My point here was basically that lynching off of next to no information with that 31-37% of success is bad. If we find somebody with suspicious behavior (e.g. fast bandwagoning), then, as you said, we have enough people to afford a lynch. However, if we don't really have any information, then risking the higher chance of killing off a village isn't very good, is it?I just figured I should point our the flaw in your logic: We are the majority by a bit. So the individual lynch probabilities are overruled by the big picture. Two lynches have a good chance of getting at least one mafia. We have enough people to do that for a few nights until the inspector finds a mafia. Of course, I agree that getting people talking is good, since it could help improve those odds, but I disagree on 31%-37% chance of randing a mafia being unfavorable.
Just checked: NWO was on 3.5 hours after my vote on him. What did he do? Unvote, and that's it.I agree with AG regarding NWO's eagerness to lynch one of our active players, but I'm going to wait and see his defense before lynching him. /activity post
You seem to be very hypocritical. You openly said right here that no lynch would put mafia in a favorable position, yet you criticize me for lynching who I thought was the most suspicious individual. You seemed eager to start casting suspicion on other people, so I thought you were mafia. After reading some other posts, I've decided to unvote for now until we've decided who is most suspicious. I am mayor in case everyone is wondering, and I can prove it. Once we have 9 other people voting on a suspect, I can make the last vote to hit the majority. Since there are 20 people and I have 2 votes (I think I'm the only one with 2 votes) there are 21 votes total. So 11 votes is enough to hit a majority. 9 from other people, one from me.Guys, please stop being idiotic.
Empoof, no lynch is just a bad idea cause it will could put mafia in a good position, seeing as we likely won't have too much to go off of this entire game.
First of all, if you are mayor claiming it so soon probably wasn't the best idea, since you've just made yourself a prime target for the mafia. Also, while your idea of voting for the person who was the most suspicious was fine, your reasoning as to why Ditto was suspicious was extremely faulty; Ditto wasn't trying to cause infighting, he was trying to promote discussion, which we need. Ditto is criticizing you not for trying to lynch someone you found suspicious, but for the logic you used for lynching him.You seem to be very hypocritical. You openly said right here that no lynch would put mafia in a favorable position, yet you criticize me for lynching who I thought was the most suspicious individual. You seemed eager to start casting suspicion on other people, so I thought you were mafia. After reading some other posts, I've decided to unvote for now until we've decided who is most suspicious. I am mayor in case everyone is wondering, and I can prove it. Once we have 9 other people voting on a suspect, I can make the last vote to hit the majority. Since there are 20 people and I have 2 votes (I think I'm the only one with 2 votes) there are 21 votes total. So 11 votes is enough to hit a majority. 9 from other people, one from me.
Completely agreeing with this. At least we know you're clean?First of all, if you are mayor claiming it so soon probably wasn't the best idea, since you've just made yourself a prime target for the mafia. Also, while your idea of voting for the person who was the most suspicious was fine, your reasoning as to why Ditto was suspicious was extremely faulty; Ditto wasn't trying to cause infighting, he was trying to promote discussion, which we need. Ditto is criticizing you not for trying to lynch someone you found suspicious, but for the logic you used for lynching him.
It's fairly simple. We have everybody except NWO and the other mayor claim withdraw lynch votes, and they vote for each other. We then have a few possibilities that may arise:But anyways, I don't buy the mayor claim 100%. I don't see how mayor claim is in any way easy to prove, since we don't know if other vote manipulations exist in the game.
By consensus he seems the most suspicious player by far, so at worst we clean him as noob town (or at least alleviate suspicion, good since mayor is useful late game so we don't want to lynch him now) and at best he cracks under pressure and outs himself as mafia. Either way, we should get a better read on him.New World Order said:You seem to be very hypocritical. You openly said right here that no lynch would put mafia in a favorable position, yet you criticize me for lynching who I thought was the most suspicious individual. You seemed eager to start casting suspicion on other people, so I thought you were mafia. After reading some other posts, I've decided to unvote for now until we've decided who is most suspicious. I am mayor in case everyone is wondering, and I can prove it. Once we have 9 other people voting on a suspect, I can make the last vote to hit the majority. Since there are 20 people and I have 2 votes (I think I'm the only one with 2 votes) there are 21 votes total. So 11 votes is enough to hit a majority. 9 from other people, one from me.