Guild of Dungeoneering Mafia (Game Over)

[DrippingGoofball]

Ooops. Triforce dropped a huge town tell.

UNVOTE:

Elaborate please

Only an idiotscum would disculpate the next most likely wagon while being wagoned himself.

[DrippingGoofball]

VOTE: TheDominator37

[TriforceP]

For those who don't know, here's the definition of disculpate:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Disculpate

[dramonic]

Votecount 4: Never heard of disculpate, but it rhymes with dissipate.

TriforceP (6): Heartless, Yosarian2, Shazam, TheDominator37, Oversoul, Muffin
TheDominator (2): Znitzchel, DGB
Heartless (2): BipolarChemist, Kindness
Firebringer (2): Doctor Vahlen, PeregrineV
Doctor Vahlen (2): BBmolla, vezokpiraka
Znitzchel (1): TriforceP
Yosarian2 (1): Firebringer
Kindness (1): Quaroath

Not Voting: BipolarChemist, Xtoxm, Actiondan

It is 10 to lynch!~
Deadline is in 12 days - 12 hours to lynch!

[znitzchel]

What post you attribute to me?

Am I the only other one bedsides triforce, not seeing him as scummy?

I made a comment in one of my other posts about you voting me incorrectly because it was Triforce who was voting me. (at a glance your avatars have a similar color palate)

I'm ambivalent about Triforce, he leaves a lot to be desired, as evidence by the wagon on him.

Yes, a wagon that I argued against, and there has still been no rebuttal, 50 posts later, even by the people who led my wagon (though someone mentioned that they'd get to it soon, fingers crossed)

Okay well here's the thing. I thought you were fine until you decided to take an anti-town stance in regards to all the miller claims. That's not critical thinking, that's making an excuse to justify a vote you really don't have any real reason to make.

And no I'm not saying questioning the multiple millers isn't worth it....but you actually aren't doing anything about it. You've been wagoned so far for really bad scum-type voting reasons. Did you even read Yosarian's post? He more or less accused you of that (in many many more words), and rather than answer for it you've been complaining there's been no rebuttal to the defense you came up with. But if I was a player looking to lynch you (and if I didn't have stronger scumreads elsewhere I would) I'd need to see an evolution in your play in order to stop considering you a top scum-suspect. None of your posts indicate any sort of critical thinking meant to find scum. That's where you have gone wrong so far, and if you are town and want that perception to change, you gotta change it.

If you think I'm scum, why? What about my play suggests this? Was my claim bad? Did I do it in a way to suggest I am scum? What about the other wagons, what do you think about them? Which wagons are worth more effort in your opinion? Which ones should dissipate?

If you can't be honest about your thought processes (which so far you really haven't been) no one is going to trust that you're town. I definitely don't trust that because I don't see any real town thought processes coming out of your posts.

[TriforceP]

My thought process is that I'm having a hard time setting up hard reads for mself this game. All I didn't like about your claim was your placement, much like trying to take scum out of a bandwagon. The reason I have yet to argue for other lynches is for two reasons.
1) I have no others I'm currently willing to ride
2) I have literally one reason for this vote

And I get that you guys are blaming me for the Kindness vote. I really do. But I explained it as well as I could, and if that doesn't work for you than oh well.

And I apologize for the constant complaints about no replies. I admit to not giving a lot of time in between those, and I definitely should've waited longer.

[Xtoxm]

I'm gonna VOTE: Yos, his case on Tri feels contrived and makes me question his motives.

The Shazam vote on the wagon is also suspect.

[PeregrineV]

Good Monday morning! Will do some reading today.

[Kindness]

Hi game, espe here. Vezok are you a mason miller?

I expect an answer in your next post.

Xtoxm, I encourage you to reread Yos' post. Him being wrong doesn't mean the case doesn't have backing. I disagree with the case too and actually think it looks better that TriP isn't afraid to do suspect things rather than placing a vote that isn't really believed in. So yeah, Yos being wrong doesn't make him scum.

I have cases brewing for my two top scumreads at the moment but mollie and I don't have many reads in common so I think a tag team of pushing is in order for the time being.

[znitzchel]

I don't think I said anything about you and your Kindness vote.

[vezokpiraka]

I'm not mason. I'm just miller. Why did you ask?

[Oversoul]

Should we tree claim?

[Oversoul]

If multiple people are millers for being on the Stupid tree, then we might be able to predict future types of powers/actions.

[Xtoxm]

If multiple people are millers for being on the Stupid tree, then we might be able to predict future types of powers/actions.

This sounds entirely plausible. We could tree claim and work out what type role everyone is.

For your next trick, please explain how this benefits the town.

[PeregrineV]

Ooops. Triforce dropped a huge town tell.

UNVOTE:

He didn't even use the litterbox...

[Kindness]

Ok next question vezok. This one is a theory question.

Assume a hypothetical game. There are many people in the game but we're going to concentrate on three of them. Player A and Player B clear each other because of role related stuff but then player B starts using that and being careless about their play. They start saying things without any logical backup, things that they can't even know like declaring other players as town when there is no evidence, lets call that person (the one they unfoundedly call town) player C.

Player A realises that the mod, who is very experienced has a tendency to create scenarios where scumhunting using anything to do with roles is completely false. Player A then realises that player B is doing some suspect shit.

Given this scenario, do you think it is reasonable for player A to vote player B for lazily calling player C "pretty town" off no evidence? Because that really looks a lot like player B looking for easy things to say and fucking up because they got complacent. Do you agree?

[PeregrineV]

Vote: Dominator27

[Doctor Vahlen]

212213 I think there's also scum in Xtoxm and Oversoul, leaning Xtoxm. That post exchange just doesn't feel right.

Firebringer needs more votes.

[TriforceP]

I don't think I said anything about you and your Kindness vote.

Let me check back on that post. I only skimmed it since I had to get to work.

If multiple people are millers for being on the Stupid tree, then we might be able to predict future types of powers/actions.

Sure.
I have a stupid level of one. I'm just stupid... That's it. No changes.

Hi game, espe here. Vezok are you a mason miller?

I expect an answer in your next post.

Xtoxm, I encourage you to reread Yos' post. Him being wrong doesn't mean the case doesn't have backing. I disagree with the case too and actually think it looks better that TriP isn't afraid to do suspect things rather than placing a vote that isn't really believed in. So yeah, Yos being wrong doesn't make him scum.

I have cases brewing for my two top scumreads at the moment but mollie and I don't have many reads in common so I think a tag team of pushing is in order for the time being.

Even I agree with this, and it's my wagon. Doc feels townish to me, despite being wrong. He's just trying to scum hunt with what he has.

[vezokpiraka]

@kindness: I don't agree. If the players are role cleared to each other even if it isn't actually like masons, they should trust each other at least until close to LyLo. I know for a fact players push stupid suggestions when they think/know they are confirmed town.

In your scenario player A seems scummiest and player B towniest.

[vezokpiraka]

@kindness: what are these questions?

[Kindness]

You missed the part where they aren't confirmed to each other because it was based on a false positive.

The scenario is that player B thinks they are confirmed but player A knows they aren't confirmed. Is player B not accountable for their actions based of thinking they are cleared when they aren't?

[Kindness]

@kindness: what are these questions?

Very important.

[Doctor Vahlen]

I don't follow this recent exchange at all, but it doesn't seem to hurt anything. We should give Kindness the space they need.

[vezokpiraka]

You missed the part where they aren't confirmed to each other because it was based on a false positive.

The scenario is that player B thinks they are confirmed but player A knows they aren't confirmed. Is player B not accountable for their actions based of thinking they are cleared when they aren't?

Well, that's a little scummier, but it's only important near Lylo. I wouldn't wagon player B if it where the forst few days.