The evidence for why a leashed SK
was
gamebreakingly powerful has been given to the point where if I stated it again, it would be repetitious. I've brought every single point forward as to why the stance about having the leashed SK was powerful--as a start, she could have (and would have, despite all arguments to the contrary; I've shown the in-thread evidence from Tammy multiple times already) tested Aco's claim, with zero risk to the town.
We've also dismantled (to the point where any further would be repetitious, as everything I've said before hasn't been, as I brought in new reason after new reason) the counter-arguments multiple times, showing why
they
were appeals to repetition and fear without logical basis.
To summarize, Tammy would have shot as directed, including shooting Aco, because she had an overall town approach to the game, had agreed to the shot for d3, knew there was a chance of survival if Aco was fakeclaiming, knew there was a potential chance for her to survive even if Aco wasn't (albeit highly doubtful), and knew that she would be lynched for shooting anyone outside of Aco, probably even if the person shot outside of Aco flipped scum, because she went against the town's will. She had been scumhunting (now verified by the neighborhood talks along with her statements after her death) and wasn't playing like scum: rather than trying to make allies (via buddying to everyone defending her, such as me), she was trying to find scum.
Saying she wouldn't goes against the in-thread evidence, saying she was a BP went against logic and setup balance (and now her flip as well), saying she was second-scumgroup went against logic and in-thread evidence (and now her flip as well), saying she wasn't going to play ball goes against logic and in-thread evidence...
Again, Tammy was, for all intensive purposes, trapped into doing something, but that something was something she (once outed) would have probably done anyway if we had let her. So she would have given that second lynch, which would have been able to get rid of Aco. And again, the double-day would be gamebreakingly powerful, because that's a second lynch. The argument against it was that "scum could influence it", but again, they can (and have!) influence lynches just as much, if not more, than the daykill.
If Tammy were a normal SK, the argument for lynching her would be a matter of MD debate. (It's well-known that I always side for letting them live, but I have no reason to doubt that MoI's stance would be on the other side--as either alignment, he has no reason to lie about a stance on a normal SK.)
But she wasn't. As was pointed out, the SK being a daykiller changed the dynamic of the debate.
And, yes, we know, some town players sided on idiocy by trying to lynch her. Benmage did (but again, Benmage wasn't playing optimally), WC did (WC's not exactly a strong player). Doesn't mean it was all-town, nor that people taking stances were doing so off of their beliefs as a person rather than a player.
I made sure to emphasize that in my article for dang-good reason. During the debate, I never once argued as a person. My belief as a person is to let them live. But I wasn't paying attention to that. I was paying attention to things as a player, where I saw Tammy as an asset, a double-killer who was acting town and had to act with the town, while potentially serving as NK-bait thanks to her obviously not being NK-immune.
This should be my holy rule #3: context is key. We weren't arguing about what, in general, should be done with serial killers. We were arguing what, in this specific game with a day-SK known who had shot scum, should be done about it.
The pro-town results of a double-day are self-evident. Two town-controlled kills rather than one.
MoI passed on that, in favor of lynching her.
