What we implimented:
Alright, I've seen this a few times, to the point I feel there should be an option to enable this to occur. I'll paint a small scenario:
Two town members, one serial killer, one godfather. Town members are a jailor and investigator. Godfather convinces the town to support him in winning, and puts up the serial killer for lynching; everyone knows who is who. Serial killer is upset with the turn of events because he will end up losing, and decides to rage quit out of the game because he'll be executed. The two town members vote innocent, and the jailor then locks up the Godfather. He's out of executions, however he was able to roleblock him and the town then lynched the Godfather the following day.
What happened here? The Godfather was, for all intents and purposes, going to win the game. He managed to survive long enough to force it to a stand-off where only votes would secure his victory. Town had no real chance in any possible situation for them to win. It would all boil down to a 1-1-1 if Godfather decided not to kill the jailor, and SK didn't kill roleblockers. So obviously, it boils down to either letting SK win by default, or lynching the SK. Town elected to lynch the SK and provide the Godfather with his win. However... well, you see where the story suddenly changes. An unforeseen circumstance occurred, and provided a loop-hole for town to win, when they had no real possible chance at all. It was poor sportsmanship that permitted them a win, and nothing else.
My proposal? Allow a setting to be turned on, or off, which forces a trial to end with the defendant being lynched if he "gives up on life" aka quitting while on trial. It's pretty much an instant admittance of guilt. They should be lynched for it. While I know a lot of people might argue this is a benefit that public matches may rely upon, it's a dirty mechanic that's awarded because of players with poor attitudes and no patience.
Thoughts? Opinions?