She may be town aligned, but that doesn’t make her an asset to the town. Also, it may be a ‘waste’ of a lynch, but that doesn’t make it the waste of a Day, as we’ll still have all day to collect information from scum.
I intended it to read: “not useful at best and not helpful at worst,” in other words, despite the detractors, I don’t see the role benefiting us in any way.
In the interest of fairness, I can think of one: The T-1000 probably doesn’t want Sarah Conner around, either.
Alternately, he could feel a bit guilty that he’s exposed you, and wants to bring the game back into balance by defending you.
I can’t make any sense of this at all. It seems to me that by “suicide”, you actually mean “claim so that we can lynch her”, and by “a positive person”, you mean another Townie. But we also lose the possibility of lynching scum! Please clarify.
What I and, I think, others are proposing is that Sarah should stay alive until Day Three and then allow herself to be modkilled (remember, the mod has specifically permitted her, and her alone, to be modkilled without losing the game as an individual). Thus:
On the first two Nights, there is the possibility that scum might target her and wind up dead themselves.
Town can use both of its lynches on Days One and Two on people who might actually be scum.
Please explain how your proposal offers advantages which my proposal does not.
If she is alive on Day 3, she starts making people go crazy! That’s why we’d have to do it on Day 1 or 2 (if she’s not killed Tonight). IMHO, Days 1 and 2 aren’t about lynching scum, baring a major slip. Days 1 and 2 are about getting people to assume positions on the game setup, place votes that can be analyzed later; lynching scum on the first 2 Days only happens when Town gets lucky, or Scum do something stupid. My proposal still allows us to place votes just as if Sarah wasn’t going to claim, and then change them at the end of Day 2.
You’re right in your parsing of my mumble-jumble, but I think lynching a neutral party still gives us the entire benefit we would normally receive from the votes on Day 2.
But we saw clearly in Conspiracy 2 that if the Town has decided on a lynch early, you might as well just sit around painting your toenails for the rest of the day.
I think it’s dumb to try and lynch Sarah Connor. Now, granted, it’s possible she may have a different win condition than the rest of the town (her suicide would evidently not invalidate it.) There may be some mechanic in place to discourage her from suiciding once she begins driving people crazy. But absent that, she’s supposed to be a town player and she can suicide if she thinks she’s hurting the town. Generally speaking we try not to tell power roles what to do, right? Well, there you go - maybe she knows more than we do.
Look, if the scum know that the Day 2 votes aren’t going to count and that we’re going to lynch Sarah Connor regardless, then the vote record from Day 2 is completely useless. If Sarah Connor is such a problem, then she can suicide-by-mod(legally, without incurring the insta-loss).
The whole point of the game for Town is to gain information, and the lynch is our best method of doing so. Lynching Sarah Connor means that we gain no information from her lynch at all.
You are right, Santo, it would maybe be better for her to be modkilled Tomorrow rather than on Day 3. But to clarify, Sarah Connor can’t possibly be killed Tonight; if anyone targets her, the targeter and the T-800 die, and she stays alive. I guess it’s theoretically possible, though very unlikely, that the scum and/or one or both Vigs could all hit her, in which case I imagine she would die.
Figuring out odds, using rough approximations rather than exact numbers, and keeping in mind that these could be slightly altered depending on who dies Today and Tonight:
On Day Three, Sarah drives someone crazy:
10% could hit Jester or T-1000. Awesome!
45% no effect (hit vanilla something)
45% hit Town (probably with fairly minimal effect, as most Town power roles are redundant and not very powerful. So, say 20% really bad for Town (hit a Doc, T-800 or John Connor), 25% only slightly bad for Town.)
Also consider that if she is alive on Night Two, the scum have about an 8% chance of targeting her and dying. So, that’s a total of an 18% chance of her doing something to significantly help Town, and about an equal chance of her doing something to significantly hurt us. So, I would be inclined to let her make that call (whether to be modkilled on Day Two or Three) depending on how things go Today and Tonight and on her evaluation of how useful her vote-changing power can be. Once she starts driving multiple people per day crazy, the odds get worse for Town and I don’t see any justification for her staying alive.
Other than that, what Zsofia and Rysto said. I think we have pretty much beaten this into the ground, the only person whose opinion really matters is Sarah and I think we have all presented more than enough arguments for her to chew over.
Alright, lunchtime is nearly over, time to revise the votes.
I’m going to get off the lurker-lynch thing. I’m still very concerned that so few people have voted with less than 48 hours to go in the Day, but I don’t want to just arbitrarily pick somebody again this close to the deadline, especially as I might not be around much the rest of the Day. so, unvote all and then
1.Zsofia moves into first place pending an explanation of her vote on Rysto.
Santo Rugger advances to second. Despite the fact that I’m growing less suspicious of him, I still don’t feel like I have any better candidates. Obviously, I would rather vote for someone who I feel is scum, but barring some huge slip, I will likely have to settle on Day One for voting for someone who isn’t helping Town. And NAF, please see my post 400 for an explanation of how his actions have plausible scum motivation.
Natural Blond Chap. Once again, I feel like I am voting for someone based more on the fact that they aren’t doing what I would do (acknowledge my mistake and move on) in their situation, rather than because I think they are probable scum. Day One sucks. His offense is less than Santo’s, since he has only contradicted himself rather than openly proposed anti-Town strategy. However, he certainly has contradicted himself, and the more he goes around with story trying to deny that, the sillier he makes himself look, IMO.
Well, based on my past record, these three are probably all major Town power roles, but there’s my vote for now. Depending on how my RL goes, this may be my last substantive post of the Day or you may all be treated to lots more stream-of-consciousness rambling, but at the very least I should be able to skim and react to any dramatic roleclaims or scumtells.
Look, the scum don’t know weather Sarah is going to claim or not.
See above post. We don’t know weather she’ll claim or not, so there’s still plenty of other stuff to talk about.
I apologize for explaining myself over and over while getting the same results… maybe Sarah already made me go insane! 
ThingFish, if you’re going to move me up in your vote count, can you at least humble me and say you think I’m scum? I do rather like you you tried to make it look innocent, but moving me up is quite important at this point, and gives peeker a bit of breathing room. It almost looks like you’re trying to protect him.
I finally come to a decision about how best to handle Santo’s Sarah Connor idea and I get beaten to the punch by Thing. Originally, I was going to say that Sarah has to die before the dawn of Day 3 but after looking at Thing’s number I guess it’s moved back to dawn of Day 4. I don’t think that lynching her is the right solution because that will limit our ability to hunt scum on her death day.
What this has me wondering is why Pede would design Sarah as such a weak and useless character. Even if she suicided today there is very little downside for Town, which is worse then vanilla town who we want alive the entire game. I think that there has to something balancing her. My two thoughts are that either the role blocker or crazy doc can stop her from driving people crazy but not effect her vote changing power or her death effects John and the T-800 some how.
Can Sarah’s driving people insane be blocked?
Beyond that debate, which seems pretty well settled, I think I’m ready to vote. Unfortunately I don’t have any strong reads but I’ll give you what I’ve got.
Vote 1:
NBC
I think Story has put out a pretty good case against him and he defense seems to be nitpicky more then anything else.
Vote 2:
Boozy
He’s not normally a lurker and after NAF using his wedding in C2 I’m a little more leery of lurkers so I’m going to use my last two votes that direction.
Vote 3:
Almost Human
I’m not sure what’s going on here he drew some heat from Diggit, posted once defending himself and then disappeared. What I find interesting is that it had been more then a page since he posted previous to that so it looks like he was reading but only decided to speak up once a vote was on him.
I’m not sure how to code but for some reason the buttons at the top of reply box aren’t working.
NETA: Stupid coding I forgot one.
Can Sarah Conors’ driving people insane be blocked by a role blocker?
At least I remembered how to do it. 
I’ve played in four games:
You died quickly in Sekham; and if I recall correctly I had a big fit about how someone else labelled you scum for supporting a plan that he himself supported.
In Conspiracy, (again, if I recall correctly) you were all over me for the “not-revealing-roles” thing which eventually became a point in your favor. I was befuddled that you did not counterclaim when you knew someone was false claiming mason, and it did make me think you were scum, but I don’t consider that irrational on my part or due to some DiggitCamara bias. Furthermore, that was endgame, not Day One randomness. Or was I after you on Day One? I don’t remember.
In YSI, I was scum.
In Cecilvania, I don’t recall being overly suspicious of you. Most of my focus was on storyteller and Blaster Master. Were you even in that game?
In short, I don’t get where you get the idea that I always think you are scum. My view of DiggitCamara has been rather benign… until now.
I find stating that I always think you are scum a rather strange statement to make. I think you need to prove it to me. (And NO, my suspicion of you now is not proof!)
(color bleached by me)
I have to say that I don’t like this vote list at all, and I will explain why. The big one is the Rysto vote. I understand that sach and story have posted about why there is a greater chance of Rysto (and NAF, I think?) of being scum due to scum quirks and the resetting of roles, but to me, that’s all metagaming folderol. Yes, perhaps you keep it in the back of your mind for later, as a data point among many, but to use a metagame reason as the sole reason to vote for someone, and #1 no less, is absurd, IMO. Zsofia’s acknowledgment that it’s “capricious and kind of crappy” is both an understatement and an attempt to deflect potential criticism (e.g. "I said it wasn’t a good vote when I made it!).
The other two votes annoy me a little not for who they are for, but just the laziness of them. C’mon, if you’re going to use someone else’s reasoning to vote for someone (which is perfectly valid), at least reference the posts in question where the case is made. Maybe my brain is overwhelmed from reading most of the game in one fell swoop, but I can’t keep everyone’s arguments fresh in my head. Not to mention there might be multiple arguments against one player. Which ones specifically do you agree with and are basing your votes on? This play strikes me as both lazy and a way to smokescreen accountability for the votes.
Zsofia has climbed to the top of my list.
But I did have perfect information in SimpleTown! 
God damn it.
I wrote a long vote post that just got eaten. The vote was for NAF. I’m not rewriting my post right now. I need to go. Positions 2 and 3 are not filled yet.
For my reference for tomorrow. I wrote about Santo Rugger. NBC. peekercpa. NAF.
Ok, vote time. Things have happened, stuff has been said, I have opinions (surprise surprise) and I promised a complete vote by today.
Fist off, people I am eliminating from condideration for toDay.
Sach and Rysto. Their little back and forth is starting to show some of the earmarks of town on town violence. I am not clearning either of them, but neither will get my vote in the near future.
Rugger, BECAUSE he called for the lynch of Sarah Connor. If you don’t like or don’t follow the reasons why I think this makes him more likely to be town, then see sach’s posts on the subject. He tends to be more lucid about these things than me.
Everyone else is fair game, and I am going to put one vote on a lurker, because really they need to take some heat. So #3 is going to Boozy. He has only posted once since the game started and that was to confirm that he was pre-reset scum and didn’t have a quirk.
#2 Goes to Almost Human. So far she is the only person who’s post has jumped out at me as being scum. I even broke it down for you . She hasn’t done anything else to make me terribly suspicious yet, but she hasn’t really done anything to make me see that post in a new light either so… #2 for her.
The number one slot on my list is…Zsofia! Come on down Zsofia. Low participation and a REALLY questionable late hit vote on Rysto makes you my #1 pick for this round of voting.
So, yeah. I don’t think anyone really agrees with me on this stuff, but I feel very comfortable with these votes. (This whole waiting for a while to vote thing is actually kinda nice.)
Vote
1. Zsofia
2. Almost Human
3. Boozy Squid
Nice smudge, but you need to work on making it a bit less obvious. I moved you up because I unvoted OaOW, which I said I would do when he stopped lurking at the time I cast the vote. I’m not voting peeker because, as I already explained, I’m not impressed with the case against him. If I really cared about protecting peeker, I would be going after some of the people who are voting for him. As of now, it looks like you, NBC, peeker and Zsofiaare the leading vote getters; maybe my vote even moved you into first place, I didn’t check. But with more than half the players (including, um, you) not having voted yet, I can’t imagine anyone is going to take your insinuation that I am up to some sinister vote manipulation seriously.