Lalendra:
1.
221 --> Wants to sheep Math cuz "always power town"; also asks about Math's Beefster/Taly reads -->
Not much to say here. (Null)
2.
222 --> Asks "why" in response to Mathdino saying we should policy lynch vengeful -->
Null.
3.
223 --> Likes SIMYK's posts but find them hard to read and thus skims them -->
Okay. (Null)
4.
224 --> Now they are getting used to SIMYK's posts. -->
(Null)
5.
256 --> States "tell me you're not serious" in response to Mutant's
240 about whether the games where the mod chooses the scum actually happened. -->
Again, not alignment-indicative in any way. (Null)
6.
257 --> Complains about SIMYK capitalizing PRESENT everywhere except once -->
Noting that this is the last post Lalendra made that Friday. The next one isn't til Monday because of weekend V/LA. Other than that, nothing to comment regarding Lalendra except perhaps the lack of stating any reads. (Null)
7.
692 --> Apologizes for not declaring weekend V/LA and promises to make a more substantial post later. -->
Lalendra did actually do what she promised here. (Null)
8.
1074 --> Response to Mathdino's request for people not to do chronological catch ups. -->
Null.
9.
1075 --> "DEAD" in response to what brassherald said in
410. -->
Null.
10.
1076 --> Wants to agree with everything Mutant states in
415, but they are waiting to catch up completely first -->
Meh... (Null)
11. In
1079:
A: Quotes Ausuka's
419 and says it reinforces their Ircher scumlean -->
Okay. (Null)
B: "...You literally posted an entire wall (much of which was "fair enough, null") and then two posts later everyone is either null or neutral (not sure I understand the need to separate those) except you (shocking) and one person whose "posts continue to not really be good". That's it?" -->
This is to some extent true, and it is to some extent not true. I think I've explained both before so........... (Null)
C: "That's actually part of the reason I'm having trouble sorting him, usually when we play he is town and I'm convinced he's scum. The fact that he's acting towny gives me more pause than if I was certain he was scum." in response to The Worst's
458 -->
Okay, here is some kind of read on mutant... (Null)
D: "The numbers aren't randomized at all, the art of picking numbers is half of the strategy in this setup for both scum and town. Nevermind, apparently Math already explained that." -->
It wasn't necessary for you to repost this especially when you acknowledge Math already explained this. (Null)
E: "Up to page 23" -->
I kinda expect you to be giving more in useful info by this point, but I'll wait to read the end of your catch up. (Null)
12. In
1081:
A: States in response to Taly's
550 that there is a huge difference between randomized numbers and carefully chosen numbers that appear random because one does not know the underlying logic -->
Was there really a need to comment on this a second time? (Null)
B: "FWIW, when I played with Taly before and they posted walls that irritated me on-sight, they were town." -->
Okay. (Null)
C: "Ausuka's <post>568</post> is super waffly in terms of a read on Ircher. I've never seen someone flip-flop that much on one person in one post." -->
You still never answered about taking into account Ausuka's meta experience with me when you make this kind of read, so............ (Null-scum)
D: "I am still not seeing why people are accusing Math of doing ONLY setup spec. Like, in the first couple of pages, sure. Things have changed a lot since then. And in contrast with Mutant, I actually do think this is town!Math." in response to my
580 -->
Don't extrapolate my post so fast; I am 99% sure that you extrapolated my post from being a response to someone's question to my read at that time on Math. I am 99% sure that I was clarifying an earlier read I had on Math there versus stating my current read on the slot. (Null)
E: "Math's <post>621</post> is pure art. I'm not even going to respond to the wagon on me and all the back-and-forth because it was based on RVS posting and my absence since then, which I already explained." -->
It really would have been nice to actually tell us what
621 says, but oh well... As to the latter part, that's fair. (Null)
F: "Weirdly defensive" in response to my
833 -->
Honestly, it depends on how you read it. That said, it is evident that your bias towards me being scum makes you conclude that it is weirdly defensive first. I won't deny though that one could interpret the post that way; it just isn't the best way imo. (Null)
G: "Weird, the only other person in danger of being lynched today, besides me, prefers that I be the one to be lynched. CRAZY" -->
Okay, but how exactly is that crazy? This is confirmation bias showing... (Null)
13.
1082 --> Failed vote on me. -->
I think this vote is legitimate; however, I don't think it is a reasonable vote, at least not for the reasons that Lalendra has pointed out so far in their ISO. (Null-scum)
14.
1083 --> Correctly votes me -->
No comment; see above comment.
15.
1084 --> Asks the Worst why he "hates" Lalendra -->
.... (Null)
16. In
1185:
A: "1) I already outlined all my reasons in my catch-up posts. 2) I also addressed this, but since more has happened, I'll say this: I'm not understanding ducky's tunneling on me, most of the other votes were because of lack of activity (NAI) and tone (my tone is inconsistent af, it depends entirely on my mood and not at all on my alignment). It's horseshit. 3) I'll post a readslist after this." in response to Taly's three questions in
1085 (Ircher scumread, Lalendra wagon thoughts, and a reads list) -->
I don't remember, though I may be wrong, anyone originally scumreading Lalendra for tone-related reasons. (Null)
B: Clarifies to Mutant's
1086 that what she meant in
1081 was that Math was playing to his town meta whereas Mutant thought Math was not doing that -->
Good clarification. (Null)
C: "I wasn't saying that neutral and null meant the same thing in your readslist, I understand that they don't. I'm saying I don't understand the need to separate them. In that it seems nitpicky. Essentially yes, I understand the system you're using, I just don't agree with it. We're saying the same thing." in response to my
1088 -->
Okay, first of all, you are using this as a reason to scumread me if I am reading correctly. Second, even if you didn't explicitly state such, you consider them on a semantic level to be the same, which is not the case as I explained. Third, this is hardly an acknowledgement or an understanding of the system being used. And no, you are not saying the same thing, not even close. (Null-scum)
D: "You may want to start at least considering an AU in which you believe I'm town and exploring how that would inform your gameplay because if I flip, you're going to need to start somewhere." in response to The Worst's
1151 -->
Typical appeal to emotion. (Null)
17.
1205 --> Complains about Math's assessment of Lalendra in
1190 -->
Okay..... (Null)
18.
1206 --> "And yeah, the self-meta in my sig is something that would help me as scum. But since I never roll scum (which sucks because I love it) it's mostly just there to say 'anything you're thinking about me based on my tone, interactions, reads, or anything else is less likely because I'm scum and more likely because you don't like my playstyle.'" -->
Okay, if due to your playstyle, you cannot be read based on your tone, on your interactions, or on your reads, how are we supposed to read you
Like, this is a non-defense.
(Neutral-scum)
19.
1210 --> Says that
1205 wasn't very serious in response to Math's
1207 -->
Besides the discrepancy in tone and interpretation (which I think is important, but I'll give Lalendra a pass on that), how exactly can a post like that be not serious? You seemed pretty serious then. Also, I think the town response here would be "yes" or "yes, but....." rather than an attempt to deemphasize the post. Like, I highly doubt anyone would be more inclined to lynch you if the post was serious especially if you stated it was.
(Scum)
20.
1267 --> Asks how she is playing a nullgame in response to The Worst's
1222 -->
I'm not going to comment on this. (Null)
21.
1269 --> Response to
1254 -->
You seem to understand it better now, so good. (Null)
22.
1271 --> "Because my humor is very sarcastic and when I say something harsh, 98% of the time it's in jest." in response to my
1254 -->
I'm not convinced. Also, is there a particular need to separate
1269 and
1271 considering they reference the same post? (Null-scum)
23.
1274 --> "Nope" in response to
1268 -->
.... (Null)
24.
1275 --> "Nope" in response to
1270 -->
.... (Null)
25.
1276 --> "Still nope" in response to
1273 -->
There really wasn't a need to respond three times to what was basically trolling. (Null)
26.
1289 --> Quotes their Ircher read in response to Davesaz's
1289 -->
Yeah, this case isn't really that great.... It has some merit, but very little. (Null)
27.
1290 --> Reads list -->
1) How does davesaz move your read from null to townlean? 2) How is Myloninja anything but a null read? If I assume your reads list is ordered, I would expect Mylo to at least be at the bottom of the townlean section (Null-scum)
28.
1296 --> "I'm sorry, I just really don't have the energy right now to go through and highlight things. If I say "I agree with everything this person said," then what that person said are my reasons in that post. I don't really know what else you want.I'm not trying to be grumpy I just really don't feel well so maybe I'll just come back to the thread when I'm in a better spot." -->
Okay. (Null)
29.
1297 --> Frustrated because feels lynch isn't justified -->
Okay. (Null)
30.
1306 --> Asks "whose alignments" in response to Eddie's
1299 -->
I can't tell what Eddie was asking based on the snippet provided in Lalendra's post, so...... (Null)
31.
1307 --> Says they have no meta experience with Ausuka in response to
1307 -->
Not at all what I was referring to... (Null-scum)
32.
1308 --> Lols at Mutant and says will respond to Taly's question when not on a phone -->
Null.
33.
1430 --> "I have much less scum experience so I tend to be pretty aggressive and tunnel on people moreso than I do as town." in response to Eddie's
1309 -->
If I'm reading this correctly (and if you wrote this correctly), I'm actually more convinced you are scum due to your tunnel on Ausuka and I and how aggressive your posts have been in general. Just sayin'. (Null-scum)
34.
1431 --> Response to Taly's
1302 -->
I'm not going to bother going through this... (Null)
35.
1432 --> "...You're making reads without remembering why? And just coasting on that instead of taking new information into account?" in response to Lovebird's
1345 -->
Blatant misrepresentation of Lovebird's post; notice that Lovebird DIDN'T cross out Janitor/Myloninja BECAUSE they couldn't remember why they were town. The list is obviously who they think is scum.
(Neutral-scum)
36.
1433 --> "The thing people seem to keep forgetting when harping on my fluffposting is that we were still within hours of the game starting. It exploded over the weekend and I did my best to catch up and contribute meaningful content at that point." in response to
1419 -->
Okay, but what about The Worst's other points? You seem to have a habit of having selective hearing this game tbqh... (Null-scum)
37.
1434 --> Response to The Worst's
1422 -->
Okay. (Null)
38.
1435 --> Switches to Lovebird because Ircher wagon isn't going anywhere and "not a fan of Lovebird's recent posting at all" -->
You only comment once on Lovebird's recent posts, and it wasn't even a fair representation of Lovebird's post. (Null-scum)
39.
1436 --> "Yes, let's cast anti-town votes just to exchange information. Ugh, this town deserves to lose." -->
Question: Are you being serious here?
(Serious question.) (Null)
40.
1440 --> Asks if the group wants them to claim -->
Yes. It would've been better if you didn't wait until your V/LA to ask. (Null)
41.
1458 --> Asks not to be lynched while V/LA -->
When deadline is this close and you are one of the top lynch candidates, it really isn't fair to ask for this. I mean, I understand why, but it isn't fair to everyone else. (Null)
Conclusion:
Absolutely none of this ISO reads as town. On the other hand, quite a few things stand out as scum-motivated imo, and barring that, I still think that this is the best case we have at the moment.
Like, this is a non-defense. 
