@DanGR: When you vote a player, you should give reasoning why you think they are scum
Okay.
I thought it was vocal who asked that, so I answered it to him, my bad. i still answered the question
This seems awkwardly worded. The clarifying bit at the end was unnecessary, perhaps a bit defensive, for little reason.
@DanGR: When you vote a player, you should give reasoning why you think they are scum
I didn't explain my reasons for thinking you are mafia because I was trying to set Vocal up for something I'll explain later in this post.
That said, why not point out that one should give reasoning for voting when everyone else voted? You waited until I suggested you might be mafia to bring up this point. As a townie I'd expect you to be as concerned for all the other townies as you would be for yourself. You shouldn't want anyone to get voted for without reason- not just yourself.
Perhaps Swiss and I are reading too much into that bit. Regardless, it's more scummy than anything else I've seen thus far.
Why is this important to you?
@Dan: on second thought, don't answer that. After thinking about it for a moment, it's as bad as asking you "are you cop" or "are you mafia." I'll just keep note of it for the future.
The way it's worded makes it seem to me like I'm not allowed to multiquote anyone in here, which would be dumb if it were true. It basically says "don't quote logs of you and another person," which is every post in here.
And I still want clarification if any of y'all know what it really means...
-------
Well of course not, I'll survive by not being guilty 
What I meant is that I'll probably gather more information by
A) waiting for others to present good questions that I can then snowball off of
B) wait until something specific jumps out at me so I can ask a question with more intention.
Like...this.
I'm getting townie vibes from Vocal, considering everything I already know about him from my previous game with him: he's a very careless, carefree, but straightforward player, and plays as he sees things- more reactive than proactive. He also pays good attention to small details, though many times those details don't have much to do with the player's alignment... >_>
If he were mafia, I think he'd have picked up on my particular use of the word "survive" when I said "Do you think you'll
survive by playing this way?"- as if to subtly imply he's trying to make it to the end as mafia. I thought he would have
at least answered the question by rephrasing what I said, which he didn't. He used the word survive again.
I suspected he wouldn't notice if he was a townie, considering his careless nature and all. I think he'd be paying more attention if not.
"I didn't explain my reasons for thinking you are mafia because I was trying to set Vocal up for something I'll explain later in this post."
The above quote ties in to my experiment to give Vocal something else to think about as he read through my whole post. That and to give him a faint, false sense of security about his own scummy-ness if he is mafia. Had I explained that there isn't actually very much of a reason for me to suspect X1 of being mafia besides a small quote or two, I think the security affect would have been reduced, if that makes any sense.
I agree that I keep it light and breezy til I have something specific I want to zone in on, but I don't just go posting balderdash this way and that.
