I see.  Since the rivalry has come up several times in the game, and has even been used by both of you to justify your actions, I would be much more comfortable if all of this had taken place in the thread instead, or if it had waited until after the game.  But admittedly it doesn't look like it violated the letter of the rules, so all I ask is that everyone keep similar conversations public, or wait until after the game.

It's on their wall-to-wall noname. I wouldn't call it a breach of the rules myself.

Back to nord, as for your stance with hat, that is exactly the kind of answer I expected. That's not really a good or a bad thing, but I was a bit hopeful that you'd answer differently and I could point out logic that it's highly likely we could know if one of you is a townie/scum based on the flip of the other.

Yeah, no problem. But to avoid furtehr problems just post it here.

Finally getting around to my reexamination of prof/Gniz: 

prof's first quote of Gniz 
prof, I think you may be jumping to the conclusion that Gniz is "white-knighting" the three players listed.(now scottie, nord, and dtewi) I do see it as a bit defensive for them, but most of us have "defended" each other when we think the attack's on another player aren't sound. Here there wasn't really an attack though, and even if none of the topics at the time merited a response, those players could have started their own that did.

I also read "chasing their own tails" as implying it's a bunch of townies following each other based on nothing. However, it could also mean that it's a bunch of scum disrupting the town. I can not see it as stating the possibility of a mix of townies and scum, as that would mean someone is onto something.

prof's quote of Gniz's reply (prof in bold, Gniz in regular)
"without a lot of accuracy" implies that prof is incorrect about a lot of things. Gniz later clarifies this. I disagree with prof though that Gniz's post was insulting or aggressive. 

Gniz explains himself a bit and does so again
Apparently the majority of his posts should be read as if they are facetious. That's a bit troublesome as most of them would then be lacking serious intent. This is restated in the second post that Gniz is "less than completely serious as always." Furthermore, Gniz says the type of list originally presented by Silver-Tiger is only good after some more real time days have passed. I'd agree with that seeing as we weren't even 24 hours into the round as of the list's posting.

Gniz replies to prof
Apparently  the "accuracy" line isn't a blanket statement about prof, but just prof's first quoting of Gniz. Overall this is a very reasonable explanation of the first post called into question by prof.

Then there's a lot of back and forth starting near the end of the first day.prof calls out Gnizmo for saying 'prof says very little' yet hasn't contributed himself. Gnizmo doesn't comment on this until hat says Gnizmo hasn't been contributing. prof and SAK call out Gnizmo for not responding to prof. Gnizmo says prof's post didn't merit a response and then prof turns this into a new interrogation . Gniz writes off everything because of the twisting of "his post" into "I," a small distinction, yet a distinction nonetheless, yet far from the basis of prof's thoughts. After which it trickles into prof restating a few things and then dying off. 

Now my thoughts. I have a town vibe from prof through this. The original interpretation of Gniz's reply to the list could've been scummy, but I don't think prof would've put himself out there for so long to stay on Gniz's case. I do not like Gniz admitting to being less than serious most of the time, as that makes it quite difficult to get a read on him. It's a good tactic for self-preservation, but that's something that favors scum winning, not the pro-town side. Nor do I like that he's admittedly evasive for the same reason. However, I do think there's a good chance prof has been jumping to conclusions. I may have done the same with my analysis of the "two townies playing grab ass" comment. There's a chance Gniz states what he is thinking, but it reads as if it's a fact. Still, I'm about 50/50 town/scum with Gniz which is more towards scum than I am with others so my FoS remains.

TLDR: After going through everything, I believe my biggest issue with Gniz is much of what is said comes across as statements of fact rather than opinions. If only one of the two is scum I'm more inclined to think it is Gniz than prof.

As I explained to nen already, I would have voted for somebody if we had any leads. Based on the discussion however, I saw we wouldn't get a majority anyway, so i decided to vote for a No lynch.

You know, i see this nord vs hat as nonexistence and is just but fooling around.

I don't get why we are discussing this. 

I mean, let's say hatmoza is mafia. And then he kills nord just for the hell of it. It wouldn't happen, and nord (who said he didn't kill hat before as mafia) obviously wouldn't either because it's dumb. It's counter-productive. *shrugs*

I'm satisfied by that, actually. They're legitimate suspicions. FoS- Silver-Tiger. 

You're actually falling for that? I expected better from you j0.

That's a rebuttal?

just finished page 4 of potals.

On a rather cursory glance, the people that stand out as mafia the most are SaK, Truck, j0, and stefl.

I'll be back later once I'm done with potals.