The problem is, as inactivity goes as a criteria for this sort of trap, Hieshyn and Bergioyn stick out as most inactive, and again, the weird thing about that, which may simply be coincidence, is that both hypocopped Fox and both found him guilty. Now, Fox is not a lightning rod so loosely speaking, his odds of being hypocopped guilty by a given player should have 1 in 30. For this to happen twice, and by two players who have been very inactive, seems to stretch coincidence a bit. This is actually exacerbated by three people hypocopping me, which I assume was meant to cover for the cop since I was the expected target, it's entirely possible all three of my hypocoppers aren't cops, but I'm assuming they targeted me for HC to protect the cop, or appear to be doing so. This really shoves those odds down, I doubt anyone who hypocopped me did it truly random (which is fine, we don't really want true random target selection) but removing them as random selectors pumps the odds of HCing Fox guilty for a given player to 1 in 45 (roughly) and this simply seems unlikely.

Which ever the case, Fox is simply too old a hand at this game not to stare at the HCT for clues if he was a DF. First thing a DF does on a complete table is start eliminating players as 'can't be a cop' which is troublesome obviously in a 3 faction game. I believe him when he says he didn't even notice the HCT, because townies often don't, we view it early on as a receipt for later audit, on it's first day it holds no obvious clues for the town.

I can't see a DF not looking at it though, and since he'd been hit by not one but two guilty hypocops, if he were a DF, I think he'd have been genuinely panicked. These things don't bother me much, because I get HC'd in droves, but were I a DF and saw one of my allies HC'd guilty by two players, without any advance basis that might attract lots of HC's, I'd assume one of them was the cop and be very worried and ramping up bussing efforts. Yet, nobody has done so, no deliberate distancing etc, which makes me think he is not a DF. Can you see him, as a DF, trying this trap on inactives while the two most inactives HC'd you guilty? Can you see a DF allied to him not having laid at least some groundwork to been seen as somewhat suspicious of Fox and most definetly not allied?

I feel the weight of evidence, compared to the realistic scenarios, strongly favors Fox being town, and if nothing else, it doesn't seem to point anti-town.

Further, the flavor of his debate with me over ranagrande just doesn't seem very DFish. HE took a strong stance and rather than retreating from it when challenged, defended it for a prolonged period of time, DF's don't usually take strong early stances (self excluded) and when their arguments for their framee start disintegrating they tend to jump ship on it pretty quick. His actions, IMO, come off much more as townie following a genuine suspicion as opposed to DF trying to cobble together a frame job on an available target. I could be wrong, Fox's trap may be what Hieshyn thinks it is, but I doubt it.

So while I agree to Hieshyn's vote seeming more OMGUS than anything else, I really feel we need to consider the possibility that something deeper is going on here, there are too many coincidences involved for me to dismiss it.