A smallish debate opened up over a statement made by a Cylon player in our last game. At this point, it was a five player game with both cylons known (one revealed, one known but unrevealed). A crisis card skill check came up with colors Yellow, Green, and Purple. Revealed Cylon 1 throws in his one card and says to Known Cylon 2, "I think this is a good skill check for blue cards." Cylon 2 is Boomer, so should have some blue cards. Cylon 2 considers this and throws in one card, as well. It appears everyone, including the humans, is pretty clear what just happened. When the cards are added up, there are 3 blue cards. One is a blue 5, one a blue 3, and a blue 0 doubling all blue points. All other cards are positive. Clearly, one of the blues was Destiny Deck, and the other two were cylon contributions. Now, the humans object that what Cylon 1 said was "telegraphing" what he was playing (the Blue 0 doubling all blues). Cylon 1 says, no, I never said what color I was playing or what value; I simply suggested others play blue. No rule has been broken. Humans say in response, the fact that we are so experienced and can read cues so well means we should be more careful in how we speak and that the statement was "crossing the line." The Cylon responds that there are ways the group communicates things ambiguously and telegraphically all the time, such as "Can anyone do something useful?" means "I have an Executive Order" and "I could do something really useful if someone can help my roll" means "I have Scouting for Fuel." The cylon argued that this was just a novel example of the same, and they are upset because it suceeded.
What do you think?
More broadly, does your game group have formal or informal rules about what you can say about your skill cards? Where is the line?