@Xite:
1) So you're seriously going to suffer from not placing a random vote when you have another option that is more in the town's interest?
2)I already explained that I do not believe your gambit. If it had only been plan A, I may have believed you, but plan B is just plain anti-town with the way/reason you claim to have done it.
4) Heh... the long posts are mainly because I'm catching up on topics that weren't covered to my satisfaction prior to joining the game. Anyway, I didn't say you used
all
gut, but that you have used it a lot and conveniently in places where it excuses some of your scummier actions.
5) If Nexus were to push a poor and/or faulty case, the suspicion would be on... you? Why?
7) By going through and counting up all the posts you could find on the topic, are you implying that it should not have been discussed at all?
@wendy:
tomorrow wendy wrote:Lateralus22 wrote:3. What do you think about the Lateralus / Xite situation?
i prefer to lynch Xite today if enough people don't see the light and elect nolynch
Does this mean that Xite is your top lynch candidate at this time?
tomorrow wendy wrote:I need two flips to make any real progress.
If it could be useful after having two flips, wouldn't it be better to lynch today so that it could be useful tomorrow rather than waiting an extra day and having an extra townie dead before it becomes useful?
Xite91 wrote:tomorrow wendy wrote:xite, why did you bail off of the Nexus wagon and vote for Lateralus on page 10?
It seems odd to me that you would be happy riding on the Nexus wagon at 4 votes, and then switch to someone else who was on the Nexus wagon.
Read the thread and you might find out. It's only been said, argued about, beaten into the ground, and then argued about again.
To be more specific, read the post where Xite claimed her gambit. I quoted it in #2 of my last post (which would be near the end of the last full page).
@fitz:
havingfitz wrote:I maintain all my suspicion towards dalt…and it has never been solely focused on his cut and dry lie. It is based on the entirety of his posts…up through his last one where he avoided explanation.
Prehaps I didn't word it too clearly. It seemed as if the majority of the discussion that people had with you was what had been focused only on how vaild dalt's lie was. My question is that (forgetting about the discussion on whether its black and white or shades of grey), in your view, how is dalt's lie scummy?
@noone but myself really: I find it interesting that both Xite and wendy are linking fitz to each other. Im not sure what to make of it right now, but I'll have to look back at a couple things when I feel this becomes relevant.
@Mod: You have two votes listed on Xite, but they are on two separate rows, with each labeled as being the only vote on Xite. Please correct this. Thanks.
Thoughts about the No Lynch proposal
(may be a bit disjointed but my resulting position is summarized at the end):
1) The scum would already have a reasonable idea of who seems to be the most town currently from the activities that we have had so far today (if they do choose to kill who they think is most obvtown).
2) We would have more information to work from tomorrow with two flips if we lynch rather than one if we no lynch.
3) We would have another viewpoint in the discussion tomorrow if we no lynch now since there is the extra living player and therefore get more information than lynching in that way. However, the player we would have lynched might be scum, and lynching scum would cut down on the insincerities in the thread while maintaining the same number number of pro-town viewpoints. This possibility means that point 3 does not outweigh points 1 and 2.
4) There are no power roles on either side, so there is no way that a player can be suddenly confirmed, and therefore players views on each other are not as likely to undergo sudden changes as other games, except possibly due to roleflips. Continuing under the assumption that the scum will kill the "most obvtown" player each night, this means that the chance of the most obvtown player changing between the end of today and the end of tomorrow are somewhat low, so putting off the extra no-lynch-scumkill an extra day does not have a high chance of affecting its target.
5) The previous points can be applied to each following day as well.
6) We would have another player alive once we reach mylo if we do not no lynch than we would have alive at lylo if we do, giving us an extra town viewpoint and therefore more information at that time, however . . .
7) . . . no lynching at mylo does provide the scum the opportunity to kill off a player that it is fairly obvious the town will not vote for to be the mislynch (if such a player exists at the time), leaving the town less clarity.
8) Point 6 remains true for the day before mylo and the day before lylo, while reducing the effect of 7 since there is still more information to be produced by the lynch and nightkill that would bring the game into lylo if a scum was not lynched and therefore an opportunity for players views to shift a bit.
(Added clarification: Waiting until mylo to no lynch means that there would be no new information except for a townflip of a player. Everything else (not directly related to that townflip) would have already been discussed allowing the scum to be fairly sure of who they would want to use the extra kill on and possibly the effects of that kill as well. No lynching before mylo makes it somewhat more difficult for scum to look ahead and make the best choice with their extra kill.)
Therefore, my position is that
we should wait to use our no-lynch until we are in a situation where a mislynch will place us in mylo
. Since 3 mislynches will place us in mylo/lylo, this would then be the day after our second mislynch. My secondary preference would then be the day before this (the day after our first mislynch).
