XLAV

Mod psyche, 1st person Mod addresses must be town.

You linked to him disagreeing Parrot was town. Where was the extreme repetition? Again, null

Ok, so the question becomes, why didnt you focus on Virt and Smith then? Obviously they were doing exactly what you would think scum would do, and yet... you go after Harder.

Obviously even you dont actually think scum naturally will focus on set up. And i can point to multiple instances in this game of townies analyzing set-up. Set-up analysis isnt in itself a scum tell, its null. Its becomes a scum tell when that player starts acting as if that analysis is fact and/or that analysis doesnt quite jive with what they are trying to posit. For example, smithers saying a 7 player game would be best balanced by using 1 tp/ 1 mafia. When again, that doesnt make sense considering TP win cons had to be fundamentally altered to balance.

no, XLAV, you have part of the blame because you trumped up a case on someone that was predicated upon null tells or possible scum teams without any concrete scum tells to hold both players as independently scummy. Again, just because you thought Virt wasn't Jester, doesnt automatically mean thinking he was Jester is scummy. A towny and mafia would be equally likely to argue against a lynch of someone they think might be jester, because, again, that means they lose.

Im just over here wondering how much longer you are going to keep operating as if it makes sense that players would operate against what is conducive to achieving their win con xD 

It was a bunk ass TR to begin with and Harder was right to point that out. Being a bodyguard, especially in a game where the mod specifically warned against role confirmation =/= affiliation confirmation is right to be pointed out. Not to mention, disagreeing with a read is something a town or mafia would be equally liable to do. A towny because they disagree with it, and if they do, arguing against it is arguing against what will in their view lead to a loss. Mafia would do so because they want to obfuscate and destroy TR's. ITS NULL

In a game where the possibility of TP's, particularly Jester was outright stated, TP paranoia is like, totally merited? Why the fuck would it not be? This is, again, a null tell. Both Mafia, and Town, in a game where it is outright stated TP's can be included, is not in itself, a scum tell. Maybe in combination with other more concrete scumtells, but so far none has been presented. Ergo, it has to be null

He's trying to keep Virt alive because he thought he was Jester. If he is lynched, town loses, mafia loses. This is again, a null tell. Both mafia and town, would want to avoid lynching a jester, because it means they both lose. Seriously? This is some wtf shit

Sure, but possible scum teams, only matter, if you have scum tells to back up that both may be scum. Or else you are throwing out unsubstantiated assumptions. This is exactly what it was, an unsubstantiated assumption, based upon things that are null tells. I mean jesus, i had to point out to XLAV in 1.1 endgame, that no, mafia are not going to focus on set-up, BECAUSE THEY KNOW MORE AND THAT WILL GIVE THEM AWAY AS MAFIA. 

Like, for real, thats assuming mafia will behave in a way that is unconducive to winning. Which is absurd to posit, because you play to win the game...

Basically, what we have here, is absolute rubbish as a case. Plain and simply put. It was null tells trumped up as scum tells, because XLAV had a guilty on 1harder. This is quite obvious, because as was just illustrated, its not too hard to point out that every behavioral read, is predicated on null tells. And the only way null tells start looking scummy, is if there is something causing oneself to view them as scummy... like idk, maybe a guilty result? That definitely would create confirmation bias. 

and on the note of XLAV saying that wasn't what was happening here, sure buddy, you can say that, but your actions tell a wholly different story.