[Advanced] Lily's Mythical Beings Mafia

[Barmacral]

whats wrong with a No Lynch Sakaea?? you info off a No Lynch as well, more so than a random or inactive lynch.

 

Are you seriously arguing in favour of a No Lynch on day 1? Unvote, Vote: Red

[Red2111]

for right now i am, until i see someone better to move my vote to. honestly if it comes between a rushed "random" type lynch, i'd much prefer a No lynch majority. like i said, you can get just as much info if not more info off a No Lynch majority.

 

 

question to barm is why so agaisn thte idea? it's not like it's near a deadline or i'm splitting votes and preventing a Majority.

[Hybrid]

Time for another blatant bandwagon

 

Unvote, vote Red

[Hybrid]

for right now i am, until i see someone better to move my vote to.

 

And if we all did this, nothing would happen. Advocating a sideline approach is not pro-town on Day 1.

 

like i said, you can get just as much info if not more info off a No Lynch majority.

 

Lanth?? What happened to you??

[Sakaea]

FOS Hybrid for jumping on a bandwagon. and UNVOTE RED before this goes any further. Joke vote bandwagons are ridiculous.

[Lanthirrhos]

I'll argue for a no lynch day one. Why not? The only thing it'll come down to is that people who don't like no lynches suck at reading them, AND want someone to die--namely an innocent seeing as statitically, nearly every day one lynch is a townie.

 

No lynches are no different than a lynch except that no townie dies, and they are useful later when the game is a numbers game. All voting patterns, changes, comments and slip ups still exist, just as they would with a lynch. People who argue so harshly against Day one no lynches either need their info spoon fed to them by the mod, or want a townie dead (ala scum).

 

How's that for spin? (happy Hy? )

[Barmacral]

I am against the idea because you can get more info off of a real lynch than waffling around a no-lynch. I agree that a random lynch is worse, but advocating a no lynch when there are no strong lynch candidates or a deadline in sight (meaning no risk of a random lynch) is VERY anti-town.

[Lanthirrhos]

Advocating is an interesting word. I don't see any "advocating a no lynch" from anyone.

 

Granted, you have someone voting for it and asking why it shouldn't be done. (That's usually my trap, thanks Red. )

 

And then, when you raise to the bait, you get people like me who can actually argue for it. That only "more info" you get from a lynch is a name and an alignment from the mod. And on day one, this is generally more of a curse than a blessing, because the mafia use the day one lynch to pick out townie targets who are easy prey, and the townies have little defense because they can only claim to have done their best on day one--which is never good enough for the lynchers. All that said, the person arguing for the NL (me) isn't voting it--nor have I said to. Interesting, eh?

 

"Anti-town" is an interesting word too. butt-covering for the future because you didn't say "scum" (assuming that a lynch of said person turned up townie) and yet still connotated that the person's death would be for the best regardless.

 

I've seen a lot of great town plays that were "anti-town". That's a rather rash judgement from an experienced player, especially if the "advocating" is non-existent. What exactly is "town" in your book? Mindless voting to achieve a day one lynch on a townie? No, no of course not. Never. Sitting around making no plays to find mafia? How silly of me, to think that.

[LilyElizabeth]

Vote count:

 

Key (1) – Ishy

Verbal (1) – Lanth

Min (1) – Ed

Ishy (1) – Key

Barm (3) – Nolder, Tina, Des

Vambram (1) – Leelou

Karas (1) – Kat

No lynch (1) – Red

Kat (1) – Karas

Red (2) – Barm, Hybrid

 

No deadline for day one yet.

[Red2111]

what Lanth said, and add on that you can get the same info requrding a No Lynch as you can for a controlled lynch as to the reasons a person argues for and agaisnt it.

 

 

Barm why is advocating a No Lynch any worse than a Joke Vote on Day 1? votes are suposed to promote reactions correct? so how is this any more anti-town then joke voting and letting the game run close to the deadline before a mass voter pile up on the one with the most votes.

 

again, i can see where you would say this if the deadlien was close and we had a viable candidate; but this isn't the case. so i question your motives for painting the No Lynch as soemthign bad in this situation.

 

 

for right now i am, until i see someone better to move my vote to.

 

And if we all did this, nothing would happen. Advocating a sideline approach is not pro-town on Day 1.

 

i'm waving the BS flag on this one. my vote is on No Vote, yet i'm not advocating from teh side lines as i've been poking other posters and getting discussion up. unlike what your doing, which is "blatant bandwagoning"

[hazelkrs1]

Advocating is an interesting word. I don't see any "advocating a no lynch" from anyone.

 

Granted, you have someone voting for it and asking why it shouldn't be done. (That's usually my trap, thanks Red. )

 

And then, when you raise to the bait, you get people like me who can actually argue for it. That only "more info" you get from a lynch is a name and an alignment from the mod. And on day one, this is generally more of a curse than a blessing, because the mafia use the day one lynch to pick out townie targets who are easy prey, and the townies have little defense because they can only claim to have done their best on day one--which is never good enough for the lynchers. All that said, the person arguing for the NL (me) isn't voting it--nor have I said to. Interesting, eh?

 

"Anti-town" is an interesting word too. butt-covering for the future because you didn't say "scum" (assuming that a lynch of said person turned up townie) and yet still connotated that the person's death would be for the best regardless.

 

I've seen a lot of great town plays that were "anti-town". That's a rather rash judgement from an experienced player, especially if the "advocating" is non-existent. What exactly is "town" in your book? Mindless voting to achieve a day one lynch on a townie? No, no of course not. Never. Sitting around making no plays to find mafia? How silly of me, to think that.

 

Bolded sentence makes no sense whatsoever. A "great" town play has to be pro-town, or it wouldn't be a great town play. And "anti-town" can be a fitting term because it can refer to third party factions like cults, but more importantly it can be referring to someone who might be town, but is actually hurting town with their moves and posts and helping scum.

 

I also agree that a D1 No Lynch can give you information, but as I believe someone else already pointed out, there's no reason to start off voting for no lynch, it's best to use that as an ace in the hole should it come closer to deadline and no good candidate for lynch exists. During the beginning of day 1 the important thing is to apply pressure wherever you can and glean whatever information you can from it. Not pressuring ANYONE by voting no lynch from the start robs town of a much needed head start on finding info that can lead us to scum.

 

That being said, I don't think we should necessarily policy lynch someone for voting this way, Red might have just been place-voting and seeing how people would react to the no-vote. However, if you look at Red's behavior, she is overly anxious to point her FOS at anyone she can, and is reaching. Not only that, but she made cases against a couple people, but then still chose to no-vote. That together makes me Unvote and Vote Red.

 

BTW I also thought Ishy's question about revealing his character's name was extremely bizarre and possibly rolefishing. And Lanth seems to be reaching as well.

[hazelkrs1]

Point is Red, by voting no lynch early you potentially lift the hook off any scum that might be pressured day 1. It might be rare to lynch mafia D1, but the host of this game herself just exited a mafia game in which she was scum, and there was a good chance she couldve been lynched day 1, she had a pretty big train building on her.

 

Also, it's not "blatant bandwagoning" if the person who votes on your train states their own reasons for voting. It might be subtle bandwagoning, but not the blatant obvious kind. Once again, reaching.

[Red2111]

my answers are in blue

 

 

Advocating is an interesting word. I don't see any "advocating a no lynch" from anyone.

 

Granted, you have someone voting for it and asking why it shouldn't be done. (That's usually my trap, thanks Red. )

 

And then, when you raise to the bait, you get people like me who can actually argue for it. That only "more info" you get from a lynch is a name and an alignment from the mod. And on day one, this is generally more of a curse than a blessing, because the mafia use the day one lynch to pick out townie targets who are easy prey, and the townies have little defense because they can only claim to have done their best on day one--which is never good enough for the lynchers. All that said, the person arguing for the NL (me) isn't voting it--nor have I said to. Interesting, eh?

 

"Anti-town" is an interesting word too. butt-covering for the future because you didn't say "scum" (assuming that a lynch of said person turned up townie) and yet still connotated that the person's death would be for the best regardless.

 

I've seen a lot of great town plays that were "anti-town". That's a rather rash judgement from an experienced player, especially if the "advocating" is non-existent. What exactly is "town" in your book? Mindless voting to achieve a day one lynch on a townie? No, no of course not. Never. Sitting around making no plays to find mafia? How silly of me, to think that.

 

Bolded sentence makes no sense whatsoever. A "great" town play has to be pro-town, or it wouldn't be a great town play. And "anti-town" can be a fitting term because it can refer to third party factions like cults, but more importantly it can be referring to someone who might be town, but is actually hurting town with their moves and posts and helping scum.

 

actually the bolded sentence makes alot of sense. for instance, in a basic game i saw a vanilla townie falsely claim as finder. the finder was smart enough not to reveal and if i remember correctly the town went on to win it. thsi is only one of many examples there are of townies doing what considered an "anti-town" move.

 

however, to consider advocating a No Lynch is anti-town is reaching imo, something both Barm & Hybrid are doing atm.

 

I also agree that a D1 No Lynch can give you information, but as I believe someone else already pointed out, there's no reason to start off voting for no lynch, it's best to use that as an ace in the hole should it come closer to deadline and no good candidate for lynch exists. During the beginning of day 1 the important thing is to apply pressure wherever you can and glean whatever information you can from it. Not pressuring ANYONE by voting no lynch from the start robs town of a much needed head start on finding info that can lead us to scum.

 

 

how is voting for a No Lynch right off the bat any worse than Joke Voting or Place Holder voting for someone. if anything, someone bringing up the subject or even voting for the No Lynch gets the game moving and discussion goign; this is more than a Joke Vote can produce, especially the vote by itself.

 

you say "During the beginning of day 1 the important thing is to apply pressure wherever you can and glean whatever information you can from it. " how does a Joke Vote accomplish that. especially since no one takes them serious until a wagon forms on it.

 

 

if anything, the Joke Votes are more anti-town as it allows the scum too much leverage.

 

That being said, I don't think we should necessarily policy lynch someone for voting this way, Red might have just been place-voting and seeing how people would react to the no-vote. However, if you look at Red's behavior, she is overly anxious to point her FOS at anyone she can, and is reaching. Not only that, but she made cases against a couple people, but then still chose to no-vote. That together makes me Unvote and Vote Red.

 

 

i made a case against them yet, to point out what i found as odd behavior and apply pressure. there are other ways to apply pressure rather than just voting them, besides, finding soemthing FoS worthy and somethign Vote worthy are two different things.

 

BTW I also thought Ishy's question about revealing his character's name was extremely bizarre and possibly rolefishing. And Lanth seems to be reaching as well.

[Red2111]

Point is Red, by voting no lynch early you potentially lift the hook off any scum that might be pressured day 1. It might be rare to lynch mafia D1, but the host of this game herself just exited a mafia game in which she was scum, and there was a good chance she couldve been lynched day 1, she had a pretty big train building on her.

 

Also, it's not "blatant bandwagoning" if the person who votes on your train states their own reasons for voting. It might be subtle bandwagoning, but not the blatant obvious kind. Once again, reaching.

 

oh i've lynched scum Day 1 plenty of times. and over "reaching" as you call it like i do every game. sometimes i'm lucky some times i'm not.

 

 

point is, why are you so threatened by a "No Lynch" vote day 1 this early in the game and when i'm not pushing hard for it; only arguing the benefits of said lynch. your also goign to have to explain how a vote for a no lynch gets the pressure off scum; more so than a rushed bandwagon lynch on a joke vote Day 1.

 

 

also abotu the blantant bandwagoning. it's a blantant bandwagon vote because hybrid said so himself

 

Time for another blatant bandwagon

 

Unvote, vote Red

 

 

 

thing is Despro, first i didn't find your vote scummy; but now your actions with this last vote are pinging me.

[Lanthirrhos]

"Scum" as a term encompasses non mafia just as well as anti-town, and eliminates the connotation of butt covering for the future because he knows how the lynch turns out. You prove my point on that with the anti-town being applied to people hurting the town. That's exactly it--Red has yet to do anything to harm the town, and she's done a LOT to get people involved. In fact, just about every reason you list for your vote against her, I'd list as a reason to NOT vote her. From voting no lynch, to making cases and not following them up, to FOSing people left and right.

 

In fact, the only reason I'd vote her now is for stealing my moves. Why are so many so eager to bandwagon (btw, Hybrid blatantly said that he was "blatantly bandwagoning" so your argument there against Red calling it blatantly bandwagoning is... a bit flawed.

 

Des, you missed my previous point about advocating--Red hasn't. It doesn't lift the hook off of anyone. The only way it would is if she couldn't vote again. Let try this logic then: You and several others pile on Red for little to no legitimate reason--sounds like lifting a hook off of anyone else who may be presured today. Take off your shoes, stay awhile, presure people.... or keep puhing the Red agenda and ignore the rest of the game, eh?

 

I'll also counter that voting no lynch doesn't presure anyone--Looks to me like Red voting no lynch has gotten a lot of people involved and pressured. Sorry, but your argument doesn't stand the test of fact. Red started all of this. That's why I usually do it. So there is a reason, and a point, and it's more town that your own actions atm.

 

You'll also notice that I put "anti-town" in quotes--just becaue people call it anti-town, doesn't mean it is. To use something close to your words,'maybe it's not anti-town, and the person doing it has their own reasons' that you can't see or understand at the time.

[Lanthirrhos]

Red stop posting faster than me and saying what I said first, but before me.

[hazelkrs1]

careful, you don't want to get into long protracted arguments with me lol, I'm relentless (SG's carebear mafia game is still trying to recover from the spat between me and Kivam)

 

my answers are in blue

 

 

Bolded sentence makes no sense whatsoever. A "great" town play has to be pro-town, or it wouldn't be a great town play. And "anti-town" can be a fitting term because it can refer to third party factions like cults, but more importantly it can be referring to someone who might be town, but is actually hurting town with their moves and posts and helping scum.

 

actually the bolded sentence makes alot of sense. for instance, in a basic game i saw a vanilla townie falsely claim as finder. the finder was smart enough not to reveal and if i remember correctly the town went on to win it. thsi is only one of many examples there are of townies doing what considered an "anti-town" move.

 

But then it wasn't an anti-town move. It was a move that might have been considered anti-town by some at first, but ended up being VERY pro-town. I for one have used that tactic many times, it's definitely a pro-town move if A) you don't draw too much suspicion your way and get lynched, but more important B) you don't false-vet people that end up being scum. This is the easiest trap to fall in when false-claiming finder.

 

Point is, an anti-town move hurts town, a great town play can't truly be called anti-town in the end.

 

I also agree that a D1 No Lynch can give you information, but as I believe someone else already pointed out, there's no reason to start off voting for no lynch, it's best to use that as an ace in the hole should it come closer to deadline and no good candidate for lynch exists. During the beginning of day 1 the important thing is to apply pressure wherever you can and glean whatever information you can from it. Not pressuring ANYONE by voting no lynch from the start robs town of a much needed head start on finding info that can lead us to scum.

 

how is voting for a No Lynch right off the bat any worse than Joke Voting or Place Holder voting for someone. if anything, someone bringing up the subject or even voting for the No Lynch gets the game moving and discussion goign; this is more than a Joke Vote can produce, especially the vote by itself.

 

you say "During the beginning of day 1 the important thing is to apply pressure wherever you can and glean whatever information you can from it. " how does a Joke Vote accomplish that. especially since no one takes them serious until a wagon forms on it.

 

 

if anything, the Joke Votes are more anti-town as it allows the scum too much leverage.

 

You're right in that joke votes aren't that helpful, but they're probably always going to happen, you can't really stop it. Just try to get everyone to get serious as soon as possible. But a no lynch vote early on creates the possibility NOONE gets pressured, which means we get robbed of possible info we could have gained. I even brought up how you voting that way could have been place-voting, but if you were to stick to that vote and try to convince others to vote no lynch (which you're kinda doing) then it is an anti-town move.

 

That being said, I don't think we should necessarily policy lynch someone for voting this way, Red might have just been place-voting and seeing how people would react to the no-vote. However, if you look at Red's behavior, she is overly anxious to point her FOS at anyone she can, and is reaching. Not only that, but she made cases against a couple people, but then still chose to no-vote. That together makes me Unvote and Vote Red.

 

 

i made a case against them yet, to point out what i found as odd behavior and apply pressure. there are other ways to apply pressure rather than just voting them, besides, finding soemthing FoS worthy and somethign Vote worthy are two different things.

 

So you get to point FOS at them and yet still appear neutral that way you can exonerate yourself later should a lynch on them prove them to be town. Scummy. If you're going to make a case on them, be willing to truly get your hands dirty, otherwise it just looks like you're leaving yourself an out.

[Lanthirrhos]

Oh I like arguments. MJ games tend to have higher post counts than DM ones. *waves*

[Lanthirrhos]

You hould note that "great town plays" can be ANTI-TOWN (no quotes this time) and HELP the town. The decision is almost alway the town's. And it can certainly do both at once. It's never an either or. It's ALWAYS on the shoulders of the town to make or break an individual's play. They usually break it because they'd rather eradicate unorthodoxy and competence than trust--which isn't always a bad thing.

[hazelkrs1]

I dunno, the arguments we were having in that mafia game seem to have deflated everyone somewhat. But I guess I'll respond to a couple points, quickly if I can:

 

About the "blatant bandwagoning", by saying that's what he was doing, he was poking fun at the concept, a little tongue in cheek if you will. Then he backed up his vote with an argument, which took it out of the blatant bandwagoning territory.

 

Once again, I don't think Red voting no lynch early is on is immediately a policy-lynch type offense, but were she to have her vote stay there and convince others to go no lynch themselves, then she is potentially lifting scum off the hook. And yes, her moves have inadvertently created pressure on someone-herself.

 

True, she has gotten discussions started and whatnot, but this doesn't necessarily mean she's not scum. Mafia hiding behind "pro-town" moves, especially early on, are showing a great way to try and get past everyone's initial scumdar.

 

And Red, reaching in the hopes you get lucky and bag a scum is fine, and since I haven't played with you before, I can only assume you're telling the truth in that's what you always do. However, it can also easily be a scummy move, do you not see that? It goes into the whole metagame thing, if you set a precedent in always playing a certain way, it helps clear you a bit when you play that way even as scum. If your play was drastically different as town and mafia, you'd get sniffed out as scum every time.

 

In other words, you're not off the hook for reaching yet, and since you've presented yourself so far as an okay candidate for a lynch, I see no reason we should vote no lynch at this point. I feel no lynch votes should be saved for when there is no good candidate for a lynch.

[Niniel]

Red is starting the game as always - town or scum. FOS. FOS. FOS. Not much to say about it jet.

 

 

FOS Hybrid for jumping on a bandwagon. and UNVOTE RED before this goes any further. Joke vote bandwagons are ridiculous.

 

If Red turns out to be scum later in this game I will remember this.

[hazelkrs1]

You hould note that "great town plays" can be ANTI-TOWN (no quotes this time) and HELP the town. The decision is almost alway the town's. And it can certainly do both at once. It's never an either or. It's ALWAYS on the shoulders of the town to make or break an individual's play. They usually break it because they'd rather eradicate unorthodoxy and competence than trust--which isn't always a bad thing.

 

When I say anti-town, I'm not referring to moves that might be perceived as anti-town, I'm talking about moves which LITERALLY hurt town. If you make such a move, you're exhibiting anti-town characteristics.

 

If on the other hand, you make a move that many might believe to be anti-town, but it ends up helping the town, then it becomes a pro-town move. If that move ends up helping the town immensely, then it becomes a "great town plays".

 

"Great town plays" are never anti-town in the end. I mean look at what you're doing, you're substituting "great" for "pro", which just means positive, or beneficial (same thing great can mean), so it's like you're trying to make the argument that pro-town moves can be anti-town moves. They can't, it's one or the other. And we're not talking about perceptions here, we're talking about results. If your moves help town win, they were pro-town. If they help scum win, they were anti-town. I would say there's no gray area, but there is, there are moves that are more "neutral-town" in that they can hurt or help both sides.

[Minuet]

I don't feel like arguing with any of you, but to start out a game with a no lynch just seems wrong. It complicates the game and makes too many people upset because they either think it is a scum tactic or is anti-town. I can see it later on in day one, say after 3 days of debate and all, but to start out the game with a no lynch just seems off to me.

 

Vote Red

 

Eddie I would have OMGUS voted you, but I think I am on to real scum hunting, which is what this game is all about. Oh, and Red before you do one of your dramatic long full of ##it posts about my post, the only time I have seen no lynches pushed were by mafia.

[Red2111]

Desp, they call me the WoT queen on DM for a reason. and theres a difference between a pro-town argument which helps us get scum; and the type of argument your now doing which is more of a distrction rather than scum hunting.

 

your points are flawed, and i'm opening another thread on this board to discuss why.

 

 

you seem to be pushing really hard against the No Lynch adn trying a bit to much to explain yourself and sell your vote reason. me thinks your an opportunistic scum that decided to jump on the first thing he saw as a "legit vote"

[Red2111]

hey Min, rule #14 my posts may sometimes be apetastic, but their never full of poo. i prefer to fling the poo

 

also, i've seen townies push the No Lynch thing on Day 1 before this game *points to self* i've done it a fair amount of times. Kivam's Police Academy Mafia is a good one i can recall.