are these actually legit reasons to you?
is this how you navigate town reads?
"he has to be town because he's doing something i don't think scum would."
but you're assuming and basing this off on the theory that's what the current scum tactic is? how would you even know what their plan is here?
are you sure that people who suspected him for his emotional play earlier are now vouching for him purely in good faith?
you haven't given these any real critical thoughts.
so if i said, "aurelian has to be town, his reaction to the lynch doesn't make sense" it's a good enough reason to not vote? it's a good enough reason to not try to address?
your reasonings for lynching and not lynching, regardless of motive, feel disconnected from the actual discussion and fears that were being discussed and talked about.
you haven't even involved yourself in the very discussions that you claim AM was dodging.
and part of your reasoning, apparently, is "im not a good scum hunter."
how do your reasons connect to the bigger picture? being a bad scum hunter should not prevent you from making your own observations on the current state of the game.
and if you think it should, why? why does being a bad scum hunter, chaotic voting patterns or whatever, absolve you of solving the game with us?
and i tend to to see you saying "it's a clever strategy" as contradictory to being a bad scum hunter. if you have this level of strategy based play in you, to save a town from a lynch if you prefer, surely you'd use it?
