You point out a lot of oddities in Spruance's posts - Do you think these are just washed-out by his meta, or do you believe that the town motivation you see elsewhere (evidently the NU vote and the later pursuing of Eggy for a 'scum slip') outweighs them?
A lot of these comments have a kind of coaching vibe - For the example the "You can always find inconsistencies, you just have to put effort in to find them. If they aren't there, then you're probably right, but saying someone always plays like town doesn't work." and "You can't expect slips to come TO YOU, you have to encourage conversation to GET THEM." This is related to the above questions, but do you derive any alignment tells at all from feeling that you have to comment like this?
(Suboptimal town play can be so or scum play - if you were proceeding through his ISO sequentially, it feels to me like you gave him the townread off his NU vote and simply went forward looking at the rest of his play from that light. Does taking a step back and looking at the bigger picture again give you a different view at all?)
"I don't mind that he is actually being mature and commenting in a better way": Do you get any alignment tells from this? Do you think this is motivated by a changing alignment or by evolving playstyle?
On this Spruance quote you comment the following: "Using the only 'slip' he finds to encourage a lynch. Not a good style, but nonetheless feels town motivated." Can you explain the town motivation? Why do you think it is more compelling than a scum motivation in tunneling on a slip to avoid deeper reads or to justify a mislynch? I don't see why this scum possibility can be so easily discarded, so it seems to me like you're doing what you said DB in not considering both town and scum motivation. Is this based off momentum from your earlier townread, like I mentioned earlier?