And actually, I wanted to ask: silver, Debate, could you summarize why you are voting for me?
I dislike you agreeing on ari initially but then switching to datswan. I'm not sure I believe that town!you would scumread him.
It's day 3 and you're still alive and two towns are dead. Say what you will but this is bayesian evidence for you being scum. I also want to point out that you're not above using this argument for why people shouldn't lynch you on day 1 and such, so you should have to bear both sides.
I'm quite irritated that you don't see the argument from beauty for EFHW being town. This feels like exactly the kind of thing that is convenient to ignore because it won't mean much to most people so no-one will call you out on it. But you design setups, and I would expect you to see this as substantial evidence. This was a case where UoS had total freedom to do whatever he wanted, and you think he put a neapolitan in the setup who would only get non-VT results on masons? That's so ugly and consequently unlikely. The balance stuff on the other hand, eh, there's much less of a universally agreed upon baseline for balance than we like to pretend. Especially in closed games. Your suspicion of EFHW seems ooc.
I guess this is somewhat less true if you genuinely believe ariship.
And of course PoE, more than everything. There's only a bunch of alternatives, and they're all pretty bad. There's two ICs and no way I'm voting debatepro. Also not very interested in Eddie.