NotFrenchYet: - praising the benefits of full information one second then wondering if Rod should take his info "to the grave" the next...
itai.sharim: I do believe it was the other way around. e.g:
Wondering -> Baz was against it -> I explained I think trustworthy info is key.
Why do you find this turn of event weird?
Well, because regardless of the order of information, you still kind of 'u-turned' on your stance re trustworthy information. You went from a "Hmm... He knows an awful lot, should we kill him?" stance, to a "Trustworthy information will help us win this game" stance, very quickly. When I set it out like that, it really looks like backtracking.
You're still see-sawing all over the place... If "new" information will be revealed, it implies the information you've given so far will be replaced...
Ahhhhgh... Do I really want my first vote in this game to be a hammer? Not really (it's going to look bloody scummy afterwards), but I do think this is a good lynch...