@CropCircles: So, Sloth makes the same point that I do, and he's shading you. Why am I not in that same boat?
Because you and I just disagree on the math. I didn't see you half-heartedly shading a large group of people the way Sloth did. And your responses come across as genuine to me. I still think you are wrong, but the whole exchange has led me to lean town on you.
I'm generally getting townie vibes from KJ atm. In general I don't endorse the policy of not looking into him until Day 3, but I'm also fine with leaving him be for the time being.
That's not how statistics work - picking any four players totally at random has a 1 in 4 chance of getting scum assuming 25% scum population.
Super not interested in continuing down the statistics argument any further than it's already been addressed, and I doubt anyone else wants to read through it anyway.
Assessing the conscious moves 4 players made to distance themselves is not random picking.
It's not random picking, but it is as ineffective such. All you are really doing is throwing mass shade. And if you are assessing the players involved, then you are assessing the motivations of joke votes. Which, like...
Ftr, I honestly find this bizarrely strong reaction to me saying that your reasons were flimsy in comparison to the other 3 who also have flimsy reasons more of an eyebrow-raiser than the situation you're reacting to to begin with - which I did label as flimsy in itself, as in 'not worth pursuing on its own'.
All I said about your flimsy remark was that it was funny. This whole discussion has been about the scattershot shade. The flimsy remark is just icing on the cake.
It is pretty ridiculous though. It's a vote during RVS. It obviously wasn't meant to be taken seriously. So how could the flimsiness of it matter? What would I, as scum, hope to gain from a dogpile at that stage of the game? It's obviously not real pressure, not going to lead to a claim, not going to end in an elim, etc. So what exactly do you think I'm trying "to get away with?"
If 25% of the game is scum and you pick players at random, you have a 25% chance with each pick that you'll hit scum. If you have a 25% chance 4 times, you are most likely to hit one scum and three townies. Certainly you are most likely to hit at least one scum, which is what he is saying.
[...]
I realize his grouping is not random. But what he is saying is functionally as effective as picking players at random, and is therefor a useless statement.
...I have no idea what you're trying to prove here.
Does this make sense to anyone?
Your incredulity rings false. Whether or not you agree with it, what I am saying is pretty clear.
I disagree with the math actually. 25% of the whole game is not the same as 1 in 4 random players is proabalby scum.
What? Yes it is.
If 25% of the game is scum and you pick players at random, you have a 25% chance with each pick that you'll hit scum. If you have a 25% chance 4 times, you are most likely to hit one scum and three townies. Certainly you are most likely to hit at least one scum, which is what he is saying.
His grouping of 4 is not random, and I think you saying that its true for any 4 players is [some kind of logical fallacy (strawman? gamblers? maybe)] and isn't what he's actually saying.
I realize his grouping is not random. But what he is saying is functionally as effective as picking players at random, and is therefor a useless statement.
There being a distinct lack of content in the last sixty-whatever posts is fine but half of the players being like "nah I'm just not gonna RVS" is
There's probably a wolf in the players who followed me onto Iso but I'm gonna town lean them all anyway
I had this thought as well, meaning one in {Silver, Rhand, Bur, Crops} - of these Crops seemed the flimsiest with the 'trend' comment.
Like, it's flimsy tho so
Nice scattershot. You realize that that statement is statistically true for any group of 4 players, right?
Only thing that pinged me before I went to bed last night was killjoys post about rvs. Something felt off about noticing that a few people hadn’t participated, wondering if people didn’t do it anymore, and then not doing it himself. I tried to reason why that bugged me but every thing I thought of sounded stupid. So maybe it felt cautious in a way that felt odd. IDK. I figured I’d wait to see if anyone else noticed it too and then perhaps I was on to something, but nobody did. Not sure what to make of gentleman johnny’s push there because that should make me feel like I’m on to something but a push for not directing the game in any way on page two feels...well it feels something wrong but I just woke up and words aren’t really working.
For the record, I got a ping off of that post as well, but it didn't seem significant enough to pursue atm.
On the other hand I cannot imagine a more boring hell than a 2-*******-week drag-along culminating in reaching a vote we knew we would reach several days ago.
It's not random picking, but it is as ineffective such. All you are really doing is throwing mass shade. And if you are assessing the players involved, then you are assessing the motivations of joke votes. Which, like...
All I said about your flimsy remark was that it was funny. This whole discussion has been about the scattershot shade. The flimsy remark is just icing on the cake.
It is pretty ridiculous though. It's a vote during RVS. It obviously wasn't meant to be taken seriously. So how could the flimsiness of it matter? What would I, as scum, hope to gain from a dogpile at that stage of the game? It's obviously not real pressure, not going to lead to a claim, not going to end in an elim, etc. So what exactly do you think I'm trying "to get away with?"
Your incredulity rings false. Whether or not you agree with it, what I am saying is pretty clear.
Vote:Slothful
I'm not buying it.
If 25% of the game is scum and you pick players at random, you have a 25% chance with each pick that you'll hit scum. If you have a 25% chance 4 times, you are most likely to hit one scum and three townies. Certainly you are most likely to hit at least one scum, which is what he is saying.
I realize his grouping is not random. But what he is saying is functionally as effective as picking players at random, and is therefor a useless statement.
Also calling a RVS vote flimsy is funny.
Bro. We talked about this. You're supposed to out me for town cred on Day 2.
Also, Vote:Iso because I'm a slave to trends.
@GrapeyBoy: I would like a daykill in this game, please.
You must join, the links demand it.
Can't believe you fools bought that
Peace out