breadbocks did something that was pretty clearly an attempt at cheating.
I'm gonna go with the Air Bud defense and say that nothing in the rules said he couldn't do it.
[...]
And, breadbocks didn't cheat. You can pout and whine about what he did, but he didn't break a single rule. Not only that, but his attempt at choosing a second target was denied, as it should have been.
The equivalent of this is me being a Cop and declaring a different investigation. The next Day. It's just stupid.
Bullshit. This is like you voting
Pundarsonic, and after Pandar is lynched and flips town, saying that it's a mislynch because you misspelled his name. Not the same at all as declaring whatever you want as cop. There are no rules about misspellings either, or guidelines about how many typos are allowed before the vote is not valid.
If you want to be technical, "he didn't break a single rule" because the rule "don't cheat" wasn't explicitly stated. It seldom is, though it perhaps should be. This doesn't make him any less of a cheater. In any case, I (and others, I'm sure) will refuse to play with him again, and I think the objective of the ranking board is explicitly to identify, track, and discourage this kind of behaviour.
At the end of the day, rulings like these must be achieved through consensus. I don't think we have or will elect a single voice of arbitration to decide in ambiguous cases, like that wasn't the case in the Dak days.
I'll go on statistical evidence and general psychological principles that state that scum are less likely to lurk than townies. Generally, if a replacement can be found, they should be found. Modkilling is a last resort sort of tool for lurking.
I call [citation needed] on those statistics. But whether replacement is preferable to modkilling is, I suppose, a matter of preference. I favour modkilling, and in recent times, I believe games would have progressed better with them (this and BYOR5 being but two examples). Mods will use their judgement and implement what rules they choose, but I present this as a valid alternative that should be given thought if we are to train the playerbase to be less lurky. (Maybe I assume too much; is less lurkiness something we want to encourage?)
Don't worry. I also missed a bit. However, I was focused more on trying not to lynch the Townies.
Curious: were you onto me? Or Pandar? :-)
Were you Lonewolf? Because I was against Lonewolf, Pandarsenic, and Jokerman for being ridiculously lurky.
Yes, I was, although the question was rather about my play after I joined. Also, your suspecting them as scum for lurking is contrary to your previous statistical assessment.