@Oriole, the three main points you seem to have are: A. the contradiction between saying that a fakehammer was obvious, but in other places showing doubt in it and using it as a reason for my suspicion. B. showing doubt in it being a fakehammer, and then saying an actual hammer attempt seemed townie, but still calling scum. C. NotSci being the single scummiest person, but my not making a case for him ASAP.
Should be relatively simple. For A, it's just a misunderstanding. What I meant when I said the fakehammer was obvious was that SV
claiming
it was a fakehammer was the obvious choice for him. Even if a legit hammer attempt seems more like something a town would do, it's also extremely anti-town in nature. And as for the lying problem in saying something other then what it was, if you'd lynch somebody like that, I doubt you'd have any qualms with lying.
B. The key there is that a hammer like that only seemed townie if it was based purely on reads. I doubt it was actually a fakehammer, reaction doesn't seem right at all as if it was, and so I'm guessing the more likely option is that SV knew Beast's claim was a fakeclaim. Now, it could be because SV is a PR, Scum, or SK, doesn't really matter. Either way, Beast is confirmed PR/Scum, while there is a slight chance SV is just an idiot townie, hence why SV should be lynched first. If SV is a PR, then he just claims before lynch, and Beast is lynched instead. If it is either of the SK or Scum possibilities, then good for us, it pretty much confirms both players as scum.
That kinda brings me into point C. I personally think some form of counter-claim option is far more likely then a fakehammer, and still more likely then an idiot townie, meaning odds are both SV and Beast are scum. You'll notice I was planning on having a NotSci case be my top priority until the fakehammer thing came up. I personally think two likely scum, one of who would be SK, is a better option then one player who, I admit, could be just plain awful at this game.
Does that explain everything?
