No lynching is the best course of action on the first day of mafia games like the one described

First, I would like to say that changing the scenario of the story does abosolutely nothing. Every single argument i have made still applies to the scenario you have provided. I was using that as evidence to further show you how no-lynching could be the best option. That said, i will now argue the 'pacificitions'. "Generally, mafia games easily get around the problem of "dragging things on forever" by instituting a time limit. For instance, in the game my opponent is describing, there is a 5 day time limit on day phases. If a majority of the town fails to lynch, the person with the most votes will be lynched off. Basically, simple mod interventions can assure that the problems my opponent suggest don't occur. Not to mention that the same can very well apply to no lynching, giving that there will likely be some people wanting to utilize the entire day and some people who wish to get things over with as quickly as possible." This is true that there is a time limit. However, the time limit that 'solves this problem, really doesn't solve this problem at all. The time limit is to keep the game from going on forever. If there is all this un-decisiveness, then the chances of killing a townie over a mafia are probably going to be rather huge. For a succesful lynch, we need to have a strong majority of players vote for the same person. If we only have a couple or a few more votes on one person, our chances of a mafia hit are greatly lowered. However, more than 60% (calculated from the last two mafia games) of lynches that reach the maximum, actually hit a mafia perfectly. If we cannot reach this probable succesful limit, the best idea would be to pass the day phase, so as not to kill a townie. Mafia have the advantage of being undercover. We cannot just kill a player who we can't decide on, and chance killing a townie, thus raising mafia advantage. "Oh? As I recall, the first day of the current game resulted in the serial killer dying and the mafia usurper being exposed. All through insisting on getting someone lynched rather than abruptly ending the day without lynching anyone." If you were not aware, i had posted my argument well before this happened. And still, getting wjm lynched was just a hunch. Nobody was sure whether or not he was guilty or not at that point. The argument against him was that he was a bulletproof townie. WonderWoman also claimed this role. We had no sure way of knowing that either of them was the actual threat, (or even if the whole bulletproof dilema actually meant a threat). People at that point were just anxious to get the day phase over, and voting for the majority vote. We could have easily lost a townie in that situation. Luck was on our side. However we cannot just rely on luck to provide a townie win. That is very dangerous. In that case, it would've been more safe to just go with a no-lynch, or wait for the screw-up. "This game is the worst game to be no lynching in given the sheer amount of players. Not taking the opportunity to lynch someone (hence gather information) is only going to make the game EVEN longer, hence cause a lot of inactivity. Once again, if a townie is lynched, it doesn't matter there are benefits to lynching a townie,as I've already described. These benefits are what help the town learn allegiances. In addition, we must keep in mind that the mafia are drastically in the minority, hence the town can afford to lose two members since they will likely still have a large amount of numbers afterwords" Finding allegiances hasn't worked out so far. So far all we have found were a few mis-lead leads. No-lynching in a game our size is perfectly okay due the fact that we are saving someone who could possibly have a beneficial role to the town. We hardly consider that when we lynch, which also leads to a most likely townie loss. What matter is it if we find the town's alliances? If we've killed another townie, just to later find out the player who was allied to the other player, is innocent, or just stupid, the whole point was just flushed down the toilet. Instant town dis-adantage! "Not to mention that there's always the possibility that the town can succeed and kill a mafia member on the first day, hence putting lowering the amount of informed minority player. It's far worse for the mafia to lose a single member than it is for the town" Thats absurd. The chances of hitting a mafia are alot lower than hitting a townie. Its never safe to play the "IF" factor. "That's simple. One merely needs to keep a close eye on the people who are causing the discussion to go nowhere. Through pressing and interrogation, such players have no choice but to talk, less they become suspected and perhaps even lynched. And again, as I've already pointed out, random lynching can work to the town's advantage, thus I see no need to reiterate what has already been said." Keep a close eye on who's making the discussion go no where? That doesn't work. People have their own opinions, some of them are very strong. If people are in a clash of dis-agreement and post-poning the game through long persecution, that is not reason enough to suspect them as mafia. Anyone is going to get desperate to protect themselves, whether they are innocent or mafia/cult. Again, the perimeter on which i have based my case on, in no way changes what would happen in my opponents scenario. It works the same either way, so saying my point are invalid, doesn't hold anything. I urge you to vote pro for all you townies who have been wrongly lynched for 1. Random lynching 2. lack of evidence lynching. These both rely heavy on giving mafia win adavantages. thankyou -philosophical