I thought I posted my damn analysis yesterday of your argument, but shitty phone, shitty life.
Ok, here's the thing:
I see two reasons why Whydon is not yet killed despite being actively engaged.
1. He is a wincon: Starting from d0, Whydon was a prominent lynch candidate, because of the whole him-Leet-Biggie argument. Now, i see mafia as just easily pushing him into the lynch so that the win is guaranteed. Hence, a late game lynch wincon.
2. He is mafia: He is the one doing the nightkilling, along with two others. Him sacrificing himself rn does actually counter this point, because if Leprechan is the other mafia, then mafia has only one active member, and one player pushing for lynch against a now-more probable town is suspicious.
Then there is Leet. 2 reasons as well as to why he isn't dead yet despite. being a great arguer (I got that spelling down pat.)
1. Not a threat/Easy wincon: D0 centered mostly around Hitmonleet, the same argument as Whydon. My initial thoughts were:
I only got 2 so far.
I agree with whydon AND biggie, at the same time, they are good suspects of the same reason, which is Hitmonleet.
Biggie's hitmonleet is seemingly scum post agrees with me because it looks to me to lure cop, or center town around cop.
Whydon then goes and says that the post seems off, a diversion of sorts to divert attention, which is can also be right. This, though, for me btw, makes me see Why as Leet's accomplice, IF they are mafia, which I can only be partly sure of if one of them.flips scum.
Hitmonleet and Whydon are both scum and accomplices, serving as diversion. Well, that all but evaporated since they are at each other's necks rn.
2. He is scum: Yeah. If hitmonleet's post page 9 where he was saying that mafia wasn't hammering anyone yet seemed off to me. Like he was hinting at scum to drop it.
So, when you fail to provide evidence for your claim, it's fine because "it is clear what my intentions were", but apparently me not providing enough evidence is reason for suspicion? I bluntly stated my reasoning (Biggie has barely done anything to contribute, You were tunneled hard by the Cop, Blank was pretty much a misunderstanding) and yet you seem to think it isn't enough to match you in your evidence. I find it prevalent that you're simply trying to cover yourself up and throw shade on other people to get that last lynch you need.
Since I'm worried that you'll just call in your scumbuddies to stealth me and win, I'm gonna just highlight everyone to check this out:
leprechan
biggie
Blank Slate2356
Texas Cloverleaf
Martin
Former Hope
Shubaka
I'll be blunt here: Since leprechan is banned and we have no substitute, we're technically at 4 v 3, LyLo truely. Since Texas dislikes me, I'd like to plead for you to trust me, if we don't get unanimous village on this, we're gonna lose. I'll be honest, I'm shocked scum hasn't hammered yet.
But then again, he seemed fine with double lynching.
My thoughts on double lynching:
Its the best gamble we have, because its already semi-assured that one of them is scum, and if we find out who that is, we can derive that person's interactions all throughout and we can pick them off at the same time with another double lynch.
It is a giant risk-reward gamble, since there is a 50:50 chance they are both towns barking at the wrong tree, and the other is that one of them is scum.
Well, if anyone has other thoughts on this, but I'll keep the votes 2:2 for now.