MiX is saying "explain your completely unexplained vote and I'll join your wagon, [apparently regardless of how bad the explanation is]"
It's sweet how you were scared that I would sheep him regardless of his explanation. I merely wanted an explanation.
This is when I would vote joth but I need to slow down my votes.
Really just taking you at your word, man. You could have said "Explain and maybe I'll sheep". Words mean things.
There's no reason for me to follow through my word, helps no one but maybe my townieness.
And you displaying a lack of towniness if you are town hurts town. Like a lot. I think people often overestimate their duty to find scum as town and underestimate their duty to convince others of their towniness.
The argument is fallacious. It might indeed be more important to not get lynched if you're town than it is to scumhunt. But these are not two separate disciplines that you can independently invest time into, and the more time invest the better you do at them.
I think a much better way to look at it is this: the remaining player base is trying to figure out your alignment. If they're doing it right, then they will always consider your meta, i.e. there shouldn't be anyone who is generically less scummy and less likely to be lynched; everyone has the same probability of being scum, what we need is information that distinguishes your scum play from your normal play.
So if you're town and trying to play towny, well, that's the same thing you're doing as scum, so we don't have anything that distinguishes between the two. That doesn't mean it can't work in individual games, but it ought not to help you in expectation. On the other hand, if you're actually scumhunting, then that does distinguish between town!you and scum!you, because scum!you doesn't scumhunt, they're only pretending to scumhunt.
I.e.: if you focus on scumhunting, that ought to be the better strategy wrt not getting lynched.