Some time back I was in a game where it came out afterward that the last scum had wanted to concede (due to being the presumptive lynch the next day), but this was disallowed by the mod on the basis that it was playing against wincon.
This is certainly up to the moderator's discretion, and in this particular case one could argue that the last scum actually had a fighting chance since it was already lylo. But it got me thinking about whether flat-out conceding should be considered playing against wincon in the same way that, say, naming your teammates is. Maybe this is just from my experience with strategy board games, where conceding is considered preferable to playing out a lost game and far preferable to playing without actually trying to win.
Anyway, I was thinking about this again recently. Here are two hypothetical cases.
Case 1:
In a two-mafioso game, town lynches one scum on day 1 and the second is under suspicion. In this case, I would certainly not concede as scum (though I can see why someone would) and I would say it's reasonable for the moderator to disallow it.
Case 2:
In an open game, a confirmed town player comes up with an auto-win strategy and lays out an irrefutable case that it is an auto-win strategy. A supermajority of players agree to adopt it. In this case I'd say that the Mafia should be allowed to concede rather than play out a lost game.
What do others think?