In post 4027, Titus wrote:A voluntary no kill explains it, just like moongrass speculated.
A voluntary no-kill runs afoul of occam's razor though because it requires inventing a reason to no-kill.
Again, to reiterate:
In the hypothetical world where scumastina has a scumteam with a blocking role that blocks Not_Mafia's hide, Not_Mafia surviving to D3 is, in of itself, enough to falsely conftown scumastina.
You do not need a no-kill for that.
The blocking role, in of itself, generates that. Just by itself. Just alone. Just on its own, a blocking role on Not_Mafia would conftown scumastina N2.
So why no-kill?
What does the no-kill give?
It literally gives nothing more than what we already had.
It gives zero benefit but costs scum a nightkill, a nightkill they could use on conftown or widely townread players.
Requiring a scum no-kill N2 requires inventing extra motives. It requires inventing "scumastina planned in advance to make herself even more conftown by sacrificing her nightkill to make her even more conftown even though Not_Mafia living to D3 would in of itself conftown her, and she did this because she thought that her being conftown from hiding wasn't enough and came up with the no-kill plan specifically to elevate her to an even higher tier of conftown".
Aside from that being an occam's razor violation in of itself, that doesn't fit the modus operandi of scumastina in general. (For that matter, neither does the nom kill N1.) You're familiar enough with my scum methods to know that I maximize reward for the minimal risk and sacrificing the nightkill and roleblocking Not_Mafia is a double violation of that because roleblocking Not_Mafia is banking on him being a role he's not guaranteed to be and sacrificing the nightkill is sacrificing a resource, meaning that the proposed "block Not_Mafia, no-kill" required for me to be scum requires me to make a high-risk, high-reward play rather than just...a near-zero risk, basically just as high reward play of killing AND blocking.
After all, what if Not_Mafia were an ascetic weak hider? A block couldn't have stopped his hide on me then which means if I were scum and that were his role he'd still die, so if I was going down the next day it'd be better to have gotten an extra kill in the night before. That's the smartest play with the least risk and the most reward with a contingency plan built in.
Whereas blocking Not_Mafia and no-killing is a plan with high risk, not really a higher reward, and is putting all of my eggs in one basket with no fallback plan, nothing to help us if the plan goes wrong, if I miscalculated, if I made the wrong call.
And to reiterate: this is pretty damn self-evident. It doesn't take a genius to figure this out.
The simplest explanation for N2 is Not_Mafia, a weak hider, hid behind me, didn't die, cleared me as conftown, and scum tried to nightkill Not_Mafia but failed thanks to the hide.
Any other explanation is a violation of occam's razor requiring you add in extra steps that require extra justifications including ones which fly in the face of facts and established player metas and modus operandi.
