AWKWARD ZOMBIE

I'm not saying I disagree with it, I'm saying that it's a bit more complicated than just "we might hit town!" The only problem is that, unless the DM gets involved to help, we're extremely limited with respect to "impartialness." I know for a fact that I'm town, so I could lead the random number generator option, but the issue with that isn't in us knowing our own roles, it's that the lot of you wouldn't have reason to have the confidence I do in my townliness, and if I were to accidentally hit a fellow townie, I would be under suspicion for being mafia.

We would either need witnesses to the rolling, or the DM would have to get involved.

I am starting to remember why I stopped playing mafia

Anyway I went no lynch because the less we kill the more likely Gordon can get his investigation done without dying himself.

If we lynch, random number lynching is a horrible idea for all the reasons you listed. I was saying we would make an educated guess based on the little information we have, which is bad but not nearly as bad. Again, it's really the lesser of two evils, between a guess and holding off.

OK, well let's look at it like this...

If I were mafia, and it were day one, somone who's experienced in these sort of games would know that the "status quo" (not saying it's a suspicious comment, just accurate) is for the town to not lynch...for reasons that have already been stated as well. As for the physical nature of the lynch, I would know not to vote either first or last, since those are the two most suspicious spots to vote, so I'd wait until 1 or 2, most often 2, people voted, and then vote soon after. The mafia would know that suggesting to vote for someone would imediately look suspicious to everyone, escpecially if they're the first one to suggest it...unless they're the scapegoat voted by the mafia, where they get lynched on purpose to make other members of the mafia look innocent.

So...my "expert" opinion is we look towards the middle of the group of people who have already voted not to lynch, and not look at the people who suggested we need to lynch, especially the first person to suggest it (I think it was D-vid) since if he were mafia, he would have only suggested it under the assumption that if it put him under the block, it was done so for the sake of making other members of the mafia look innocent. Either that or he's town who truly believes that not lynching is just going to give the mafia a further head start, which is still accurate. As for who we should look at, it's already been suggested that the most suspicious people on the first day are the ones who are the last, and quickest to vote not to lynch at the end of the day as the vote hammer. Since that was suggested, the vote has stayed at 6/8 for quite a while, which I can only assume is because the people who would have hammered the vote now don't want to vote under the fear of being suspected.

So...since lynching people who are simply not talking has never ended with ideal results, I'm thinking more towards looking at the people who have been talking, but not voting, but not the ones who are talking about voting to lynch someone, since they haven't voted because they're still waiting on who they should vote for. So it needs to be someone who's active in the discussion, but passive on the idea that we should vote for someone, and has yet to vote. There's also the 4th dimentional aspect as well, meaning if anyone has suddenly changed their behavior since the idea was set out that the most suspicious people are the ones who vote last on the no lynch on day 1.

The next question is if there are people who fit this description.

I would prefer a no lynch as an olive branch to our power roles and to the serial killer. The serial killer needs the mafia dead too, so hitting town wouldn't be optimal for him until the mafia get to managable numbers.

At this moment, we're on the same side, foregoing a lynch today means not hitting any of our people, and letting the power roles sort things out so that perhaps tomorrow we can be in a better position for making a lynch.

So for that reason, I'm willing to vote no lynch, but I'll hold off on it until people get a chance to discuss whatever they want about their choices.

Kamak's right about the serial killer. I guess me being worried about him as of right now is kind of silly, but nevertheless I would prefer to have no killers running around and disturbing the peace at all.

Interesting factoid...I didn't see that Cori had actually voted to not lynch between me and Guyperson, making the current vote at 7...

Id like to make an arkham-service-announcement:

If you're given a joker bomb, consider your role and the role of whomever you may pass it to. If you're batman, gordon, or bulletproof-maker, then yeah pass.

Galaxy Man took the bullet like a real trooper.

Then again, he was dead so he couldn't do anything anyways.

The Joker's a dick.

That is an interesting point. I'not trying to be sarcastic or somehow point the finger at you, that truly is an interesting point...

...though now that I mention it, it does ask the question of how altruistic your statement truly is.

If you get the joker bomb tomorrow...do you pass it?

For the record, when I stated that not lynching doesn't help I didn't mean to imply to just lynch whoever for better or for worse.

Also jeez Reyo, way to load all that psychological stuff on us day 1.

Well...it was noted that we needed material to base suspicions off of...

I figure since I'm not a power role, I'd be one of the best ones to throw that sort of stuff around. If the mafia decides to eject me from the game for talking too much, the town loses a citizen instead of a power role.

.........Oh, and also I'm not a power role.

Reyo confirmed for Scarecrow.

How the hell are you in the game when there isn't even a role for you?

Scarecrow, you're drunk.

You can't tell me when I can and can't participate in a game I wasn't even invited to!

Speaking of which, the Riddler wets the bed and is afraid of bunies!

I thought you didn't count me because I changed my vote.