Quote Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall View Post
I think that you are all stating things as FACTS too much

Here's my opinion, the opinion of an human being who has no absolute knowledge, just like you all... even if it looks like some of you forget it sometimes. Game theory is not always clear, obvious, and clean-cut.


There is a very grey line between inactivity and strategic lurking, and the use of "lurking" to talk about "being inactive" doesn't help. Being inactive without having given anything substantial, and without any plan that will get put in place, and that will actually involve work is a mistake, and the people who do that continually should just not sign for games, as they don't enjoy them, and ruin other players' experience.

HOWEVER, not posting to create a demand (as Damus previously stated) is a thing. Waiting for things to go further, not discussing a topic, these are all forms of lurking, to different extents. Being LHF on purpose, and creating discussion by lurking, THEN getting in the game and uncovering scum with high activity and accuracy is also a strategy that can be viable IMO.

Obviously, lurking is also misused and can create a very strange and sad meta, where nobody posts because everyone is either an inactive or a lurker. I think that lurkers are clever enough to realize that, and to create discussion, as either alignment (as town, to find scum, and as scum, to control day chat).

Inactivity favors scums. Lurking can favor both sides, depending on how it is executed and how it is used.
I am personally a "lurker pusher", since I like to know players' thoughts. However, if someone lurks as a strategy that is honestly trying to help their alignment, and actually involves gameplay at some point, I'm perfectly ok with it.
So what is your opinion exactly? This feels like a "both sides" argument .