I had some Ideas for roles that I dropped in scum chat recently, and hither and yon in various games of mine, but I recall none of them

If I run into them in the scumchat of the last game, I'll add them to the signup thread. Haven't read the observer (besides a quick skim.) or the scumchat threads.

Indeed.

Lol

Also this game and a prior one taught me one more thing: if/when in doubt, lynch all lurkers in game.
(two games in the past year or so have had scum among the lurkers)

If we do have another NL, we just know to policy lynch Trent because at that point he'll be playing against town regardless of his alignment.

I believe that's what Gym said in post 7313 ;)

The difference is the order of events. I was suggesting NL first, trent afterwards.

Oops...missed that.

So you're suggesting giving Trent a chance, then? Seems a bit risky.

I like it. :)

I'm with you on that point.

Catte had IRL issues, though, and Micro is usually up for roleplaying/etc...so I can see why they were in some player's blind spots last game. I am guessing that in the future, said players will watch lurkers with a hawk's eye. ;)

Maybe a better way to put it would be, if any player starts saying things like "town don't deserve to win" they should probably be policy lynched if the gamestate allows it. No reason to single Trent out.
Mostly towards the beginning. But I am lurky at the best of times and I need to keep my scum game as close to my town game as I can. Not to say that I was deliberately lurking at any point.

Well maybe if they say it excessively and town players aren't sure(or can't somehow find out[say with a PR]) if said other players are town.....if so, then agreed.

Still, imo certain other players should've poked/prodded you/micro more. ;)

Well at that point it doesn't really matter whether they're town or not if they're playing against town...

What if they're a third party who wins by getting lynched? Gotta be careful for such possibilities, right?

Well, it's hard to guard against such a role in general...