How is the same true for all three of us?
Let's analyze every case:
-> will mean "probably leads to"
=> will mean "result"
Dry scum:
No Kill -> Mitey or Dry lynch with higher odds of Mitey lynch
=> if Mitey is the Chosen, maybe a 70% chance of Dry winning, otherwise very low chance of winning
Mitey Kill -> Dry lynch
=> Dry loses
Herodotus Kill -> Mitey or Dry lynch with higher odds of Mitey lynch
=> if Mitey is the Chosen, maybe a 70% chance of Dry winning, otherwise very low chance of winning
Zorblag Kill -> ?
Mitey scum:
No Kill -> Mitey or Dry lynch with higher odds of Mitey lynch
=> if Dry is the Chosen, maybe a 30% chance of Mitey winning, otherwise very low chance of winning
Dry Kill -> Mitey lynch
=> Mitey loses
Herodotus Kill -> Mitey or Dry lynch with higher odds of Mitey lynch
=> if Dry is the Chosen, maybe a 30% chance of Mitey winning, otherwise very low chance of winning
Zorblag Kill -> ?
Nope. There were no alternative-to-Zorblag NK's that I can see that would have made either of you nearly certain of winning.
To call my argument wifom is to suggest that I would intentionally make myself
much
less likely to win, just to be able to say that I made the game harder for me to win as scum. That's not wifom, that's stupidity. A similar argument applies regarding bussing. Just because some scum sometimes bus doesn't mean that it is the simplest explanation for why someone lynched scum.
Why is second-guessing what is obvious better than believing the same obvious thing, or third-guessing?
If Mitey is scum, then I am almost certainly the chosen. But I feel like Mitey actually believes the BS she is writing. In either case, I think Dry-fit is a safe lynch. If Dry-fit is lynched, I'm pretty sure the town will win. I'm not voting because doing so won't prove anything, because I could be wrong, and because I'm not sure whether Dry understands how voting in lylo works with the chosen mechanic.