To qualify my earlier statement a little bit: flavorgaming alignment is risky. My own #96 is flavorgaming of a sort - for example, I'm assuming that both Peter Venkman and Dana Barrett are Human from flavor - but I think that kind of flavorgaming is generally fine. MTGS mods generally don't change things like "is this character human". The only recent counterexample I can think of is very minor - Golgari Grave-Troll's colors being changed in Banned mafia.
Observation: We know there's a Human/Ecto mechanic. It seems like a name claim would make it obvious, in all or at least most cases, whether someone is Human or Ecto. This could help both town targeting and scum targeting, depending on who has what powers. I think the relevant reasoning is basically the same as for a general mass claim; it comes down to whether you think town or scum gets a bigger advantage from extra targeting info.
That's a lot of votes on Highroller just for proposing claiming. Don't think it indicates alignment here; Highroller was town in Banned Mafia and was pushing hard for a massclaim there.
@Rodemy: The town win condition is public knowledge, see #4. Also, if you are assuming this is actually part of Highroller's PM, doesn't that mean you believe him town?
I'm used to "meta" meaning "this person has acted this way / that way in other games", which is fairly different.
@Rodemy: The town win condition is public knowledge, see #4. Also, if you are assuming this is actually part of Highroller's PM, doesn't that mean you believe him town?
Highroller: Are your reasons for wanting a claim the same as our last game together?
Tom: Is #32 serious? If so, explain.
Grape: What do you mean in #53?
Vaimes: What's the scumteam?
atogs are known scum