Resolved: In the game "Mafia," the Town should abide by the Policy, "Lynch All Liars"

C1) LAL removes the mafia's responsibiltity from a mislynchPro doesn't really respond to my argument that Lynching all liars gives the mafia free mislynches. It also removes any accountability on their part for those mislynches. Analyzing votes on a mislynch is a useful strategy in a mafia game as scum are often in on mislynches. After eliminating all the confirmed townies on a wagon, there is a good chance that some of the remaining players are mafia. Their reasons for voting on that lynch can be scrutinized and attention can be focussed on them. However, with "policy" lynches such as LAL, this scrutiny is completely thrown away as all the scum have a ready answer. "He lied!"Townie: "Why did you vote on the mislynch?" Scum: "Drafterman's Rule #1."C2) LAL gives the mafia free mislynchesPro claims that the free mislynches is not a problem with LAL but rather with townie lies. However, Pro doesn't advocate that townies shouldn't lie at all. All he says is that while townies can lie, they must do so with the understanding that they will be lynched. This is where the problem lies: Townies may lie with the understanding that they will be lynched - and they will be lynched. However, these lynches move the mafia closer to their win without giving the town any new information at all so LAL is actually a pro-mafia strategy.My opponent might argue that in multiple games, LAL is an overall better strategy as it discourages lies. However, his position is not that townies should not lie but rather that liars should be lynched. If all liars are lynched, this discourages townies from lying even when it helps the town.Pro points out examples from the HvV game as well as the Quentin Tarantino game to show that townies lie because "they don't like their role." Pro is completely unaware of why said townies lied. Unless he can provide confessions from the endgame, it is just as likely that they lied to help the town or get the mafia to target bulletproof players. Pro is unaware of why they lied and his argument on that matter is nothing more than a guess.C3) Town Liars vs. Scum LiarsPro does not adress my argument that scum can work collectively to out-persuade the town to get townie liars lynched first. Add that to my C1 on scum being absolved of responsibility for the lynch and the result is a mislynch with town none the wiser as to who the mafia could be.Pro also drops that character and role-claims are used extensively at DDO and can be used to distinguish lying town from lying scum. Pro doesn't want to distinguish lying town from lying scum and simply wants to discourage town from lying by lynching every liar. However, a town that does that is just lazy and is unlikely to win many games. Finding scum requires hard work and just lynching every liar without considering other factors inhibits town from learning the skills needed to find mafia."Yes, LAL can be detrimental when the Town lies with such ease and without good cause. This is not a problem with LAL, it is a problem with lying with such ease and without good case!"What if there IS a good cause for lying? LAL would advocate lynching those liars as well which is overall a detriment to the town.C4) Overall SuccessIt is true that with 10 town and 4 scum, town gets 4 mislynches. However, this is only true assuming that town never no lynches, and the vig never makes any mistakes. In reality, town makes mistakes and lynches people for reasons other than lying. For this reason, a better situation to consider is when town is a lynch away from losing.Here is the most important part: Pro says that I am assuming that all lying townies are lynched first. I am not assuming that. Consider a MYLO situation with four mafia M, N, O, and P and five townies A, B, C, D, and E. One townie (E) lies and the four mafia lies. If LAL was used and M was lynched first, then N, then O, and only then is E lynched, town still loses. For town to win in this situation or any MYLO situation, they have to lynch ALL the lying scum before moving onto the lying townie. LAL is a horrible strategy. I am not saying that all lying townies will be lynched first, but if any lying townies are lynched, then town loses.This answers my opponent's assertion that liars are lynched as they are caught. If a townie lies and is caught before any mafia liars, then town can lose.C5) Pro's examplesPro gives two example from the Quentin Tarantino game which I turned to show that in those very examples, LAL nearly cost the game for town. Pro instead says that pointless lying was what cost the game. It is obvious that the reason the game was nearly lost was due to both lying and LAL. If town players hadn't lied, town wouldn't have nearly lost. If LAL wasn't followed, town wouldn't have nearly lost. To avoid similar situations, one has to go: Lying or LAL. I ask: Why should townies stop lying? Why can't we abolish LAL? Both have the same result. Pro wants to abolish lying and I want to abolish LAL. Now let's look at practicality issue to see how it could be done. Pro wants to use LAL to discourage and abolish lying. However, if the negative effects of lying are removed, why would lying need to be discouraged at all? If townie liars and not lynched, and scum liars are lynched, town will be coasting their way to victory every game. Why do we specificallt need a detrimental strategy like Lynching all Liars to discourage something that doesn't really do more harm than LAL itself? Whatever harm that lying does, LAL does the same harm, so what is the point of following it.C6) Lying vs. MisleadingPro says that misleading is an alternative to lying to which I responded that players are generally not content with ambiguous statements. Pro doesn't advance his point that there are alternatives to lying. He just says that most players cave under pressure and claim anyways. My point is that a lie could get the town off their back in a way that misleading cannot so misleading is not an alternative to lying.Townies also can have good reasons to lie. If their role is very important and there are no protective roles, a good decision by a townie under pressure would be to lie about their role.C7) Caution vs Lynching in response to lyingPro says "Should not the appropriate response be to say: 'Hey, that was a poor lie that only got you killed and served no purpose'."As I explained through the course of this round, doing that would put the mafia one step closer to victory while at the same time giving town no information at all from the mislynch because the scum have ready answers on the tips of their tongues when asked why they voted on the mislynch:Drafterman's Rule #1.