I have no idea what this means.In post 1098, VP Baltar wrote:So by that, shouldn't the 1/3 be priority????
Are you using the same kind of logic that NPOM used that you lynched him for?In post 1095, Blair wrote:I would contend your math is askew, not mine.In post 1082, VP Baltar wrote:HOWEVER, if you were to assume it was a three scum game (which is fairly standard for this size setup unless meta around her has changed), that would mean you could have up to a 2 out of 7 chance of hitting scum on the wagon --- or roughly 28%. Any way you slice this, it doesn't feel statistically significant to me unless you assume only two scum in the game.
Starting from the base assumption of this discussion (not all scum are on the wagon), and the reasonable inverse (not all scum are off the wagon) we are left with at least one scum in seven and at least one scum in four. Then, if there is a third scum, the third scum has a 2/3 chance of being on the wagon, or a 1/3 chance of being off.
Doesn't that still add up to "We have better odds off the wagon than on it"?
OK, the error was mine in understanding. I see what you're saying now.In post 1100, Blair wrote:I have no idea what this means.In post 1098, VP Baltar wrote:So by that, shouldn't the 1/3 be priority????
Is it possible you don't understand the math? Not trying to be condescending, it can legitimately be confusing.
The 1/3 is a 1/3 chance that there are two scum among four. The 2/3 is a 2/3 chance that there are two scum among seven.
here. your push on NPOM wasnt because you scumread NPOM, but it was opportunistic as a way to get info on quick. and today you haven't used that info at all, so i call BS on the story.In post 1086, Blair wrote:First of all, I wasn't being "dismissive" about your initial question, I was asking you what the purpose of the question was - because it is not generally helpful to reexamine scumreads on dead players.
As to Quick's ego, I do not believe that he "thinkhe could dupe the town into a mislynch." Quick doesn't seem very confident in his ability to persuade the rest of the players, he is just very confident in his ability to read players.
At the time that I stopped fighting with him and started explaining his NPOM case for him, the NPOM wagon hadn't picked up real steam yet.
Basically I was thinking "Quick may be setting himself up for a long bus, so whenever we do get around to flipping NPOM he can say 'I was right, my system has been saying NPOM is scum since Day!'"
So I helped push the wagon to get that out of the way and sorted. We may disagree on this bit, but the importance point here is that I believe: NPOM would not have been lynched yesterday if I had not decided to help Quick articulate his case.
As for me being snarky and/or dismissive - I mentioned I have a bad habit of that in my earliest posts in this game, and it is not alignment indicative. I'm working on it, because I know it makes people resentful.
P-edit: I'll ISO him and find the quote from him, but basically when I initially looked into the vote count after you said he was lying, I started scrolling and saw "two votes," then realized one of them was actually in a quote block and thought "whoops, that's one vote, actually." I kept scrolling to make sure the quoted vote was current, and it was, but guessed that R2R probably didn't do that diligence. That ended up being his explanation, and since his explanation matched my (unstated) explanation, I'm inclined to believe it.
Why is Gamma more Scummy than R2R?In post 1108, Blair wrote:Side Note: I am getting an extraordinary amount of pushback on a case on someone with about 20~ posts. Not everyone townreading Gamma this firmly right now will flip town. Count on it.
Literally all of his votes have been opportunistic and lacking original reasoning as well.In post 1114, Blair wrote:R2R is less scummy because the case on R2R appears to be "He blatantly lied about checking the vote count, for no discernible reason, when he could have just kept his yap shut." I don't find that very persuasive.
In post 1117, Blair wrote:VP Baltar, you never gave your final thoughts on my Gamma case, after we ironed out all the details.
Thoughts?
The case seems to come down to you thinking his reasons for voting NPOM weren't good enough, and a process of elimination.In post 1117, Blair wrote:VP Baltar, you never gave your final thoughts on my Gamma case, after we ironed out all the details.
Thoughts?
*Not voting NPOM.In post 1120, VP Baltar wrote:The case seems to come down to you thinking his reasons for voting NPOM weren't good enough, and a process of elimination.
You are going to have a very, VERY difficult time substantiating the false premise behind that question.In post 1122, Quick wrote:I would like Blair to unpack how they know there are only 2 Scum in this game.