... as if a bandwagon on you is inevitable ...
I thought your vote looked kind of reaction-testy, but once Ansoro also started to place suspicion on me, I started to get worried, because you're one of the most experienced players; some people would follow a vote of yours with no evidence required, while after Ansoro had some more explained thoughts, it seemed like a more likely outcome.
Frankly, I'm still not entirely sure what I should be defending myself against.
Plausible Deniability? You discredit the vote on you by saying that is has no basis. That would be fine
if there wasn't a basis. But there very well is, and it's imho more scummy to try and discredit a voter than to try and work with what they stated.
Not quite sure how I discredited stuff, but I was pointing out that Priz's vote wasn't exactly a verbal assault, and that Ansoro could easily move in under the shadow of the more experienced player (and once people take that advice, it seems to be forgotten that the initial vote had no grounds, a bit like Road (although he turned out to be correct)). Also, plausible deniability is, firstly, the sort of answer I was chasing to my quoted question, and secondly, once again we are seeing instances of only selected examples of suspicious actions being taken into consideration. There was a great deal of plausible deniability yesterday, but I don't think I saw you bring it up much at all.
One of the reasons that I haven't been massively outspoken is my suspicions, due to most of them being able to turn a lynch on me in an instant. But something I'm wondering about now, is that while I'm not totally suspicious of any of them, if Priz, GmK and Ansoro were among the mafia, some of their past actions might seem coordinated as a unit. My main suspicions at the moment, however, are of Myuser.