544 replies to this topic

[ccabal86]

Well, I guess that's for the cop to figure out.

VOTE COUNT
KevinH (1): CanucksDynasty
Electric Mango (1): Tactical Evil Dan
Preston (1): Nerau
Nerau (1): Preston
Ccabal86 (1): Kasabian
AKCPLUTO (1): Kaziocore

No-Lynch (5): KevinH, ccabal86, AKCPLUTO, Chaoshawk, Electric Mango

Not Voting (0)

With 11 alive, 6 is needed to lynch (or not).

Edited by molestargazer, 06 February 2011 - 01:53 PM.

[Nerau]

Voting no lynch may gain us information in time but a quick no lynch is not benifical to the town

Its the subject that comes up time and again and probably one that will always come up

[Preston]

Well, I guess that's for the cop to figure out.

So if that's all there is to it - that there's no clear or consistent way to actually use any information provided by a cop in case people just go no-lynch... then yeah, I'm very much no-lynch still.

If people no-lynch, then there's no vote records - not only to use in evaluating people post-lynch, but also to use the next day following the mafia night kill.

Also - people talk about the risk of killing a townie power role before it has a chance to be used... but if we get lucky and get a mafia, we have a chance to deny one of THEIR power roles before it gets used also - and since there are fewer mafia than town for probably a comparable number of power roles (just for balance's sake), I think the odds are somewhat better that we get one of their roles than we get one of ours.

I accept that no lynch is probably going to come up every time... but at the moment I really dont like the idea.

So yeah. I'm not going to vote no-lynch... and I will probably be somewhat suspicious of whoever does.

I encourage everyone NOT to no-lynch - and further, in so far as it's possible, to make sure that EVERYONE has logged a vote against SOMEONE before the day ends. Not voting or voting no-lynch denies us the ability to start tracking scum based on positive or negative confirmation. Everyone here was active enough to respond to a 48-hour signup period; there should be little excuse to not have at least SOME vote cast.

Also - 11 people total - do you think that means we have 3 or 4 mafia to contend with?

-Preston

[Kaziocore]

Probably we have 3 mafia members.

[ccabal86]

The problem with day 1 voting is that it's totally random, and using it as "evidence" later on can be misleading. On day 2 you have something to go off of, even a no-lynch.

And yeah, we probably have 3 mafia...

[Tactical Evil Dan]

Well, since it seems like we've gone from random hee-hee voting to serious discussion, I'll jump back in.

The arguments that a first round no-lynch serves the mafia's end, and random first round votes aren't good as evidence later, both make sense to me.

That leaves me wondering exactly how one goes about accomplishing something on the first day.

[Preston]

The arguments that a first round no-lynch serves the mafia's end, and random first round votes aren't good as evidence later, both make sense to me.

That leaves me wondering exactly how one goes about accomplishing something on the first day.

The way I see it, if we no-lynch then when someone is nightkilled we have no idea about whom they might have pissed off or suspected/sided with during the previous day's voting.

What is different on day 2 other than that someone's been killed, that would give us more information? We could have a cop, but I highly doubt he'd come out at the start of day 2 and say "Okay; person X is dirty!"

We have to start SOMEwhere.

-Preston

[Preston]

Clarification/addendum (Since we can't edit):
If we have a cop, then his odds of FINDING mafia during the night are the same 3/11 chance of us lynching one of the mafia on the first day. If the cop finds someone who returns 'guilty', then great - they can start figuring out a way to shift suspicion to them, other than just coming out and saying it. If instead they find someone who returns 'innocent', then we're basically in the same boat as day one unless someone tries a little too hard to accuse that person.

[KevinH]

Clearing people as innocent is very valuable. Besides decreasing the possible scum pool, it gives credibility to posts that are truly coming from a townie.

[Electric Mango]

I've only played one game where we did not lynch on the first day and that was because of the special game mechanics involved. It's uncharted waters for probably most of us as we usually lynch on the first day. I'm guessing this game will end with a day 1 no lynch. Tonight a townie will be killed by the mafia and our cop will try to drop some sort of subtle hint on his investigation. He'll either FOS someone or say that he's getting townie vibes from someone else. When the cop dies or role claims his night actions will assist the town in finishing out the game.

[Tactical Evil Dan]

Unless, of course, the cop turns out to be crazy or otherwise impaired.

At any rate, I still agree that a first round no-lynch is bad, and I'm still wondering how we make the most out of day 1.

I'm sort of hoping that the solution isn't a truly random vote.

[CanucksDynasty]

Random votes are usually just to get the ball rolling.
As discussion progresses...it usually falls between 2 suspects.
And then we have what we call voting patterns.

I know that he says he wants to try No Lynch voting this time around.
But in past he's always been in favour of a lynch on D1.

So he gets my vote.

Unvote
Vote: Electric Mango

[KevinH]

A townie gets lynched and I get to say "I told you so."

Everybody involved in the lynch comes under suspicion but they all claim they were just scum-hunting.

Nobody knows nothin' and with no information at all on day 1, a lynch (with no information) hurts the town's cause.

There will be more information available on day 2.

[KevinH]

"No-Lynch" is sort of like calling the question in parliamentary procedure.

Hearing no other discussion, I'd like to call the question ...

[CanucksDynasty]

"No-Lynch" is sort of like calling the question in parliamentary procedure.

Hearing no other discussion, I'd like to call the question ...

Not familar with politic procedures.
So what's the question?

[Tactical Evil Dan]

"Calling the question" is when you prompt a vote to determine if debate on the issue at hand should continue. If a super-majority decide it's gone on too long, then debate ends and the issue at hand is voted on.

To frame it in terms of US government politics, if you succeed in "calling the question" on the floor of the Senate you've broken the filibuster and the bill in question gets an up-or-down vote.

[Tactical Evil Dan]

It's kinda like when it's your turn to bet on a round of poker, and you "call." You're voting that it's time to stop talking and put up or shut up.

[Preston]

Before you go to the question I want to confirm - has EVERYONE said at least something today? I don't want to 'call the question' until everyone has gotten a word in - not just for their own benefit but to get their perspective and to force mafia that may be sitting idle to take at least SOME position.

-Preston

[Tactical Evil Dan]

Just did a quick head-count -- everybody has, indeed, said something, and everybody has cast a vote of some kind.

[Preston]

Just did a quick head-count -- everybody has, indeed, said something, and everybody has cast a vote of some kind.

Can I get a current vote summary then?