Why are you talking about the fifth mission anyway? That's about one mission away.
I believe you've misread. The final mission involves five players, it's in the rules.
Yes...and I'm asking "why that specific mission."
If you're going to complain about me not having evidence on you (which is total bullshit), you could at least answer what I said here if you want, possibly, maybe, by chance:
I have no idea how to explain this, but I believe LS is pulling a safety line drop. He picked a fully town team to elongate the game, is what I'm thinking, because those 4 stand clearly in the town side.
Okay:
1. Why would a spy risk an easy win.
2. Why are you confident he picked a fully town team? (it's because you're a spy)
Evidence in the sense that says suspicion, not conclusive Mr. BS.
First point: LS has the majority convinced he's town for reasons circling around gut feelings or how he relates with others. Whatever team he picks, for me, is under suspicion. If there's a spy - they win, case closed, cut communication. If its all town, here's me going along a line which continues communication if in case that idea proves true. Also, while the 'risk an easy win' = shortest possible way to achieve your wincon, the verdict seems set in stone right now. Its being upvoted by the masses, and to tell the truth, I'm just thinking out loud there. No defense in a way that I can peg LS out by that team as I really do see them all as town. (For Dariush, refer to my last post. Also, it would seem really hard to poke him as scum if LS was too, as said in the second mission)
Second point: I'm not confident that he picked a town team. I'm confident in my reads on the people, and wondering why he's picking them - what I can see is that he's also seeing them as town; either because of ruling out who he thinks is 'scum' or...preferably, that explanation only. Most of the people he's tagging is only labeled by him as scum because of mistakes in logic, anyway. They're not leading to a conclusion, and where I see it, why exactly he's picking them over the rest; the rest here, meaning why he thinks those people are scum.
Which wasn't specifically addressed. Suppose me, for example. "I think Tiruin is scum because of his defense of Nerjin." Its using the logic of letting you look into it without defining his reasons. I mean, you can infer that my opinion back there was suspicious, right? What came of it? Nothing but 'You're scum!' accusations instead of a continued conversation.
PPE: link.
I said lacking evidence. I didn't say No evidence :/