In post 142, pieguyn wrote:I'm probably one of the few people who thinks faking a guilty is valid, *only if* you're competent enough to
1. be correct about it within all reasonable certainty - AKA, as everyone else is saying, you have to be a competent player who knows what the standard play is. 100% of the time, people who fake guilties just bc lol are too incompetent to know when to be able to fake a guilty; it should only be done if you're competent enough to know when you're analyzing a situation objectively and someone really just does have as good a chance of flipping scum as you think
2. be able to identify when you won't be able to get someone lynched via normal means.
Everyone who thinks faking a guilty is a reasonable thing to do believes they are competent enough for 1 and 2. They're often wrong, based on pretty much every game I've read that's included a faked guilty.
If you're talking about a fake guilty that you then retract before a lynch occurs, there are reasonable arguments for that. If you do though, then you're going to out the real investigator pretty much 100% of the time.