Zero your stupidity knows no bounds.
You link a quote from me, where I said I'd expect a cop would either die or be blocked.
Then you link a quote from the next day after you've claimed that you got a guilty, where I said, we'll not sure I trust zero, because fr one he's not dead, and clearly you said you got a scan off.
So you weren't blocked, and you couldn't have been killed either.
So, it should seem fairly obvious to most, but if I say "a cop would either be blocked or killed", and here you are neither targeted nor blocked, then it wpuld st and to reason that you couldn't be a cop, correct?

Furthermore, peabrain, it's not just that you're the cop. It's that I'm also the doc. Here go to google, type in "mafia scum follow the cop" and read up. It's an op combo without good counter roles.

If you weren't countered, then there's two options. 1. You're not the cop. 2. Stefl didn't balance correctly.

Now to rest your fears about your claim. I do believe you about being the cop. I already said that the simplest explanation was that you're just an idiot who softclaimed, right?

I was putting suspicion on you to see who jumped at the opportunity. So far, it's only been spurge. That's not indicative of his alignment, but it is interesting, and possibly a lead.
You definitely were not going to get info out of trucks, like you think you were going to. I don't even know what gives you the idea that trucks would out his teammates, or that i somehow had anything to do with trucks going inactive. He's inactive because the game is up.

See, your problem zero, is you don't look at this game from a strategic standpoint. You come in, spout all kinds of nonsense, and just expect to win. You don't look at the game and say, "if a cop came in and had a guilty scan, how would they react". You say, "I came in with a guilty, I suspect prof and he's reacting this way, so that must be how a mafia reacts". You fill in the evidence after youve already come to your conclusion.
This is a big nono is scientific study. I forget what it's called exactly, but there's a term that means you look for data to support your conclusion, instead of looking at data and finding a conclusion.

Two examples would be confirmation bias and inductive reasoning.
Confirmation bias means you interpret, remember, or find evidence in a way that suits your preexisting bias, while disproportionately giving little thought to other possibilities.
Inductive reasoning is when you take a bunch of theories, facts, or ideas and use them to confirm the possibility of something. It's like, say I believe that gravity bends light by a certain amount. I then go out and get a bunch of examples where this was the case. Have I proven that gravity bends light a certain amount? No. I've only proven that in those examples, light was bent by gravity.
Similarly, you're saying prof is scum. You then cite examples in which you believe I'm acting scummy. However, no matter how many little ideas you come up with, you cannot prove that I am scum, you're simply only looking for things that support your conclusion. We could do this with literally any player. If you only look at what's scummy, everyone is guilty.

Oh and ps: thanks for finding the link and proving yourself wrong. You're right, I never said I believed spurge was town. I said he was acting as the voice of reason.
You see how I'm looking at evidence before drawing a conclusion? I look at spurge and say, "he's being very reasonable, and very placid". I don't immediately say, we'll he's clearly town because townies are reasonable. I say, "this is how he's acting, for what purpose, I'm not sure. The possibilities are that 1. He's gotten better 2. He's trying to lay low 3. He's trying to be a leader 4. He has a role and potentially 5, 6, 7, 8.
Do you see how actual detective work goes?
It's a process of deduction. Not induction.
I can say, ok so one possibility was that spurge is trying to lay low. Let's see how he handles attention.
He he continues to lay low, then fine, it's still a possibility. If he suddenly starts drawing more, then I can rule out this behavior as part of his goal. And then I can follow up and make new deductions why he was laying low before and not now.

This is the difference between you and i, zero. I think, you guess.

Just to add to this, someone claiming to have a role on the first day is very hard for a doc to handle. Before, I could just guess at who might have a role, or put myself in the mafia shoes and guess who was the best kill. But when someone claims, that alerts the mafia. The mafia then have to decide whether to kill that person or someone else, or if they have a counter role, they can use that on the person instead.

So, my job then changes from having to decide who i should protect, and instead trying to figure out if the mafia have a roleblocker, and then decide who the next best target would be. It becomes a game of me trying to know if they know that i know. It complicates everything needlessly. Whereas, say zero hadn't said anything, and just came in today and said he had a guilty scan, I could know for one, he wasn't tampered with, and two he wouldn't be targeted, because let's face it, it's zero. 

That changes my options for who to protect. I went into last night saying, "well, either I protect the cop or someone else. But will they even try going after the cop? Maybe I should protect someone else, and expect that they wouldn't try anything. But maybe they will expect that, and target the cop. Oh well, I guess my hand is forced, I kind of have to protect the cop now."

Instead of me picking who I should protect and possibly getting lucky with a doctor protection, I have to protect the cop, and knowing that, the mafia will then just kill someone else. It's basically taking my role away from me.

read mine after xander's. That should answer some questions.

Well, I really wanted it to be mrp, but I'm not sure. Evidence does kind of point to spurge.
I'm just not sure yet. Would've been easier if I could've gotten more input but you kept exploding and drawing so much attention. Basically by you calling me scum, you were warning scum not to question you.
So I'm nt sure if the appeasing attitude of mrp is scummy, or spurge defiance is scummy

No, that doesn't happen. If one doesn't show up, the other decides for them.

Stop metagaming

Oh and just in case you don't know what metagaming means.
It means when you're playing on things that are outside of the game's boundaries.
I'm clarifying because meta in one case means "trend", but metagaming is different.
"metagaming; Metagaming is any strategy, action or method used in a game which transcends a prescribed ruleset, uses external factors to affect the game, or goes beyond the supposed limits or environment set by the game. Another definition refers to the game universe outside of the game itself."

which is in contrast to "meta-theory", which is where the term meta comes from:
metatheory: meta-theory, a theoretical consideration of its properties, such as its foundations, methods, form and utility

How do you even play tf2 (Team Fortress 2) a PC exclusive game, without a PC? It doesn't add up.

Or maybe you're playing it on the PS3 or X360, which leads me to ask you why you're playing such inferior versions of the game when even my crummy old laptop can play it 720P@40fps (It's 6 years old, my laptop)

Brilliant post prof. No other words can describe it. Just utterly amazing. While it was intended for Zero, I do play a lot like this as well.