Actually, when Stephen coded, unlike us, it was basically required. He posted after I'd posted the 'Thoughts' thread detailing how no role would pass up such a wonderful opportunity to encode and thus the non-Also crowd was a good scummer fishing hole, others concurred as I recall, and it's highly improbable that he wouldn't have read that and come to additional conclusion that not role coding would be suspicious in of itself as well as being reminded of the logic. That was my point about him right from the get-go, not just that he didn't code his role, but that having had very good reason to have done so, it's weird that he chose not to when there were banners hung up all around it. He's more suspicious for not doing it when I just got done reminding about the safety benefits and explaining how scummy it made someone look not to. I appreciate that the revelation about it not being mandatory gives people second thoughts, but I've never been arguing from those grounds anyway. I've been arguing that he was suspicious for delaying his code claim and not including it even with various bells and whistles reminding him how logical it was to do so, on the grounds that it goes beyond plausible mistake, caution, or oversight.

Remember that the Day 1 coding was setup that way as a fishing expedition for scum, those who chose not to encode an also would be a good pool to hunt in. That was thin, but it was Day 1 and without Rana's code-crack on Yuna we'd likely have fished that pond. Once Rana code cracked and Stephen still hadn't RC'd the trap was effectively redundant and I explained what I was up to, and Stephen thus had a reminder of why it was helpful to do it and legit reaon to worry that not doing it was scummy. That makes his case different then ours, though I still regard not doing it as a very questionable act by others, it is anti-town not to do something that has no appreciable risk and makes you less suspicious, doubly so when someone hangs a lantern on it.