Page 39 of 41

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:39 am
by Korlash
Ok so where are you getting these numbers? I assume 1/3 and 1/4 represents scum to town ratios as in 1 scum in 2 players and 1 scum in 4 but where does 90% come into it?

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:39 am
by Sajin
the converse of SCs 10 percent or less post.

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:53 am
by Korlash
Ok let me see if i can get this straight...
Sajin wrote:and your being seriously anti-probability.

12 total with 4 scum including a role blocker and a SK with 2 kills total?

Tell me how likely you think that is. Some percents please.
SC wrote:I would argue for less than 10%, but forgetting about that small amount is not an option when everybody's life is on the line.
Sajin wrote:I agree with those odds you posted SC. You do realize its higher odds to randomly lynch scum now.

With a 90 percent chance of hitting a 1/3 or a 1/4.
So what you did here was take the 90% from setup speculation and magically turn it into a 90% of catching scum. No wonder I'm confused. You can't pull V out of a math equation and insert it into physics problem and expect to solve anything... ok well maybe you can but that's not the point...

His 10% and conversely your 90% are in respect to how likely we have 1 scum left. that has nothing to do with out odds of "catching scum today" other then telling us the ratio of town to scum.

So you do not multiple 90% by 1/3 and 1/4, you use the 90% to get the fractions of 1/3 and 1/4 giving our odds today of catching scum to be 1/4 and our odds tomorrow providing a no lynch to be 1/3 making our chance higher tomorrow.

Unless you can honestly say you think we have a 90% chance of catching scum I'm going to have to ask you to redo your thought process and fix your mistake before bringing numbers back into question, ok?

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:56 am
by Sajin
90 percent chance of their only being 1 scum left out of the 4 of us

so we should nl to 3 people

1/3 chance of catching scum out of the remaining. I fail to see how your getting this confused.

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:59 am
by Korlash
Sajin wrote:What matters are the odds. I have concluded that based on kill flavor and night actions and reactions to events that SC is the likeliest to be the SK. There is a point where being through about possibilities just muddies the waters you are searching.
Oh and I would like some more input on this... How does flavor make SC the likeliest SK? And is it Night actions or simply night action, if it is the plural form I would like details on which ones and why, if it is only one perhaps you can do me the favor of telling me which one and why just in case I am mistaken about the one I think.

And what reactions specifically and why?

To me this just seems like one of those times when someone says "I consulted an expert and was told I was right" when in reality all they did was shake a magic 8-ball. It is not obvious to me what you are referring to here and so I cannot be sure you aren't just saying this to try and mislynch SC, so this is all about clearing the waters so to speak. (ha ha ha... It's funny because of the 'muddy the water'... oh forget it... I thought it was funny)

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:00 am
by Korlash
Sajin wrote:90 percent chance of their only being 1 scum left out of the 4 of us

so we should nl to 3 people

1/3 chance of catching scum out of the remaining. I fail to see how your getting this confused.
I am confused because you said:
Sajin wrote:I agree with those odds you posted SC.
You do realize its higher odds to randomly lynch scum now.
Meaning that we have better odds of lynching scum today and not tomorrow which is contradictory to what you just said about no lynching down to three.

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:05 am
by Sajin
Reaction to my vote on him. He completely freaked out.

The kill flavor part refers to his role claim being the likeliest to have a magiced kill method. Not that the actual SK claimed the same name that he actually got though. The night action part refers to how the doctor semi cleared was not killed last night.

I don't really like long posts. Sorry if my shorter posts come across as unclear.

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:09 am
by Sajin
Korlash wrote:
Sajin wrote:90 percent chance of their only being 1 scum left out of the 4 of us

so we should nl to 3 people

1/3 chance of catching scum out of the remaining. I fail to see how your getting this confused.
I am confused because you said:
Sajin wrote:I agree with those odds you posted SC.
You do realize its higher odds to randomly lynch scum now.
Meaning that we have better odds of lynching scum today and not tomorrow which is contradictory to what you just said about no lynching down to three.
No. He was talking about the 10 percent chance of his situation (2 scum) existing. If it was only 10 percent, then the 90 percent chance of it being 1/4 would mean 90% of 1/4 or 22.5 percent. 22.5 percent of victory is greater than 10 percent of prisoneers dilemna going town (I am not going to assume the 1/9 odds here as provided).

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:21 am
by Korlash
Sajin wrote:The kill flavor part refers to his role claim being the likeliest to have a magiced kill method. Not that the actual SK claimed the same name that he actually got though. The night action part refers to how the doctor semi cleared was not killed last night.
How does the fact the cleared not being killed implicate SC?

Why are you even considering flavor if you don't believe the SK claimed his real role? You believe it is a fakeclaim yet you still think it matches the kill and thus is the sk?
Sajin wrote:Reaction to my vote on him. He completely freaked out.
I must have missed it so I'll have to look his reaction up...

How does freaking out over a vote implicate him as scum? This is potentially endgame, any town would freak out over a vote on them. If they are lynched they lose, end of story. I think scum and town are both liable to feel the pressure at this time.

Also he is the first and biggest pusher of the no lynch, I think it would only be natural for him to freak out after any vote on anyone.
Sajin wrote:I don't really like long posts. Sorry if my shorter posts come across as unclear.
I hate them too... but sadly once I start typing I just cant stop...
Sajin wrote:No. He was talking about the 10 percent chance of his situation (2 scum) existing. If it was only 10 percent, then the 90 percent chance of it being 1/4 would mean 90% of 1/4 or 22.5 percent. 22.5 percent of victory is greater than 10 percent of prisoneers dilemna going town (I am not going to assume the 1/9 odds here as provided).
But you are still ignoring things. Taking one option of the 109 and putting it next to one option of the 90 isn't fair... Of course something multiplied by 90% is going to be higher then something multiplied by 10. What you are doing there is taking the best case scenario next to the worst and saying it proves the best is the best choice to go without discussion second and third best at all.

22.5% of victory is not greater then 90% of 1/3 which is what he was arguing, that's 30% so it is still better to no lynch. But all this is moot because it ignores the main point and focuses on numbers.

One of the 90% and 10% is wrong, meaning when compared it's all tained with false info. The entire comparison is flawed.

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:27 am
by Sajin
I agree. The whole point of those numbers was to debunk the theories of SC about possible prisoneer's dilemna and no lynch today.

BTW, the vote I was refering to him freaking about was not today, it was day 1.


Did I say that his roleclaim made him scum for sure? No. Just slightly more likely because of kill flavor.

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:51 am
by StrangerCoug
Sajin wrote:BTW, the vote I was refering to him freaking about was not today, it was day 1.
May I bring up again that I was not the first to act on your vote on me. You were trying to push a crap case on me and then pass it off as looking for information.

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:53 am
by Sajin
I was not pushing any crap cases. You blew up at anyone who remotely attacked you. I found it scummy.

If my case was really that much crap, why did you care so much?

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 12:03 pm
by StrangerCoug
Sajin wrote:I was not pushing any crap cases. You blew up at anyone who remotely attacked you. I found it scummy.

If my case was really that much crap, why did you care so much?
You refused to give anything on my case under fear that I would twist it. If I'm going to twist your words, that should be more reason for you to lynch me, since holding that information back would and did hurt the town more than me.

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:27 pm
by Battousai
Ok, sorry. Been busy and haven't had time to make a post.

The numbers... meaningless. It is extremely unlikely we are in prisoner's dilema and it is statistically easier to get a lynch with 3 players over 2.

I'm backing SC on this one. Your case was crap and you did refuse to tell anyone about it. I think you actually did that to another player as well. Also Sajin, you said SC blew up at anyone who remotely attacked him, please give examples.

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 8:25 am
by Sajin
The numbers are meaningless yet you conclude my sentiment about the prisoneers dilema anyways.

Not sure what the 3 players over 2 players thing means though, should that not be reversed?

Reguardless, I did not like the way he responded to alexhans, firestarter and myself on day 1/2.

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 8:50 am
by StrangerCoug
Sajin wrote:Not sure what the 3 players over 2 players thing means though, should that not be reversed?
I think so, too.

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 9:42 am
by Korlash
I'm thinking he meant 3 players over 4...

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 9:53 am
by StrangerCoug
Regardless, the lower number over the higher number. I figured that he meant the town would have to pick only from two people as opposed to three right now. It is not likely that it will matter to scum who, if anybody, gets lynched from here on out.

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 10:08 am
by Battousai
Korlash wrote:I'm thinking he meant 3 players over 4...
Yes.

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 7:01 pm
by Battousai
Sajin wrote:The numbers are meaningless yet you conclude my sentiment about the prisoneers dilema anyways.

Not sure what the 3 players over 2 players thing means though, should that not be reversed?

Reguardless, I did not like the way he responded to alexhans, firestarter and myself on day 1/2.
Post numbers?

Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 2:10 am
by Sajin
Hmm. Well what do you think about my other points I have brought up Batt? You have not commented on those at all.

Its not just 1 post for each of those.

Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 5:24 am
by Battousai
Well could you point me in the direction of the votes at least?

It is not wise to use flavor to find which claimed name would most likely be the SK based on the night flavor. The SK wouldn't claim with their real name, unless there is nothing in the name that would tie them to being scum.

And the numbers thing, I do agree the chance of prisoner's dilema is extremely low and we should not be focusing on that anymore.

Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 5:47 pm
by Gorrad
If anyone feels the urge to see a vote count, lemme know.

Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 6:13 pm
by Korlash
Yes... vote count, k thanks bai!

Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 6:16 pm
by Gorrad
Vote Count:

No Lynch(2): StrangerCoug, Sajin

Not Voting(2): Korlash, Battousai

Three to Lynch, Deadline on the 15th.