SC:
Dearie, you don’t get to dismiss an attack against you as “stupid trivia that has very little to do with the game”. I’m not arguing with you to convince you of anything. I don’t expect you to concede, “Why yes, EmpTyger, you’re right, I must be mafia, I’ll be toddling off now to vote myself.” I’m pointing out suspicious things that you are doing to the town, with the expectation that you will either give a plausible explanation or others will vote you.
So far this game you have:
1) Said that “being pushy is scummy”, while saying that “being pushy” was your playstyle. (This alone should be lynchworthy.)
2) Attacked a player solely for pressuring someone who you admitted was behaving suspiciously.
3) Changed your reasoning as you go along
4) Falsely accused a player of WIFOM.
5) The point to the gender slip was that either
you know BSW’s true identity (implying that you talked with her about it pregame) or you were lying about how seriously you were considering Natirasha suspicious.
Considering all the other inconsistencies in your alleged suspicion of Natirasha, I suspect the latter. You FoSed him, and said that you were “pretty sure at least one of [EmpTyger, Natirasha] is scum at this point”, and now you’re saying that you “have never had a solid case on [Natirasha]”. So, what was that FoS based on? (Early D1 distancing, perhaps?) Especially given Natirasha’s behavior: I hypothesize that you 2 are mafia together.
Also, just noticing that you never responded to this:
EmpTyger [154] wrote:<snip>
I can’t think of why you care, or why you think the mafia care that much whether the mafia roleblocker is blocked. They get slightly less information, but that’s nothing to do with whether the real vigilante is dead or alive. Really curious where you’re going with this.
<snip>
Was there anything, or should I just add 6)?