ZFR: But trent (and I thought you too, sorry if I misunderstood you) implied that I want to turn this into a game based *only* on numbers:
trentonlf: So now this is a game of statistics and no lynches to support those statistics, what happened to playing mafia?
ZFR: This post does imply that I'm turning this into a game of statistics *only*. "What happened to playing mafia?" seems to imply that playing mafia by "social interactions and so on" will not be there.
Yes, that is true. This seems to imply that you want to turn the entire game into a number game. But I read that as hyperbole too - maybe coming from my own mindset and from knowing that trent often reacts negatively to meta-playing. (abusing PM comparisions, too much statistics). You know trent, so it shouldn't be a surprise that he reacts strongly, maybe even over-reacts, to the suggestion to make the game less fun for efficiency reasons.
And yes, your suggestion to shorten D1 and turn D2 into D1 would reduce the amount of additional boredom. But, as you realize yourself, it would be equivalent to a N0 kill, which is mean towards the player killed. 'Oh, we have an even number of players, let's kill off one of us before actually playing.' That would be callous.
dedoporno: So far Trent's and Lift's reactions towards ZFR's claims have been the strongest and it's possible at least one of them is scum leaning on the fact that discussing NL so early is normally frowned upon and can be a good enough excuse to push against a good player.
And if you re-read what I wrote about ZFR, you'll realize that I'm not pushing against him. Only against his idea. I'm rating him as neutral, since his ZFR-typical mindset is independent of alignment.