is even in this game.
Vote God Emperor Q

Maybe it's because he's been reading the thread? Several of us have talked about inactivity/submarining throughout this game. We've already lost two townies last night, let's not lynch another today.dazza2008 wrote:Very good point Vote Dibblerslowreactor wrote:The fact that you know forum inactivity/submarining as a scumtell but don't know trying to end the day quickly as one makes me even more suspicious...Dibbler wrote:I mean God Emperor Q has only posted once, That seems a much clearer scum tell to me. He really doesn't want to get noticed. I bet many of you have forgotten he is even in this game.
Vote God Emperor Q
soundman wrote:Dibbler strikes me as a townie. He's bored with all the waiting and told us he didn't care if he was lynched. I think he would be more interested in the game and not mind waiting if he had a mafia/power role. Of course he could be using reverse psychology... I'm actually more interested in what ShaggyDan's case is. He's been pretty quiet through most of the game.
2 things here:soundman wrote:And I have a case! Looking back to when Dibbler first made his comments I find slowreactor voting for him first. And first on Day 2. And first on Day 3. Even on Day 2 when Shaggy came up with his guilty find on safari, slowreactor didn't change his vote. He made a couple of comments during that time but was very reserved and noncommittal. I think he didn't want to vote for his scum partner. And now he's trying to make an easy lynch against a potential townie. Vote slowreactor
Mafia shouldn't have much reason going 3rd on a bandwagon against a co-mafia - unless Saf really thought that my bandwagon would be successful. Can people please let me know, if Shaggy didn't claim yesterday, would you think my bandwagon would have carried through? Just so I can gauge Saf's chances of bussing Dibbler vs him being innocent?safariguy5 wrote:drake_259 wrote:And yes, vote Dibbler for his actions yesterday.
EBWOP: Saf was the one who did that vote, not drakeslowreactor wrote:2 things here:soundman wrote:And I have a case! Looking back to when Dibbler first made his comments I find slowreactor voting for him first. And first on Day 2. And first on Day 3. Even on Day 2 when Shaggy came up with his guilty find on safari, slowreactor didn't change his vote. He made a couple of comments during that time but was very reserved and noncommittal. I think he didn't want to vote for his scum partner. And now he's trying to make an easy lynch against a potential townie. Vote slowreactor
1) I saw a major scumtell day 1 from Dibbler, and I acted on it. Day 1 ended too fast for any action, so I restarted day 2. As for the Safari bandwagon, the 1st time, right after Shaggy claimed, I misread, thinking he hasn't told us who his guilty investigation was yet, and when I came back to the thread Safari was already hammered.
2) I just saw this combing back through yesterday's stuff (in-game yesterday):Mafia shouldn't have much reason going 3rd on a bandwagon against a co-mafia - unless Saf really thought that my bandwagon would be successful. Can people please let me know, if Shaggy didn't claim yesterday, would you think my bandwagon would have carried through? Just so I can gauge Saf's chances of bussing Dibbler vs him being innocent?safariguy5 wrote:And yes, vote Dibbler for his actions yesterday.
And then later on the same day,VioIet wrote:I am doing Dibbler a favor here.Dibbler wrote:I just don't think that we will get any more info. If you want I'm ok with lynching I never thought this game would go for months but right now it is on that track.
Vote Dibbler
So her only two posts that could be described as scum hunting consist of: 1) Voting a player and then 2) Agreeing that player shouldn't be voted.VioIet wrote:QFT. I remember making a similar statement in the Quentin game- which was perceived wrong. I think Dibbler's comments were due to inexperience, and not being sure how the game works.soundman wrote:Dibbler strikes me as a townie. He's bored with all the waiting and told us he didn't care if he was lynched. I think he would be more interested in the game and not mind waiting if he had a mafia/power role. Of course he could be using reverse psychology... I'm actually more interested in what ShaggyDan's case is. He's been pretty quiet through most of the game.
They were actually different days, the first quote is from day one and the second from day two. Nothing about the dibbler case had changed between the posts though.icedagger wrote:And then later on the same day,

I think your bandwagon would have been successful. This just strengthens my conviction that Dibbler is town.slowreactor wrote:EBWOP: Saf was the one who did that vote, not drakeslowreactor wrote:2 things here:soundman wrote:And I have a case! Looking back to when Dibbler first made his comments I find slowreactor voting for him first. And first on Day 2. And first on Day 3. Even on Day 2 when Shaggy came up with his guilty find on safari, slowreactor didn't change his vote. He made a couple of comments during that time but was very reserved and noncommittal. I think he didn't want to vote for his scum partner. And now he's trying to make an easy lynch against a potential townie. Vote slowreactor
1) I saw a major scumtell day 1 from Dibbler, and I acted on it. Day 1 ended too fast for any action, so I restarted day 2. As for the Safari bandwagon, the 1st time, right after Shaggy claimed, I misread, thinking he hasn't told us who his guilty investigation was yet, and when I came back to the thread Safari was already hammered.
2) I just saw this combing back through yesterday's stuff (in-game yesterday):Mafia shouldn't have much reason going 3rd on a bandwagon against a co-mafia - unless Saf really thought that my bandwagon would be successful. Can people please let me know, if Shaggy didn't claim yesterday, would you think my bandwagon would have carried through? Just so I can gauge Saf's chances of bussing Dibbler vs him being innocent?safariguy5 wrote:And yes, vote Dibbler for his actions yesterday.
Both prodded.soundman wrote:Unvote Can we get a prod on God Emperor Q and Violet please? Thanks.