Page 45 of 99
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:08 am
by Blair
I have no idea what this means.
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.
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:20 am
by Quick
In post 1095, Blair wrote: 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.
I would contend your math is askew, not mine.
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"?
Are you using the same kind of logic that NPOM used that you lynched him for?
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:26 am
by VP Baltar
In post 1100, Blair wrote:
I have no idea what this means.
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.
OK, the error was mine in understanding. I see what you're saying now.
So you think it's a reasonable assumption there are only two scum in the game?
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:31 am
by Blair
No, math favors hunting off-wagon if there are two scum or if there are three - as long as you assume not all scum wagon'd together on the mislynch. I think that's a reasonable assumption.
I used basic math to narrow down my hunting grounds to my best odds (either 25% or 50%, depending on variables VP and I just discussed).
Those percentages are worst-case scenarios assuming we lynch randomly, however, which we are not going to do. Here's why I chose Gamma:
Mafia is a game of uninformed majority vs informed minority.
The scum know who is town and who is not.
Am I suggesting we lynch everyone who has accurate reads? No! Sometimes our reads are accurate because our reasons are good.
Scum will know who the townies are, but they can't just SAY "I'm scum so I know NPOM is town." So they have to make up reasons.
Gamma is scum because he knew NPOM was town (he was right!), but his reason for believing this was wrong (NPOM refuted it himself, and Gamma has since admitted it was wrong).
Gamma is scum because Gamma distanced himself from the mislynch by giving reads that were
right for the wrong reasons.
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:37 am
by votato
VOTE: blair. not only did you vote someone you thought was town yesterday and encourage a lynch, but today you arent using the information you said you gained from that flip. you're spamming the thread like crazy which is making everyone else disengage, and your reasoning for your votes today is bad. gamma isnt scum. if gamma is scum it isnt for the reasons you listed. gamma isnt the only one who disagreed with the NPOM wagon. in fact you thought NPOM was town right? so you are just as guilty. even if you're town i'm kinda willing to lynch you just to get you to stop spamming the thread so much. when the two people who died N1/D1 are still in the top 4 in terms of post count, you have a problem. the problem is that blair and quick are sidetracking us. i dont think i scumread quick - he just has ADHD or something. but im pretty confident that blair is scum here.
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:39 am
by Blair
*sigh*
OK, Votato. Go ahead. Show us all where I said I was townreading NPOM.
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:43 am
by votato
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 "think
he 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.
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.
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:45 am
by Blair
How on earth do you read that and conclude I expected NPOM to flip town?
You don't. You're being disingenuous.
And the "info" I gained from it was a townread on Quick, which I have "used today" by not trying to lynch him.
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:48 am
by Blair
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.
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:50 am
by Quick
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.
Why is Gamma more Scummy than R2R?
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:52 am
by votato
gamma: 25 posts
blair: 214 posts
and yet i still feel like gamma has had a more significant positive impact on the game.
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:53 am
by midwaybear
actually?
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:54 am
by votato
yes. i think blair's impact has been negative. i think midways impact has been 0. but hes taking a slot that could have been taken by someone useful, so also slightly negative due to opportunity cost. gamma has a positive (albeit small) impact on the game.
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:54 am
by midwaybear
what about quick's impact
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:55 am
by Blair
Gamma is scummy because he distanced himself from the mislynch by stating an accurate townread on the lynchee based on logic so flawed that the lynchee rejected it and Gamma has since even been forced to admit it was flawed.
i.e. Gamma had some other reason for townreading NPOM.
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.
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:56 am
by Blair
Votato is pushing a policy lynch on me while poorly disguising it as a scum-case predicated on lies (I was never townreading NPOM).
Discuss.
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 6:58 am
by midwaybear
what you're saying sounds legit. I will take a look at what gamma's defense was on NPOM
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 7:06 am
by Blair
VP Baltar, you never gave your final thoughts on my Gamma case, after we ironed out all the details.
Thoughts?
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 7:08 am
by VP Baltar
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.
Literally all of his votes have been opportunistic and lacking original reasoning as well.
The case has built over time, and the flip did him no favors
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 7:17 am
by Blair
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?
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 7:40 am
by VP Baltar
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.
As someone who didn't believe in the NPOM wagon either, I'm not convinced that is indicative of alignment, though it is certainly possible scum could have avoided the wagon. I will go back and re-read his move off the wagon to see if what you're saying feels convincing, but right now I have him more on the null side...and it certainly doesn't read to me like a better case than dealing with r2r, or even some of the questionable thinking I'm seeing from you atm.
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 7:41 am
by VP Baltar
Is there reasoning beyond that I've missed?
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 7:43 am
by Quick
I would like Blair to unpack how they know there are only 2 Scum in this game.
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 7:50 am
by VP Baltar
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.
*Not voting NPOM.
Phone posting and such
Posted: Thu May 21, 2020 8:01 am
by Blair
In post 1122, Quick wrote:I would like Blair to unpack how they know there are only 2 Scum in this game.
You are going to have a very, VERY difficult time substantiating the false premise behind that question.