It depends, but yes.
If most people are confident that a certain player is scum it can be worth risking a lynch, but in the case seen in the last game where the town players were split it would have been better to No Lynch and let scum take out another player.

If scene had been killed off the other three would have lynched one of the scum.
If Vitek had been killed then scene would have had to reconsider his position and Lift would probably have been lynched.
If trent had died then it would be clear flub was lying as there was no reason he wouldn't have tried to protect him.
And Hunter couldn't have died, so it wouldn't have changed the situation beyond confirming him (or flub, but I think it may have called flub's claim into question a little) but it would also have allowed Vitek to visit scene as he'd planned, which may not have confirmed him if there was no NK but might have helped confirm his role at least.

I don't think there is any situation in mafia where you can say an action should be taken automatically, but No Lynch should definitely be considered in a situation like that.

I suspect it would have gone:
scum risk attacking trentonlf and succeed. supplementscene immediately attacks vitek again, the mafia join in to reach instant majority.

But I can't see alternate realities very clearly so I can't say for sure.

Yeah, or that. XD

Depends on the overall situation.

There can be various ratio of confirmed x unconfirmed players, some roles in play or some other modifiers.
If you lose towny player who was trying to lead town the right way to NK are you really in more comfortable position? The person you lost
wouldn't be lynched anyway, if there were no roles or were blocked/killed you got no info and if the number of players was even before then now the lynch treshold was lowered, allowing for easier mislynch.

There is also the option that mafia would elect to not kill and we would none the wiser.

In our game they would most likely kill trent. Then it would be 3-2 and it would only require scene to recklessly place his vote on me to win it for mafia. So I hoped, if it came to this, mafia would choose not to kill to not lower player pool, and I get the chance to visit someone to prove I can't be mafia but it would be a long shot.

Why is everyone spelling bkock wrong?

I do it because I was never invited to take part in your inside joke so I don't understand it and even if I did, I would have no interest to participate because it's stupid. :-)

Ah, yes I forgot about this. MYLO needs 2 townies to mislynch, while LYLO only 1.

SWISH

True, you've got to take into account the standing of players as well. Usually the player pushing against the scum also happens to be the one scum are trying to paint as the bad guy so they can't kill them without risking giving weight to their reads and case (this is the position I always try and put myself in). No lynch in this situation is generally best if you have little idea who is scum and almost anyone could be, the more townie players there are the less useful it becomes as scum can just pick off someone most people were town reading anyway.

But by killing trent they would out flub, and confirm mafia had a roleblocker. If the other town could then claim their roles it would become obvious that some were lying, and a number of players (like Hunter and you) could confirm their town roles (though admittedly your poor luck in choosing targets meant there was no one alive to confirm you for definite). I agree that scene would probably have voted you again anyway and scum would have piled on for the win, but that was another particular circumstance of the game to consider.

Unfortunately if there had been no NK then your visitation would no longer be a town confirmation, it could be argued that you chose to forgo the NK to make yourself seem town. Though Visitor would be an odd scum role and it should be reasonably obvious that you were town it wouldn't be a clear cut confirmation.

You are correct.
So their best bet would be to not kill and nothing changes so we are either stuck with the same situation. We could then either lynch someone tis time or no-lynch again, mafia dose the same and game ends in draw. :-)

You are right about fulb getting in trouble, but he could just say there was probably a strongman and do you think it would get him lynched?

Take that back! I'll bkock you right in the roke, so help me!

It got started by accident in the last game where trent wrote something about SPF having claimed Rokebkocker, yogs made fun of that and SPF adopted it as "I'll bkock you in the roke!" - and now it's the new official spekking.

If they hadn't killed me off previously it would have :P

Well in that specific situation flubb could have claimed to have protected trent and thus blocked the NK. Which could have bought flubb some credibility.

But we'll never know. I think at MYLO a no-lynch is a valid play for town if there is a trusted cop around (who isn't continuously bkocked). Otherwise one just has to go for the lynch or find oneself at LYLO the next Day.

/replace out of mafia forever