Vote: Silvanus

As Bali said above it only gives the mafia more time to act. Sil, you said it was just a placeholder, yet it's still there inviting others to no lynch

My vote's staying on Daganev as I go off to bed because I really, really don't like 'cleanse the town of useless players' logic. It stinks. STINKS OF SCUM.

Vote: Silvanus

Because we all like bolded votes

Somebody is going to have to explain to me how voting No Lynch gives the mafia another chance to act. A random lynch gives us one less townie, maybe, or one less scum, either way we do not know. But come night time (I'm going to assume two since only two people died but do not take my word on this) two people will die again, unless somebody is roleblocked. So, if we random lynch up to three townies can be dead by tomorrow when we wake up, or if we no lynch up to two townies can be dead tonight, and the people who need to find out the information (Investigator, Cop, Protector) will still be able to find out info they neeed to, because that's a night choice.

So once again, I am very confused as how No Lynch gives scum another chance to act, as we can lose less if we don't vote a lynch then vote a lynch.

He's spoken, so..
Unvote: Daganev

and...
Vote: Silvanus because we have nothing else to go on.

..It lets them nightkill. We end the day with absolutely no roles revealed or possible suspects. You don't want it. You vote people, pressure them into roleclaim, and if you believe them you bugger off to the next person. That's how it works.

It should be fairly obvious unless you're blatantly ignoring it, so, I'll have to join in. Vote: Silvanus

Yes, it lets them nightkill.

But they are going to nightkill anyways, unless they get Roleblocked (night one) or the person they are attacking is protected (night one), not day abilities. And yes, I know how to pressure people into roleclaim, but roleclaims early on are not always best, and I know first day is usually bad. I just do not like to random vote, and need information to go on.

I just do not understand the reasoning behind a random vote, which is why I voted No Lynch in the first place. The nightkillers are going to nightkill anyways.

I don't think it's so much random votes this time (at least, for some) as it is we're looking for someone to slip up. You apply on the latter, no offence, since what you're saying seems to be pretty against the mainstream.

And you do have a point- they'll nightkill anyways. But the more information we glean, the better (usually).

Which also make the better targets at night for a night act.

Decent point again, especially if that person's a doctor or a cop. Then again, even if they do reveal themselves, we've got someone to flock around and identify ourselves as townies with. At this point, we're shooting in the dark. I don't like the No Lynch, but your point is good, so

Unvote: Silvanus

Voting 'no lynch' means no one ever gets threatened, no one defends anyone else, no one suspiciously jumps on a bandwagon too late or too early... the information gleaned from a lynch, even of a townie, is almost always worth the cost of lynching someone, even a townie.

However, I'm going to Unvote: Silvanus and Vote: Xavius, for now. I think Silvanus is just being a bit newbish, and Xavius's opinion on the passing (or not) of the envoy motion seemed to strong to be disinterested. It made me suspicious.

Of course it's not disinterested.

Look at it this way. We get double votes. Scum gets double votes. Both sides benefit. Which side benefits more? The side that knows everything it needs to know to use it fully. The side that knows how many scum are in a 21 person game. The side that will use that double vote to nail shut a coffin when things get tight. The side that won't miss. If looking ahead to the end game makes me scum, then I'll just go ahead and roleclaim now: I'm scum. Lynch me.

Frankly, this is so amazingly obvious to me that I'm disturbed that it isn't obvious to you.

I have to agree with Xavius, as well, all the reasons he mentioned. Scum are far better equipped than us. Townies that could be capable of forming teams (like you saw last game with the cult) can't reveal themselves for fear of being smacked.

I understand what you're saying, but I think your argument contains way too many assumptions to be the basis of a decision like that. What if there are townies out there with no votes, and this will let them vote? What if angels have certain powers unrelated to voting, and 'enfranchising' them lets them use those powers? What if we've completely misinterpreted in some obvious way that isn't obvious?

If everything you were saying were true, yes, voting Nay is the smart thing - but we don't know if everything you're saying is true. My point is that you defended your argument especially zealously instead of admitting the possibility that you were wrong, which made me think that it was a smokescreen for some other undisclosed reason for voting Nay.

However, Unvote: Xavius.

Oh god... I want to edit so badly...

"Some way that isn't obvious" is how the last sentence of the first paragraph should read. Obviously.

I wouldn't imagine that both scum and town get double votes with the angel vote.

I would think it would be more something along the lines of Angels are able to vote and be free, and the Scum now have a special ability to kill angels who vote.

I doubt the envoy reports give the exact same power to both sides... otherwise, we will just be voting no for all envoy reports.

Personally, I think we lost out with voting Nay on the envoy report, and I'm a bit disappointed in that. We need the advantages we can get. Though it is a risky advantage.

That's needlessly confounding.

Unvote: Xavius
Vote: Daganev

You are voting for me, for the same reason some people were disappointed that Shiri got killed. Personally, I think if Shiri isn't around to keep people active, then others should take up that roll. Why don't you?

Did you kill Shiri?

@Silvanus: A Random lynch is bad, however before someone get lynched, they need to role claim and defend themselves etc. At that point, the lynch isn't truly random anymore. Would you still argue that a no lynch is better than a non-randomly concluded lynch?

Please explain.

In the past few games I played, having an inactive day was seen as a bad thing, and have an active and talkative day was seen as a good thing.

Why do you feel that it is scummy?

... there's just a slight difference between Shiri's style and yours. Shiri is, generally, active about prodding people to talk as well as logically presenting his opinions, while your own style tends to be far more confusing, illogical (to the general observer), and just plain odd. I'm not really sure why you'd be trying to compare yourself to him, as it is pretty obvious you're not at all like him in terms of post style (excepting sheer number of posts...).