A matter of outrageous fortune. (NO LYNCH)

Due to some shenanigans on both Cloak's game, skype chat and then some, I decided to open this poll.
A new balance patch will be made to the current ruleset. Yeah, remember when we made those back in the day? Those were made to balance out the recent shenanigans to allow more fun!

Anyways, in short: Abstaining Vs. Not Lynching.
Are they different? Are they the same? Let's take a look at the first model:
Ruleset 1 - The Different Strokes Patch.

Abstaining: Decides not to vote for anyone in particular. You all know and love abstain to the point of voting it off.

Not Lynching: Call the day off, giving the mafia a free kill, but at the advantage of narrowing down suspects. More commonly used on Dethy rounds.

What does this mean to you: You can instead hold off the lynch, narrowing down who's mafia. Even better, you can notice who else is mafia if the mafia team up to hold off a teammate's lynch. It's a double-edged sword, yes.
Obviously, if No-lynch has the most amount of votes of the bunch, the lynch is held off.
This can lead to new roles that benefit/get the shaft from reaching a No Lynch day.

Meanwhile, let's look at our older business model:
Ruleset 2 - That 11's Mafia

Not Lynching: Works exactly like abstain. To the point that they're synonyms.

What this means to you: You will keep playing mafia like you used to.

Alternatively, let's have a 3rd option:
Ruleset 3 - The "I can't think of another old-timey show name to parody" Patch

Abstaining and Not Lynching work the same way as the 1st business model, BUT, instead of Not Lynching holding the lynch off, it will only hold the lynch off if the amount of votes on Not Lynching sum up to that of an insta-lynch's amount of votes. (Give or take a few more)
For example, let's say that there's 14 players playing. 8 players vote for Not Lynching. (or 9 players, to make things more balanced)
The lynch is called off that day, the mafia kills that night, day begins again, etc.

Finally, we have this space reserved for further suggestions. Think none of the above methods work? Think DA's a total sack-a-shit that couldn't moderate for crap? Then gladly post here your rule revision. Vote for the 4th option "Other (post reply)" and proceed to elaborate on your method of dealing with these shenanigans.

Ruleset 4 - The actually logical solution.

Leo E. wrote:Actually, I have an idea. Why not just leave it up to the mod of that round?

Anyway, until next time. Seeya.

I like 1 the best, but I doubt anyone will go for it, so I'm going with 3.

>Vote No Lynch every day
>Lose only one townie a day
>Wait for bus driver to get lucky

In the place I played before this, we did no lynch.
The first day,and often the second was allways terribly unproductive, moreso than ours are.

And it was boring.
Though, I like the option. I vote choice 3.

Going for choice wan wan.

Actually, I have an idea. Why not just leave it up to the mod of that round?

Leo E. wrote:Actually, I have an idea. Why not just leave it up to the mod of that round?

I agree with Lee here, Changing my vote!

Leo E. wrote:Actually, I have an idea. Why not just leave it up to the mod of that round?

Why didn't I think of that. It's basically the same issue as PMs after all.

Sounds good to me.

I like what Lion said.

Leo E. wrote:Actually, I have an idea. Why not just leave it up to the mod of that round?

See, this is why I pay you to be a mod.
I like this idea! Adding it to the OP.

Although I am quite concerned, as this makes each game more radically different rather than slightly different, due to how the strategy aspects would plan out.
Either way, I like it.

I like Leo's plan because then the GM can tie it in with their rules easier, plus if it means it doesn't work out, then we don't have to keep it!
The votes are looking fairly clear.

Leo is winrar and credit to team.

Any objections, lady?

I'm actually kind of afraid of multiple mods using the rulesets 1 and 3. I agree that normally those would be great options, but let's be honest, we are mostly incompetent with mafia, some because they join without giving a fuck and others simply because they refuse to think.

We already have in most rounds the stupid mentality of "if I abstain, any possible innocents lynched aren't my fault!" after all. I fear that we will have boring rounds, with little to no progress as we abuse of "No Lynch", making our games even more luck-based, with matches where the mafia desperately tries to get the investigator early. If they are lucky enough, they will get investigative roles early and the "No Lynch" will work as free night kills. If the town is lucky, the mafia will get weak roles first giving the investigator plenty of chances to get them right and the chance to build a group of trusted people, as there is no risk of him being lynched.

"Luck" is the keyword, as without the fear of being lynched we won't have the usual amount of roleclaims, counter roleclaims and discussion, with many people simply voting "No Lynch" without much talk, turning active powers from both sides in something closer to a random pick where they hope they get an optimal target.

Ruleset Updated to revision 3.0.
Locking down the thread.