Well, this is probably going to look a bit confusing on my phone, but is the best I can do. I'll number the corresponding responses and quotes.
The reasons...
1.
From a jailer's point of view, they have less than a 1/9 chance to catch mafia since they don't know if saved the victim or blocked the hitman. From a mafia point of view, the jailer has a 1/9 chance to block the mafia hitman. This post looks closer to the mafia point of view than townie point of view and it also occurred before the goon = hitman breadcrumb.
2.
This post has a couple of things.
As of Solar Ice's post, kestegs made post 21, 24 and 28. Post 21 and 24 were OT type posts. Post 28 contained statistics in a manner found in many mafia games.
I disagree with SI that kestegs didn't spam. I think 21 and 24 are indicative of typical kestegs postings. Despite that, kestegs didn't correct SI. kestegs accepted SI's premise that kestegs wasn't his usual self. Accepting the premise of a question is commonly done to ingratiate one's self with the question asker. Politicians do it in interviews and press conferences. Criminals do it under interrogation. Mafia have done it. If they do it, it's usually in a deflecting manner and that's what this post appears to do. SI's main question looks to be "do you have anything else to add" and a result of kestegs reply is a scumlist.
3.
The main reason I'm quoting this post is the reason given for Phillinnicus' placement on the scumlist. By itself, that isn't disturbing. When I asked kestegs about the chicken and egg scenario, I knew kestegs mentioned already having a scummy opinion of Phillinnicus. I asked kestegs which posts (made before post 61) led to that opinion. kestegs reply pointed to posts made around post 85. It looks like kestegs knew Phillinnicus was scummy even before Phillinnicus made the statements that made him look scummy. Time travel!
Post 64. Just pointing out the underlined sentence. I'll reference it later.
4.
This post occurrred 1min after kestegs replied to several phillinnicus posts and included a vote.
It's a textbook mafia ploy. I recognize it because I've done it many times. He has options. Not voting Moar isn't too scummy since he's voting is primary suspect. Later voting Moar wouldn't be too scummy because he agreed with the reason given to vote Moar. There are reasons and explanations for any course of action he takes. Additionally, this post throws support for a Moar lynch. Posts like this make it easier for others to vote Moar.
I'm not sure if I would have unvoted Moar if I saw this post before the end of the day but I would have definitely raised a ruckus.
Another post with multiple issues.
5.
"What are the chances that mafia are found among this group of players that doesn't include you?"
"High I'd say."
That's not an inaccurate translation. Finding mafia in a group of 4 players has better odds than finding mafia in a group of 7 players. A concensus that at least one mafioso among Moar votes has the effect of making it easy to ignore the non-Moar voters.
6.
Another scumlist is given and it includes SI, who was a Moar voter. SI was on kestegs' D1 scum list as well. Funny thing though. Remember that underlined bit I said I would reference later? Look back at it now.
If kestegs said "those two people" posted to his satisfaction or not posted in post 64, why does 2 or the original 3 still appear on the scumlist in post 121? I take it I'm the "not posted" player of post 64. If so, then either SI or Phillinnicus should be the "responded to kestegs satisfaction" half. It looks like kestegs post 64 removes SI from the scumlist since Phillinnicus received attention and a vote. Why did SI go back on the scumlist?
It looks like post 64 is meant to get SI to back off. It looks like it worked.
I admit I had to look back and see if kestegs mentioned his reasons for saying SI was scum (looking back was when I picked up post 28 being relevant with a mafia hitman point of view).
What I see I wouldn't characterize as kestegs giving reasons SI is scummy. Instead, I see reasons why we shouldn't listen to SI when SI says kestegs is scummy. I urge everyone to look over kestegs D1 posts and post their thoughts on the matter. (In other words, how many players will read this sentence?)
7.
How true. But who had the second case? I'd say it was you. Zokar posted after you did.
8.
I already referenced this.
Mass claim works best when it happens at least a couple days before LYLO. That would be today in case anyone is keeping track. I'm in favor of mass claim today. Perhaps surprisingly, I would have been fine with a mass claim on D1.
Not advocating a mass claim also makes it more like a cop or jailer keeps their yap shut. Their silence benefits mafia.
9.
SI has a strange way of trying to save his scum buddy by placing his scum buddy at Lock-1. If phillinnicus and SI are scum buddies, I think bussing is the proper term. No way SI did what he did in order to try and save a fellow scum buddy. I know you've talked about bussing before so your lack of it's use here leads me to believe you don't truly think both SI and phillinnicus are scum.
10.
More textbook mafia action. "I didn't vote for a townie that was lynched because TWO others were more suspicious." You would have voted to avoid a no lynch yet you also made sure to support the basic reason given by every voter.
1. I didn't even realize the jailer could save someone like a doc. I know I should probably know that by now, but it's not a role I've ever actually had.
2. The train I accepted the premise is because I had been absent from the thread for a bit. (Maybe 10 hours or so? Don't remember for sure) I didn't really feel he was do much accusing me of what I had posted before, but that I had not posted at all.
3. This doesn't really make sense. Either that or you intentionally poorly worded your original question to try to trap me. I really can't look at the context while I'm posting this, so I'll try to go back and check that when I have a better chance.
4. When I made the write about not associating goon with hitman it was purely for reference. I didn't expect to have moar locked by the time I got back to the thread before I had a chance to actually express my opinion. When I did get back it no longer seemed relevant to express my opinion on whether I thought she was scum or not.
5. It is an inaccurate translation, actually. Translated it would read: "yes, you're (si) on that list.
6. SI has never left my scum list since I first posted it. What I meant was that he responded and I got the information I wanted. I never stated that my opinion of him changed. I also don't think Phil was even referenced in that response, it was only you and si from what I remember.
7. I made a case for moar's lynch? Show me.
8. You're in favor of a mass claim at the end of the day? Scum move. I'll explain why: it's obvious that if there is a cop they don't have a guilty read on scum, because there's no reason they would have not come forward by now. It's also obvious that any other power role doesn't have any incriminating evidence since someone died last night. So what do we possibly have to gain from a mass claim today besides giving mafia easier targets?
I could go with a mass claim after a power role comes forward with info, or possibly in lylo.
9. I actually realized later that what you said is true and that what I said didn't make much sense. My theory was that solar/phil decided that Phil was a lost cause and that they should buss him. Then they saw an opening to lynch someone else and solar jumped ship. It's a bit of a stretch, but I think it's a plausible theory.
10. Yea, I can see your point there. Like I said earlier, I expected to be able to come back and give my opinion later. That's why it was a purely factual post, not an opinionated post.