Pikanchion wrote:What, the rest of my post where I say it's of little consequence? That means "harmful and distracting" to you? I later called your terrible idea WIFOM hell, I did not call all discussion "harmful or distracting".
Your silence spoke volumes in this regard. If you thought there was any reason to prolong D1, you sure did not suggest it, and you chose to spend the time after I had joined arguing against my analysis of your commentary instead of pushing a case against blacky or doing anything else.
And since you asked, dgz did indeed do this too (note that this was after all players had joined):
Whether it is appropriate or advantageous to No Lynch is situational. Players may No Lynch in order to maintain an odd number of living players, which is mathematically advantageous.
It should be D2 already...
dgz345 wrote:People that are not voting no lynch right now are either.
Unknowingly making it harder for town.
Knowingly making it harder for town.
Like sure lynch me if you want but do it D2... I won't magically get a power role that says I'm immune to lynches so you have to lynch me D1...
Pika wrote: Metsfanmax wrote:
In other words, your posts strongly conveyed the message that it is pointless to do anything other than No Lynch on D1. If you believe that (and the opportunity for kills through the not-yet-having-posted mechanic is shut down), then it is entirely logical to just do a No Lynch as quickly as possible so that we can move on to D2. That is the strain of reasoning Razor was picking up on with his hammer. If you had thought there was any reason to continue discussion on D1 you presumably would have said so. Are you suggesting now that actually you did want D1 discussion to continue? If so, why did you maintain your No Lynch vote instead of unvoting?
And yet when given the opportunity, only one of us
ever actually made clear who they had suspicions about. You chose not to do what you advocated for, as did every other player who failed to suggest who they suspected day one, did you see me say anything against those who did in fact state their suspicions day one? You used your time day one arguing with me by choice. Your inaction is on you, and those who failed to contribute (in your eyes) day one likewise have the blame for their inaction on themselves, don't blame me or Razorvich for it.
I was arguing for a world in which we could have continued D1 as long as we wanted. (And I am arguing now for a world where we can continue D2 as long as we want.) I am not a fan of early hot takes. Early "tells" based on apparent D1 slips are wrong more often than they are right. Sure, blacky said things that appeared scummy, but we can examine other things as well. I would have preferred that D1 extend for at least another 1-2 weeks of RL time as we drew out the discussion more. There was no need to rush into making accusations; there was no need to rush at all.
Pika wrote:Your inaction is on you, and those who failed to contribute (in your eyes) day one likewise have the blame for their inaction on themselves, don't blame me or Razorvich for it.
As I said you cannot claim neutrality here, every vote for No Lynch contributed to making the day end when it did. It's absurd that someone who actually formally voted to do nothing on D1 would blame someone else