Makes sense that you'd often go after a lynch leader in face to face games. Forum games usually play out differently, because you're not just going off memory of conversations so far. Rather you can actually go back and read everything that's happened again to see what adds up and what doesn't.

Here, since X people voting fairly randomly will be unlikely to form a consensus, the "Town Leader" is an important part of the game to try and get people to follow along so lynches can occur. If the Town Leader is actually mafia, then yes it's quite dangerous, but too many mistakes will backfire on them and it's hard to keep up pretending to scumhunt against townies when very active. If the Town Leader is town, they're likely to be a target for a night kill since a somewhat united town is a threat even when they're uninformed. That's a pretty simple breakdown of it, of course there are more nuances depending on who tries to take up Lead, who makes up scum, and how the game is playing out.

I started an endless mindgame circle in my head and this doesn't make sense after all >_>

OK, so I was talking about the time period in which Linkzmax laid out his suspicions about me; specifically that I had responded to his post about "Stefl + other thing" by talking about the other thing and not you, when I had FoSed you.  I responded to him and then, in a separate post, started bringing up the option of a lurker lynch.  Noctis claimed that was evidence that I was trying to deflect suspicion by starting a lurker lynch:  "It's funny though when Links is onto you, you quickly divert the attention onto somebody else."

"Egging on" is not "joining for weak reasons" but more like "encouraging something to happen or escalate".  So "egging someone on" to chug a 2-liter bottle, or egging the town on to lynch someone.  So if I just wanted the best way to get the town to look in a direction that wasn't me, I argue, weren't there better targets in pre-existing lynches versus starting a new lynch, even if lurkers are relatively easy targets?  Unless, that is, I had a reason to want you to live...

darwin, you mentioned my analysis earlier today, what did you think about it? I still don't know if you agree or disagree. Kinda why I asked people to chime in.
Thanks in advance

Okay, found it.

I don't agree that a day one lynch will get us close to the mafia guys. We have 8-9/13 to get a towsguy and 3-4/13 of a mafia (you keep mentioning a 3rd category, the survivor, what is that?), so the odds are against the townspeople. But I do agree that wanting people to talk will be good in the long run, to detect further suspicious behaviours. Maybe he just wants to try and get someone to slip ut if they are mafia or not?

Things I want to see in the next 8 hours:

Mr. P explain himself
Noctis appear for his daily visit
Xander being alive (requesting a mod-poke there)
Clyde's thoughts on Mr. Ps roundhouse accusation
Me understanding spurge (cuz the two most recent statements I cannot agree with, ignoring the axum one)

Mr. P's initial accusation was just a general observation. The real problem child is this post here

However, I can't tell if this is a scummy play or just a noob mistake. I feel like a scum would have played this off better, but then I'm not sure how experienced he is in the game. It's definitely something worth applying pressure to. 

I checked back on the previous two games, mr. p was more talkative in both of them, so that is a really hard tell (since he switched up mafia/town)

Xander has been more active in both games, both town(I don't want to say that that is any indicator since I have no fucking clue what is going on on his end, when I checked he at least wasn't online)

This was not a full checkup so far, just of parts of the first day of each game.

For some reason, quoting is not working so well on my browser.
Anyway,
@darwin

What is it about my analysis that makes you think that I'm a dangerous player? As far as I can tell, you agree with stefl that day 1 NL is better than lycnh because "a day 1 lynch won't get us closer to the mafia guys", and the "odds are against the townspeople". You also like that stefl is assumedly trying to get people to talk, and you're guessing that he's trying to get mafia to slip up. It doesn't seem like you agree with anything I said, and actually side with stefl.

I mean, that's fine, it's your point of view. But you also said the day before that avoiding a day one lynch will be the opposite of stopping the bad guys. ie; no lynch won't get a mafia. You also add that mislynching will hurt whoever lead the lynch.

Also, I believe stefl already told you that while the chances of a "random lynch" do increase tomorrow for finding a mafia, lynching today also gives us an extra lynch depending on circumstances, and 4 chances, even at a slightly worse percentage, is better than 3 at a better percentage.

And in what way am I dangerous?
Oh, you also said you weren't sure which was more dangerous, players who overanalyze at the beginning, or people not saying much. Care to explain who is overanalyzing and what is considered "over the line" for analysis?

Nothing specific from spurge, but it did make me look back. It was this post, fyi. As I was re-reading, Noctis' posts seemed like classic mafia "fake participation".

I should note, I'm getting the same vibe from Mr.Playstation: making sure to post, but not really saying anything. See here, here, etc.

It's different from the vibe I'm getting from other, more blatant lurkers, such as XanderXT. I would feel fine about lynching one of them rather than a NoLynch. In order of preference: Mr.P & Noctis (tie), then Xander.