=|

[Ashe]

Also... I may be the only one that misunderstood this, but from the repeated wording that those that didn't vote would be considered as No Lynch votes, and the stress of a majority vote being required, I made a couple of assumptions that were wrong, but I did not know they were wrong until after.

Yes, No Lynch votes and nonvotes are equal, but not in the sense that I was thinking. My thought was that it counted as positively contributing a vote to not lynch someone, stating your preference. My thought was that if a vote to lynch someone had to be all over 50% of the members specifically at a certain member, counting as the majority, then the reverse was true as well, in that if over 50% (such as day one) voted to "No Lynch" and showed that they did not want a lynching that day, then it would be considered as a majority vote to not lynch.

This was wrong.

Votes to not lynch and nonvotes are only on equal ground in that neither of them count, as best as I now understand. They are "the same" in that voting No Lynch basically just means you give up your vote, not that the majority wishes to make a preference of not lynching someone, but that there is no majority (more in terms of group apathy than intended pacifism) and the group simply hasn't come to a majority vote.

Only a vote specifically to lynch someone will be considered towards a majority vote. All other votes (or nonvotes) are considered more in the "Eh, I don't care what you do" direction and less in the "Please don't lynch anyone" side.

It seemed to me that some people understood that and that some people were confused, but that could just be me assuming such and probably is. All I know for certain is that I really fucked up that interpretation due to the wording, so don't be like me.