I called radish out for having a bad vote on me. There was no way to argue against stubbornness. And I was glad that a majority(5 votes at that time) was required, because if any other votes were going to come my way, the voters would at least have to try to make a case.

How does trying to convince a person that is suspicious of me to vote with me instead make any sense? Even if that was possible, given TOS's post, two people does not a lynch make.

First, please address the bold, italicized, and underlined question.

1. This stuff about Stefl would all be relevant if you had mentioned anything day 2, or when I had originally made the point about rolefishing.

That is the only post of prof's of all the ones you claim to be rolefishing that I would agree with.(Some others are blatant nudges for claims, which as I said I didn't like, but it's different from rolefishing) However, it doesn't make sense to think that Stefl and prof are scummates in this case. They would have to KNOW you visited Stefl, which means one should have to be a Mafia Tracker, which followed you to Stefl. If you're investigative they're going to hope you don't claim damning info on Stefl instead of pushing you to reveal it. If you don't spill anything they can assume you're protective or something else, and possibly try to get you lynched. Either way they would be happy to kill you at night.

My second question was directly related to the first. How did you think scum Stefl was rolefishing with his first post, which he later clarified meant he was roleblocked?

2. See no. 1 as well. You made none of these points yesterday, when it actually mattered. It's easy to say you were thinking just about anything then, but nothing backs it up.

3. I appreciate you fixing the links. It's actually a bit bothersome that nobody else pointed out any of the errors, am I the only one that cared to read your post?

I mentioned it in no. 1, but that is rolefishing to me. Only makes sense as that with Stefl being town and prof being scum though. Mafia would know if they targeted Stefl and could try to pin it on someone else, or if they weren't the ones to target him they could try to figure out who was and net two town powers in one fell swoop. But I don't think asking the other mason to claim means much. There are pros and cons to making the information known, and I think in the end it benefits Town to know more than scum.

Now that post is a solid point for you. And it's a direct contradiction to what prof asked Stefl after Stefl claimed he was roleblocked. I don't think I was defending, just defining things, pointing out broken links, and explaining why I thought your theory was very unlikely or in other words what I think prof wasn't doing. I didn't explain what I thought prof was doing, and I'd like to hear that too. What's nagging me most with prof is he's avoiding a lot of the stuff asked of him. It's not enough to push him higher than you or FF on my scumspect list, but he's not moving down towards Wonk's level either.

4. Again, thanks for the fix. But you didn't answer my question, "In the end, Stefl's case was that he was blocked and it's a null tell as to my alignment... What defense is needed?"

5. I'd like to try to follow your logic as to how you think I'm preparing to vote for Stefl. Please give the links again and explain what I am saying in each one, in your opinion. Your new explanation still doesn't make sense to me. Why would scum try to divert their votes away from the claimed power?

In the practice round you didn't have me "figured out" as in you realized I was a SK. I was hostile towards you because as third-party my only chance of winning was to have you mislynched and then hope the right actions occur to let me survive until the end. Here, even if I were mafia and you were town, I'd have 3(or 2 accounting for radish's "confirmedness") other people I could push to be mislynched. There's no need for hostility in that case. If I'm hostile it's because I most likely need two correct lynches out of two chances. So if you're town, I don't want to read a wall of text with little to no point or an illogical point. I'm pushing you to prove to me that you're actually town or to crack as scum.

Like this. What is the implication of the post to you? Why would he regret it?

@linkz
I'll try to answer you later when I get a good sleep. I just got home from a weekend party with friends so I am feeling tired and sleepy.

I'm about to go to sleep, but I just want to confirm that Linkz was shouting at me earlier because I made a bad vote on him- I just wanted things to happen, and I appreciate now that my decisions were wrong.

Making things happen is fine. Leaving a vote when you no longer have a reason and you are "confirmed" isn't going to make things happen though. Glad you recognize that though, it is a sign that you're growing as a player.

Well, being the only "other" does draw a bit of attention, but I certainly wasn't going to lie, so I wouldn't say I ever regretted it.  And anyway, I only posted that because it was true. 

I've been sick for the last two or three days, nothing to put me down but I don't feel in top shape.  I forgot to post today until now; I'm looking through the thread to satisfy prof's request vis-a-vis noc. 

Linkz is certainly not confirmed innocent to me, but he's fairly low on my suspect list.  Above radish, of course. 

Right, so Noctis.

Day 1 he was absent for quite a while, then came back to congratulate Wonk (I think it was) on going after lurkers, which he freely admitted to being. Wonk shamed him into contributing a little more substantially. Then he disappeared again, only to randomly and uselessly vote radish when moreno/Baalz was in danger of being lynched. But as we all know, Baalz flipped innocent so I'm not sure of the significance there.

Day 2 he had a little activity. He asked radish and stefl about their claims, resulting in prof's gotcha post, and had an exchange with stefl who was making some very odd remarks at the time. Not much substance there that I noticed.

Day 3 he posted nothing other than "I have mixed feelings about prof" until he started making his big posts recent which I decline to recap.

The best case I could make against this is that it stinks of someone lying low, and then becoming active when he has a chance to push a mislynch for the win. He could have tried to take pressure off moreno to buddy up.

I guesss since this could be the last day there's not much point to being coy about my suspects. Right now they would be:

Noctis and prof in no particular order, I'll have to look at prof more closely.
Wonk and Linkz in no particular order -- in my eyes half as likely to be scum as the other two, at most
radishhead very likely innocent

That isn't to say any of this is set in stone by any means. But I didn't pull this list completely out of my ass either.

That's an awfully broad charge to defend against; other than just trying to post more I don't know what to say to that unless you get more specific.  Or maybe that's all you mean, in which case I apologize.