Supernatural Mafia

[Passarelli]

In that case wouldn't a no lynch still be more beneficial?

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

While that might be true it would help derail the prominent wagon on someone who is most likely a VT and nothing good comes of lynching a townie unless you are scum--especially if that VT is being lynched due to inactivity. We won't even get accurate data from votes because of the reasoning behind people wanting to lynch him.

If I am wrong in my reasoning, please help me understand where. I rather enjoy this game and would love to improve.

- - - Updated - - -

It has also been said that "policy lynching" is never beneficial.

All I see that a "policy lynching" does is waste a day, kill a VT and give mafia a free swing. We likely won't have any useful data for day 2 unless someone gets lucky with their investigation.

I also don't see how 5 posts in less then 6 hours is a day.

I know what im about to ask is extreme but i need you to take at least 2 of your remaining braincells and put them to use. Lets first start by asking what kind of behavior you proclaim to be scummy because as far as i can tell, i havnt seen much.
Secondly, Stan being VT is a speculation, it is not fact. VT or not, the guy has and will continue to contribute nothing. His vote was hardly consistent, he clearly did not read posts, and we will be lucky if he even votes again from this point on.

That, sir, is what we call a liability.

[SCRIBBLE]

Just vote for someone or no one. Day one has been drawn out too long, I might change my vote to the people who refuse to vote.

[Passarelli]

Ah, so you see him as a liability. Thank you for actually giving a reason besides, "policy lynch is policy lynch". I still do not agree with you, and would enjoy some usable data rather then lynching someone who isn't active. You can always lynch him down the road when you do not have a viable person to lynch even with lots of data. At least if he was lynched on day 2 instead of 1, you would have enough data going into the night on night 1 and 2 to make an educated decision rather then being a night behind. Does that make sense to you?

If you have to sacrifice a pawn, make sure you waste as few moves as possible.

- - - Updated - - -

As for what I see as scummy, I'd have to say whatever does not benefit the town.

Lynching a hard claimed VT day 1, for example, before anyone even investigates. I'd be one thing if you rolled dice to decide and happened to pick him on day 1--but to lynch him because he claimed VT? That seems pretty anti-town to me.

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

*facepalms

Dont do well attempting to converse with 5th graders.

Onto another pressing thing id like to talk about. Where is aco and locust?

[SCRIBBLE]

Day 1, page 10.

[Passarelli]

*facepalms

Dont do well attempting to converse with 5th graders.

Rather then being pointlessly insulting, why not simply poke holes in the logic.

My logic being:

Day 1 policy lynch means no usable voting data. No voting data means investigators are ham-stringed and less likely to have usable data for day 2. Thus, night 1 is not being used efficiently.

Day 1 semi-random lynch gives decent data which investigators can use to zero in on a suspect. If they still miss their mark, even if a policy lynch takes place during day 2, they can still use the data from the previous day.

Which of the two seems preferable to you?

Again, let me know if I am misunderstanding how this works. I am a newbie after all.

- - - Updated - - -

*the previous day for night 2.

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

Can some one post stans posts as well as my post quoting the original prior to him editing it? Im at work atm.

[Sin]

Pasarelli is just saying the exact same thing I was yesterday. Policy Lynching is the same shit as No-Lynching except you're hurting the town even more by taking out one of our numbers and votes. SO WHAT if he isn't active? We can lynch him another day if need be, or he could just be mod-killed (preferred).

Aco, accusing me of playing scummy by asking everyone to give their NAMES, and be debunking it with the Bobby character, without him responding or contradicting me... kinda fishy, to be honest.

I'll stick to my vote since Nem though. Fucking scummy excuse he gave for trying to wagon votes against me.

SMH

[kionay]

Pasarelli is just saying the exact same thing I was yesterday. Policy Lynching is the same shit as No-Lynching except you're hurting the town even more by taking out one of our numbers and votes. SO WHAT if he isn't active? We can lynch him another day if need be, or he could just be mod-killed (preferred).

Aco, accusing me of playing scummy by asking everyone to give their NAMES, and be debunking it with the Bobby character, without him responding or contradicting me... kinda fishy, to be honest.

I'll stick to my vote since Nem though. Fucking scummy excuse he gave for trying to wagon votes against me.

SMH

i don't know that this policy lynch would be quite the same as a no-lynch since we have a bit of information here, he claimed a plain 'ol VT afterall

all i see is an inactive someone who says they're VT and What didn't seem too upset about the possibility of... adapting, and this lynch would remove someone we don't think is a power role, and doesn't seem to contribute much if at all

so it's either lynch nobody (seems to be a bad thing all around if i understand that right) lynch someone inactive who claims to be a nobody, removing a voter, but also removing someone that mafia probably wouldn't vote for anyway

i suppose later he could be of some use as a come from behind hammer when we need that extra vote? but i'm too new to this to say if this is significant at all

i'm not ready to vote yet myself, kinda on the fence about who to lynch, even though day 1 has gone on for quite a while :-/