This is the ridiculous bias that you bring into this. You are perfectly happy to exonerate fang on a flimsy basis of some early D1 posts, but there is nothing I could ever do to receive the same treatment. It's infuriating.
This is AtE, it’s over the top, and it’s not really fair.
Look I was ride or die you until I re-read the whole game and your interactions with out one confirmed scum were scummier than fangs. He’s a claimed cop with a scum result on you. One of you is scum.
If that's not the case, I'm really torn between Didds and EFHW. They both seem extremely towny on re-read.
There's a lot to respond but mostly... how on earth does Didds seem towny?!
Ok, maybe better would be to say, on reread, they both have a lot of towny posts and a handful of scummy ones.
Which by the way proves that this isn’t some crazy bias of mine, and it’s so insulting for you to say it is. This is me re-reading the whole game and coming away with an overall impression that your play is consistent with the scum-faust of my experience.
Why would you defend fang day 3? That’s the crux of your defense. Well, your partner had just decided to 1v1 him. Sure your team could go all in to throw your weight behind him winning the 1v1. And you could lose anyway, especially with a mayor still in the mix adding an extra vote to the equation and playing his cards somewhat close to the vest (by the way I would love for you to support your assertion that Dylan was “basically set on” fang).
So what happens today if your whole team goes in on the wrong side of the 1v1 and still loses? Game over. So you hedge your bets with the full-throated defense of fang hoping to ride the towncred to victory.
It’s actually the smarter play.