drafterman

The interaction part is where I see the most red flags. Why is Pie pointing out something drafterman said a year ago and looking at him to test his reaction? How does he know what drafterman is thinking at the time this is going. What would be the motive for Pie to focus in on something from a year ago just to ask for Drafter's opinion on something. To me, it doesn't add up in anyway. The only reason that post would've been brought up if drafter told Pie about the post, which leads me to believe they have some form of communication with each other. Drafter even says it wasn't recently where he said Miller claims. Why would Pie remember this info at all? These don't add in anyway

Tunneling on one person when there's no concrete evidence of whether or not he's scum is extremely rash and reactionary versus him last game, where while he voted Water, he was much more cautious of his vote versus now, where he is voting Elm off of less information. Water had bad plays and sus moves constantly, and it didn't take Drafter til page 6 to vote him, where he didn't even go through with the vote because of Elm. This tunneling where he disregards the case on Pie and only focuses on one character is anti town, and anti town is usually scum. I maintained the position that bad town and anti town are different in various definitions and regards. The fact he is willing to throw Pie in the pile after he did not claim Dp1 in the time he had. He isn't considering any options, versus town drafter, where in the last game, he considered Elm an option as well. Why isn't he doing the same here

I've made a big case about this but drafter left the site in March this year. He then states his belief of Millers are confirmed town because of the site and shouldn't be trusted. Yet  when he left the site and came back, he is now suddenly changing his opinion on claimed Millers, even when they don't claim right away?

What changed about his behavior since? He didn't participate in any mafia games during this time? He rage quit another mafia game,

why is he suddenly having this drastic change of heart? To me, his reads are not consistent of his play. Drafter is not someone to change based on a meta or belief or wave, yet he decides to drastically change the style he preached. It's out of character, and would coorelate with drafter forcing a potential mislynch on Elm and then when it's MYLO, he goes an attacks me for being aggressive and gets enough of town validation to get a mislynch since it is the funny trend to hate on Supa and just push the narrative that Supa is an idiot and should be lynched cuz idiots are scummy.

To a certain extent. You changing your entire logic after a 7 month hiatus makes no sense in anyway. Plus you are someone who sticks to your beliefs and values. Correct? Why all of a sudden are you going back on that? I'm not saying things can't change. I'm saying that you, yourself, as a player, is not someone that adapts to change to a certain extent because of your beliefs.

You have no proof of that. That's simply a scum read

You can still have a scum read on someone but prefer to lynch someone over another

Yet why do you wanna dismissively accept has claim and not weigh all options and form reads on all players.

This strategy is a double barrel. If the lynch doesn't shift your way with Elm, you're gonna keep your vote on Elm and risk a VTNL, or will you vote Pie?

Either way, it's inconsistent.

Yes, in one of those ways, I'm being inconsistent with a position I stated while in a game a year ago as scum, and in the other way I'm inconsistent with some person that may or may not be me that may or may not have said something about the subject "recently."

So what has changed since your hiatus

I'm questioning about the way you play the game and determining. You say you buy the claim when he has only posted 3 or 4 posts and then believe it when Pie could've claimed it in DP1 first thing first. Yet you said you believed it. I don't know how you are putting Pie in your town pile

I didn't  feel strongly enough on any reads to take the risk based on the MYLO/LYLO situation (at least I didn't then -- I'm about to make a case against Supa).

I think if Elminster promised to play to his win con but then flaked out the second a slight disagreement came up, he's prob faking, and I'd def lynch him if he refused to claim. But at the same time if we're close to losing per 1 mislynch I'd prefer to play cautious. Regardless I never committed to No Lynching so no need to nitpick for no reason. 

Back to Supa. I didn't want to look into characters too much (in fact I didn't even read the dead character flips) JUST IN CASE I ever wanna read the book which I doubt but you never know. However I couldn't help but look up Supa's character which is a fucking bad guy lol. Whitney Horgan is a villain, and apparently he only wants to desert the other bad guys because shit has already gone bad. That's literally what Reddit says and notes it's not an admirable reason to desert his fellow bad guys. So although I hate to go by theme analysis alone I really think Supa might be lone wolf scum or scum of some kind. Ya'll are more than welcome to look up his character.

Note I'm not going based on theme analysis alone here but also behavior. He's playing a bit more aggressive like he does as scum. Look at post #191 where he seems to think I was calling him inactive this day phase (I wasn't; I said I didn't buy his reason for allegedly being active today 12/8). I mean I'm not entirely sure how to read claiming vanilla with only 2 votes and could see an argument either way, but coupled with his seemingly defensive behavior and that super sus character claim I feel very wary of him.

Well you said it,

and I recall someone saying it recently too and I'm like 85% sure it was you.

Either way, it's inconsistent.

There also wasn't enough evidence with Pie to suggest you buying him as town.

Even so, it's a sharp contrast from that game,

you might be bringing it up so you can use that to fuel your story about it. I don't doubt that you're smart person, and you could be playing this card as scum to try to convince me otherwise

No. I said I'm leaning toward a No Lynch, not that I'm definitely voting No Lynch. That's why I said I'm not rushing the day phase. And I said "the rage seems a lil fake" but that doesn't necessarily mean he is scum. I do happen to have him more in my lean scum pile based on what little behavioral reads we have to go on.  Now that we have Supa's claim I'll think about whether I want to pressure Elminster for a claim. 

Re: Mikal, I agree with drafter that the rage seems a lil fake cuz he did it again for no reason, but I wouldn't be surprised if Mikal and drafter were working together (who knows!) creating fake tension.

Your reading him off the fact he is checking in the game for a break. This is a bullshit reason to scum read someone.

Your reason for Elm has been

"Anyway Elminster won't rage this time, not because he promise, but because he's actually scum and he'll get reamed by his team mates if he throws again with the lead they've developed.

Eli is scum if only for this half assed attempt to rile me up for no reason. This fake indignation screams scum.

He didn't try to rile me up last game when he was town. He just caved and imploded. His behavior here is different."

Yes. That's how raids work. You get breaks in between fights

Meow meow

1. His ignorance to things such as Mikal going to a raid

2. His contrasting view where he says "Miller shouldn't be an instant town" when he did the same thing with Pie

3. Blind voting Mikal for no reason and without giving valid justification

4. His interaction with Pie felt scummy asf

He is either throwing or is scum