unvote
I don't think TA does that big post as scum. Too much attention and he as a mini-wagon on him. That's not his style.
I think we don't lynch from gkrieg/faust today, no matter what. I'm still not convinced the second mason needs to claim yet. Imagine a world...
--where the second mason stays hidden and this is a single M game, so there is no UB. No way they can kill gkrieg, nor do they want to kill the other mason. If the second mason claims, that ensures they don't hit either with an NK. Instead, they'll want to kill from the pool of townies that can't confirm his lie -- so any other PR is best, as he can just say he inherited it and make crap up from there, but a VT is safe. Now, instead, imagine a world...
--where the second mason stays hidden and this is a 3M+ game, so there is a UB. We can't confirm that until a mason dies, which can be gkrieg at this point, since that's who scum could kill, force faust into that role, and the "extra" IC is taken out of the equation. There are some reasons I can think of where that's actually the preferred route to confirming faust's towniness, which don't have to be spelled out. I'm not sure how much value we get from knowing it's 3M+ vs single M.
So, I see an argument to be made to hold off on the second mason's claim if we think boxing in scum's options are better. I think even at worst, it keeps a solitary quasi-IC alive in gkrieg who they can't kill until they can cover faust's claim, and at best we could force them into stumbling a bit.