@Vecna: "but on the other hand lynching lurkers is so enticing. "
And so instead of casting a vote for a lurker -- which you just said is so enticing -- you choose ghug. lol Get out of here, man.
YES or NO --
1. Lurking is a *very* effective strategy for a mafia member to not come under scrutiny? (i.e Avoids "psychological/behavioral" examination)
2. "Off"-voting -- either not voting, or voting singularly so as to have no effect -- is a *very* effective strategy for a mafia member to not come under scrutiny? (i.e. Avoids "voting pattern" analysis that tends to focus SOLELY on trains and buses and dog carts...)
3. Neither of the above behaviors is, in any way, a "Pro Town" style of play?
If you answer those three questions THE WAY YOU SHOULD in regards to Reeder, then you really have no choice but to determine that he ONLY can have suspicion cast upon him, and that there is very, very little to vindicate his behavior.
This isn't even going on to discuss his very predictable behavior, which is both a mix of scheduled and non-information-giving/insignificant posts, and his occassionaly drop-in reactionary posts when he feels he is threatened, which only last precisely long enough to deflect the heat and make sure no voting trend is coming his way. He then leaves, always with an excuse, etc.
There is *NOTHING* about Reeder that can be identified as Town behavior. And the "I'm a Noooooooooooob...." bullshit has long since flown the coop.
So if you are all looking for a Town Leader with a strong case to be made against someone -- then either FOLLOW ME....or give me the reason that my arguments are wrong.
It's go time, People. Time to put away the bullshit play and the monkey poop flinging, and lock this game down. If Reeder if mafia, then we have this game wrapped up.