I read through the posts of / cases against Ivy, Rob, and Furcolow.
Furcolow's acting has been decent if he's lying.
It bothers me a lot when players do that sort of "I'M INNOCENT I PROMISE LOOK AT MY META" ATE garbage;
since I would hate to lose to scum doing that I want to lynch anyone who does that,
but unfortunately often when I see people doing that stuff they turn out to be town.
On the other hand him having town meta doing this makes it more likely he'd do the same thing as scum.
Him finding ATE from poison scummy is just sickeningly hypocritical due to the massive volleys of it he is launching.
But my read on him is not scum this game, elevating the probability one of the others is scum.
Some of the case presented so far against poison seems silly.
The GF thing doesn't seem like a big deal to me; she speculated that a scum in the GC would be investigation immune and thus GFlike,
which simply makes sense.
ATE is a null tell and we've seen way more of it from Furcolow regardless.
I'm not scum, so that connection-business is meaningless.
But there are legitimate points to be made against her.
She wants to lynch VIs (Furcolow, Elleran) just to get them out of the way.
Scum do push VI mislynches because VIs are not as good at defending themselves and typically give off scumtells even as town.
She has supported her Furcolow vote by explaining why she believes his actions make sense if he is gambiting scum.
If a town player votes somebody who has claimed some role-related action, they have a reason for thinking it's a scum gambit, which she gave.
But she gave said reason long after her initial vote, which I don't see town logic behind.
If I were town-Ivy, I'd think Furcolow was bad because he outed the GCs, but not particularly scummy, so I wouldn't vote him.
Later, after discussing the scumgambit possibility and giving reasons for my belief in it, I might vote Furcolow.
ScumIvy immediately votes Furcolow because she sees him as primary alternative to her own lynch, then works out the logic fully later.
Rob looks pro-town/genuine for the most part, but I want to know where his vote goes and who he finds scummiest / why.
Andrew has repeatedly asked the GCs to disclose more role information. Fishing for role information helps scum.
He is also sending accusations at various players and then not mentioning them again.
Town care about getting accurate reads, so if they see something scummy they will keep it in mind and vote based on it.
Scum try to point out false scumtells given off by other players so they make them more likely to be lynched,
but they have no incentive to stick with a particular target unless it looks like they are a good lynch candidate.
He has vote parked on drshot, which is no better than not voting.
His play reminds me of Darox in his scummy unwillingness to commit any real reads to anybody.
No alignment makes him either a miller variant, scum GF variant, or third party.
Now that 4 players have claimed investigation immunity, lynching one of the 4 gives us the same 1/4 chance as lynching everyone else.
But although it's painful to say so, I don't think Furcolow or (for now) Rob are scum and I don't see Andrewscum revealing his special investigation status (maybe he actually does flip scum and this is a gambit to avoid investigation?) as very likely. That leaves good odds of hitting scum on an ivy lynch, and since she's also had some scummy actions I'll place vote L - 3.
Unvote; Vote Poison
Players who are not voting should be voting somebody;
not saying anything relevant or voting (Darox!) makes it hard to read you and thus is pro-scum.
there is something most wrong here. 
