trickser wrote:1st - Actually basic was the poor game design, which made it possible at all, so I don't see how you can dare to turn it against me.
2nd - I tried to get microchip lynched to express my anger not because I believed it would work.
3rd - I only went potentially meta, even thought I knew I wouldn't leave the game for next 2 days and might have been thinking about how to use that, I made no attempt to come back to the game.
You call it poor game design, but we're run umpteen games here without any rules in place for this occasion and people were perfectly capable of working with/around this. What in the end proved game-breaking is the big fuss you made about it. It's perfectly possible to deal with this without having to openly call cheating and still not making yourself look explicitly suspicious. If anything the first logical thing would have been to contact the GM (i.e. me) about whether or not I'd consider it cheating - first doing this in public and then contacting me leaves me with absolutely no way to deal with it even if I wanted to.
My main point: any way you look at it, tactics like these all also have the goal of stirring up reactions by which people try to judge which role you are - in that regard you didn't do a very good job (hell if you hadn't gone public about it no-one but microchip and whomever he contacted would know, instead everyone knew). As far as the rules go it's plain and simple: I'm not changing rules halfway through a game. The fact that this is a rule which I probably wouldn't even change at the beginning of a game is just an additional feature of the debate.
jelco wrote:You prioritized the winning condition about gameplay related rules, again a nuts job of you. And in the end that makes me look like a dirty meta-gamer.
Removing inactive players is not a 'gameplay-related' rule. It's a bonus feature I inserted myself to keep the game going if players fall off the face off the earth. It has nothing to do with the original game rules and should not interfere with them. Hence, there's absolutely nothing 'nuts' about it.