First off, Ranagrande:


I find this interpretation to be extremely unlikely. Without the added punctuation and words, I don't think your second interpretation follows. However, if it is seen as a legitimate concern, we can try something different. Is your example of "I have the same alignment as the town," acceptable? Or we could make it as simple as possible, I could post a simple question: "As of this moment, do you win with the Town?" Everyone could answer with a Yes or No.

We could try a statement where lying is proof of goodness. "My death is essential for a Town victory." If it is deemed necessary, we could add words like incapacitation or imprisonment, neutralization. I don't know how well Meta statements would go, if we used "I must be removed from the active player count for the town to win," it likely would bypass our character too much to use.

As for Isaac's idea of overriding the statement with an NB to the Mod: One could try to explain or argue the intent behind a statement. But I think it would be more like a lawyer arguing before a judge. They can take your explanation into consideration, but if they decide it's too convoluted and you did lie, that's up to the mod.

I also find it interesting that Isaac's role message wasn't explicit on that matter. Being Day 1, this launches him to the top of my list, though I'm nowhere near voting yet. I also think it is interesting that he's avoided any statements a lie detector could use. If the one I provided really wouldn't do, could you try an alternative? Just something to pin you down on.



So, between the group, can we come up with a decent statement for the all-too-improbable lie detector? "My character's death is not required for a Town Victory," seems good to me, but I'm also sure it can be picked apart.