|
On November 01 2013 01:13 Grackaroni wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 00:55 JarJarDrinks wrote:On November 01 2013 00:53 Grackaroni wrote:
This whole game is lurkers lol still didn't answer his question. Why would an RNG lynch be better than a lurker lynch? Because it can't be influenced by scum giving us good odds. That is the reason why statistically day 1 RNG lynches come out more successful than analysis.
This is terrible reasoning. The odds of lynching a scum from the hardcore(1-5 posts max, with a vote to stay alive and no contribution has the exact same odds as picking someone at random but provides an added benefit in the form of reducing the room scum has to hide in the inactives.
|
On November 01 2013 02:03 Stutters695 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 01:13 Grackaroni wrote:On November 01 2013 00:55 JarJarDrinks wrote:On November 01 2013 00:53 Grackaroni wrote:
This whole game is lurkers lol still didn't answer his question. Why would an RNG lynch be better than a lurker lynch? Because it can't be influenced by scum giving us good odds. That is the reason why statistically day 1 RNG lynches come out more successful than analysis. This is terrible reasoning. The odds of lynching a scum from the hardcore(1-5 posts max, with a vote to stay alive and no contribution has the exact same odds as picking someone at random but provides an added benefit in the form of reducing the room scum has to hide in the inactives.
I don't really wish to argue over the benefits of RNG but you are wrong. Scum can push town lurkers and we would be none the wiser. RNG is completely objective.
|
On November 01 2013 01:57 Grackaroni wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 01:44 JarJarDrinks wrote:On November 01 2013 01:13 Grackaroni wrote:
That is the reason why statistically day 1 RNG lynches come out more successful than analysis. Is this a fact? It says so in the TL Mafia Database.
OK, I just saw that. I was thinking that you meant games where people actually employed a random lynch.
Ok based on that information you can assume that random lynch on day 1 will in fact lynch scum more often on day 1. However, I'd be willing to bet that it would result in a town win less of the time. For reasons already pointed out regarding the amount of information gathered.
|
On November 01 2013 02:09 Grackaroni wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 02:03 Stutters695 wrote:On November 01 2013 01:13 Grackaroni wrote:On November 01 2013 00:55 JarJarDrinks wrote:On November 01 2013 00:53 Grackaroni wrote:
This whole game is lurkers lol still didn't answer his question. Why would an RNG lynch be better than a lurker lynch? Because it can't be influenced by scum giving us good odds. That is the reason why statistically day 1 RNG lynches come out more successful than analysis. This is terrible reasoning. The odds of lynching a scum from the hardcore(1-5 posts max, with a vote to stay alive and no contribution has the exact same odds as picking someone at random but provides an added benefit in the form of reducing the room scum has to hide in the inactives. I don't really wish to argue over the benefits of RNG but you are wrong. Scum can push town lurkers and we would be none the wiser. RNG is completely objective. Well @ the very least, wouldn't it make more sense to randomly choose someone out of the lurkers?
/still against random lynching
|
What do you think of hzflank Fuba?
|
Oats and I say the same thing in different ways, but JJD thinks that Oats and are saying the opposite.
On October 31 2013 22:00 JarJarDrinks wrote:
First off I'll add my name to the very much against random lynching list for the exact reasons Oats posted.
On October 31 2013 13:40 Oatsmaster wrote:
Random lynching is bad and lets not do it.
If we hit scum, great, but then what do we do on day 2?
If we hit town, fuck, but then what do we do on day 2?
On October 31 2013 22:00 JarJarDrinks wrote:
hzflank because he only said he was for it
On October 31 2013 13:19 hzflank wrote:
20103741 mod 14 = 7 = Pandain.
I guess we can all stop posting for the next 45 hours.
The most obvious thing to take from that is that my meaning was not clear enough. But that is not useful.
The useful thing is the old: was he looking for scum of looking for someone to call scum?
My initial reaction was that he was town looking for scum. If he thought that my longer post was scummy then there would always be some confirmation bias, so he might of missed the fact that I was against a random lynch.
The problem with that is that he never goes into detail about why my longer post was scummy. He only mentions it briefly:
On October 31 2013 23:08 JarJarDrinks wrote:
Yeah. Other people pointed out stuff that didn't look for him good either
Therefore I must conclude that JJD actually thinks exactly what he said here:
On October 31 2013 22:00 JarJarDrinks wrote:
First off I'll add my name to the very much against random lynching...I'm suspicious of the people pushing for it.
And we arrive at the problem that I was not in fact one of the people pushing for a random lynch, which makes everything that JJD said (regarding myself) rather arbitrary.
I cannot get any reads from talk of rng or policy lynching, which means I cannot get a better read on JJD at this time until the discussion moves on a bit. I am very aware that scum may just be lurking at this point while town goes after eachother.
|
On October 31 2013 12:53 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2013 12:37 Grackaroni wrote:On October 31 2013 12:24 Bereft wrote:grack, if you really wanted to throw weight behind that vote, why not at least RNG it? instead of picking your favorite singaporean, that is. which has tons of favoritism bias. since we have extra mafia this game, RNG gives us a 31% chance of hitting scum, instead of the typical ~25%. we're all reasonable and rational people here, logic appeals to us [i'd hope]. On October 31 2013 12:13 Grackaroni wrote:On October 31 2013 12:10 Asinine wrote:On October 31 2013 12:07 Pandain wrote:On October 31 2013 11:53 Asinine wrote:
Hello comrades. I will be doing an ASA (Ask Smurf Anything) today. It starts now. I cannot guarantee that I will answer any questions that seem to be fishing for my real TL account. What is Qatar like? Another thought elicits it's familiars Crowding their weight into the chamber Of my weary, doleful mind What right does he possess To exhaust my idle time By way of his enslaving image. I have come to the conclusion that this man is Palmar. There will be no further questions! no, i want to ask a question -- why does pandain only get to ask one. asinine, what's your reason for smurfing? i can think of only 2 reasons. which one is yours: [a] you have a reputation known throughout the land of being an excellent scum hunter, and you don't want to die night 1. [b] you believe your meta is so obvious people would be able to read your play day 1. [c] other (please expand) Those are some pretty good odds. I'm not against RNG if people are up for it. I would think my chances of actually identifying scum on day one are less than 31%, therefore RNG would yield better results for me. Ofcourse, We would need to decide on who rolls the dice. How should we do that? I suggest we vote on it. How could anyone read this post and not think you were for random lynching?
|
On November 01 2013 02:34 JarJarDrinks wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2013 12:53 hzflank wrote:On October 31 2013 12:37 Grackaroni wrote:On October 31 2013 12:24 Bereft wrote:grack, if you really wanted to throw weight behind that vote, why not at least RNG it? instead of picking your favorite singaporean, that is. which has tons of favoritism bias. since we have extra mafia this game, RNG gives us a 31% chance of hitting scum, instead of the typical ~25%. we're all reasonable and rational people here, logic appeals to us [i'd hope]. On October 31 2013 12:13 Grackaroni wrote:On October 31 2013 12:10 Asinine wrote:On October 31 2013 12:07 Pandain wrote:On October 31 2013 11:53 Asinine wrote:
Hello comrades. I will be doing an ASA (Ask Smurf Anything) today. It starts now. I cannot guarantee that I will answer any questions that seem to be fishing for my real TL account. What is Qatar like? Another thought elicits it's familiars Crowding their weight into the chamber Of my weary, doleful mind What right does he possess To exhaust my idle time By way of his enslaving image. I have come to the conclusion that this man is Palmar. There will be no further questions! no, i want to ask a question -- why does pandain only get to ask one. asinine, what's your reason for smurfing? i can think of only 2 reasons. which one is yours: [a] you have a reputation known throughout the land of being an excellent scum hunter, and you don't want to die night 1. [b] you believe your meta is so obvious people would be able to read your play day 1. [c] other (please expand) Those are some pretty good odds. I'm not against RNG if people are up for it. I would think my chances of actually identifying scum on day one are less than 31%, therefore RNG would yield better results for me. Ofcourse, We would need to decide on who rolls the dice. How should we do that? I suggest we vote on it. How could anyone read this post and not think you were for random lynching?
Because the whole point of that was that I did not like the idea of random lynching because I was worried that scum might control the random.
|
then why even bother calculating the RNG results after I quoted BH's method?
|
I wanted to post that I also did not like agreeing to rng for the same reason that I do not like agreeing to policy lynch early on day one. I was interested to see what the TL unique post IDs were, so it seemed like an appropriate way to do it. The point of that post was not the calculation, but that I said if we agreed to rng lynch we might as well stop posting for the next 45 hours.
|
So Bereft, you also thought that I was pro-rng lynch?
|
On November 01 2013 02:37 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 02:34 JarJarDrinks wrote:On October 31 2013 12:53 hzflank wrote:On October 31 2013 12:37 Grackaroni wrote:On October 31 2013 12:24 Bereft wrote:grack, if you really wanted to throw weight behind that vote, why not at least RNG it? instead of picking your favorite singaporean, that is. which has tons of favoritism bias. since we have extra mafia this game, RNG gives us a 31% chance of hitting scum, instead of the typical ~25%. we're all reasonable and rational people here, logic appeals to us [i'd hope]. On October 31 2013 12:13 Grackaroni wrote:On October 31 2013 12:10 Asinine wrote:On October 31 2013 12:07 Pandain wrote:On October 31 2013 11:53 Asinine wrote:
Hello comrades. I will be doing an ASA (Ask Smurf Anything) today. It starts now. I cannot guarantee that I will answer any questions that seem to be fishing for my real TL account. What is Qatar like? Another thought elicits it's familiars Crowding their weight into the chamber Of my weary, doleful mind What right does he possess To exhaust my idle time By way of his enslaving image. I have come to the conclusion that this man is Palmar. There will be no further questions! no, i want to ask a question -- why does pandain only get to ask one. asinine, what's your reason for smurfing? i can think of only 2 reasons. which one is yours: [a] you have a reputation known throughout the land of being an excellent scum hunter, and you don't want to die night 1. [b] you believe your meta is so obvious people would be able to read your play day 1. [c] other (please expand) Those are some pretty good odds. I'm not against RNG if people are up for it. I would think my chances of actually identifying scum on day one are less than 31%, therefore RNG would yield better results for me. Ofcourse, We would need to decide on who rolls the dice. How should we do that? I suggest we vote on it. How could anyone read this post and not think you were for random lynching? Because the whole point of that was that I did not like the idea of random lynching because I was worried that scum might control the random. This is exactly my point. You pretend like you're ok w/ random lynching when you are clearly concerned about it. First you say that you're worried about who gets to choose the random person. Then when it's pointed out to you that there is indeed a way for a random selection to be chosen, you change your stance to: If we lynch randomly then we wont get any discussion.
If that was your stance then what was the point of suggesting that we vote for someone to pick the random person?
|
On November 01 2013 02:30 Stutters695 wrote:
What do you think of hzflank Fuba?
Actually, I think I'm going to vote for him. He's talked quite a bit, but always ends with a noncommittal statement. He kind of narrates the thread, but doesn't give a conclusion.
As far as his involvement in the rng debate, the apparent inconsistency in his position is the most concerning thing to me, though I'm not even sure there is one. I think rng-ing would be bad play, so advocating for it or opposing it are pretty null. I agree with jjd that he appears to be supporting it in one post, then the next one appears to be agreeing with the first. However, I guess it could be interpreted the way hzflank says he meant it, so overall that just makes me lean slight scum on him.
Altogether, I feel pretty confident with a vote on hzflank.
##Vote: hzflank
|
On November 01 2013 03:03 hzflank wrote:
So Bereft, you also thought that I was pro-rng lynch?
I interpreted your post where you calculated the RNG then said we didn't need to do anything for 45h as advocation without commitment
|
On November 01 2013 02:37 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 02:34 JarJarDrinks wrote:On October 31 2013 12:53 hzflank wrote:On October 31 2013 12:37 Grackaroni wrote:On October 31 2013 12:24 Bereft wrote:grack, if you really wanted to throw weight behind that vote, why not at least RNG it? instead of picking your favorite singaporean, that is. which has tons of favoritism bias. since we have extra mafia this game, RNG gives us a 31% chance of hitting scum, instead of the typical ~25%. we're all reasonable and rational people here, logic appeals to us [i'd hope]. On October 31 2013 12:13 Grackaroni wrote:On October 31 2013 12:10 Asinine wrote:On October 31 2013 12:07 Pandain wrote:On October 31 2013 11:53 Asinine wrote:
Hello comrades. I will be doing an ASA (Ask Smurf Anything) today. It starts now. I cannot guarantee that I will answer any questions that seem to be fishing for my real TL account. What is Qatar like? Another thought elicits it's familiars Crowding their weight into the chamber Of my weary, doleful mind What right does he possess To exhaust my idle time By way of his enslaving image. I have come to the conclusion that this man is Palmar. There will be no further questions! no, i want to ask a question -- why does pandain only get to ask one. asinine, what's your reason for smurfing? i can think of only 2 reasons. which one is yours: [a] you have a reputation known throughout the land of being an excellent scum hunter, and you don't want to die night 1. [b] you believe your meta is so obvious people would be able to read your play day 1. [c] other (please expand) Those are some pretty good odds. I'm not against RNG if people are up for it. I would think my chances of actually identifying scum on day one are less than 31%, therefore RNG would yield better results for me. Ofcourse, We would need to decide on who rolls the dice. How should we do that? I suggest we vote on it. How could anyone read this post and not think you were for random lynching? Because the whole point of that was that I did not like the idea of random lynching because I was worried that scum might control the random.
I also was under the impression that you were in support of random lynch if it was actually random, but I can see the sarcasm now.
|
On November 01 2013 01:53 JarJarDrinks wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 01:24 Laughing Jack wrote:On October 31 2013 23:49 Grackaroni wrote:On October 31 2013 23:19 Laughing Jack wrote:
I think we should be one Jarjar less at the end of this day.
##Vote: JarjarDrinks care to elaborate? On October 31 2013 22:00 JarJarDrinks wrote:Hey all. First off I'll add my name to the very much against random lynching list for the exact reasons Oats posted. Also, I'm suspicious of the people pushing for it. Most notably hzflank because he only said he was for it after people brought it up. Like, even though it's only a 30% chance, if I'm scum and someone talks about random lynching my first thought is probably something like "Oh god, what if one of us gets chosen? There'd be nothing we could do." So he makes his post saying he'd be for a RNG lynch to show everyone that he's not afraid of it. Even going as far as saying On October 31 2013 12:53 hzflank wrote:
I would think my chances of actually identifying scum on day one are less than 31%, therefore RNG would yield better results for me. Ofcourse, We would need to decide on who rolls the dice. How should we do that? I suggest we vote on it. How in the world could his odds actually be worse than random? Even if he had no scumhunting skill whatsoever, it would be @ worst equal to random. Jarjar doesn't bring up anything new but just says he's against randomlynching, However most of the post is just fluff about what rng-lynching is to make it seem like his saying more then "Yeah I agree". And it's very certainly fluff because he doesn't reach a conclusion with it. What do you mean I don't bring up anything new? I'm the first person to bring up that supporting RNG lynch is scummy. Whether or not you agree w/ it, it's something new. And who really cares if I brought up something new? I commented on the main topic of conversation. And what exactly do you mean by "he doesn't reach a conclusion with it"? What conclusion could I have reached?
No, oats said why we shouldn't rng. You just talked some general reasoning for why scum/town would or wouldn't want to rng. You said townies shouldn't want to do it and that scum wouldn't want to do it. A lot of people were confused to what you actually ment. And that was because you didn't type it with any conclusion in mind. You could had reached a conclusion by for example saying.
I believe scum wouldn't do this because the risk it pose to themselves are high, so rng supporters are town.
or
I believe townies wouldn't do this because it's bad play so rng supporters are scum.
Regardless if what you choose is true or not picking one side means you believe in it or are pretending to believe in it. Picking neither means you're full of fluff.
But fine, so what do you mean by rng is scummy, which was what you were first to bring up?, Is it that it is bad townplay and scummy because of it. Then how was it you and not Oats who brought that up?
|
Bereft while your vote on the lurker is most admirable I don't really care about it, and you're floating around without any real opinions so would you mind sharing any of your current scumreads?
|
Vote Count
Oatsmaster(1): Grackaroni, Oatsmaster
Pandain(2): Grackaroni, Bereft
hzflank(2): JarJarDrinks, mkfuba07
JarJarDrinks(1): Laughing Jack
Pandain is currently set to be lynched. The deadline is at 00:00 GMT (+00:00) in .
|
On November 01 2013 03:25 Laughing Jack wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 01:53 JarJarDrinks wrote:On November 01 2013 01:24 Laughing Jack wrote:On October 31 2013 23:49 Grackaroni wrote:On October 31 2013 23:19 Laughing Jack wrote:
I think we should be one Jarjar less at the end of this day.
##Vote: JarjarDrinks care to elaborate? On October 31 2013 22:00 JarJarDrinks wrote:Hey all. First off I'll add my name to the very much against random lynching list for the exact reasons Oats posted. Also, I'm suspicious of the people pushing for it. Most notably hzflank because he only said he was for it after people brought it up. Like, even though it's only a 30% chance, if I'm scum and someone talks about random lynching my first thought is probably something like "Oh god, what if one of us gets chosen? There'd be nothing we could do." So he makes his post saying he'd be for a RNG lynch to show everyone that he's not afraid of it. Even going as far as saying On October 31 2013 12:53 hzflank wrote:
I would think my chances of actually identifying scum on day one are less than 31%, therefore RNG would yield better results for me. Ofcourse, We would need to decide on who rolls the dice. How should we do that? I suggest we vote on it. How in the world could his odds actually be worse than random? Even if he had no scumhunting skill whatsoever, it would be @ worst equal to random. Jarjar doesn't bring up anything new but just says he's against randomlynching, However most of the post is just fluff about what rng-lynching is to make it seem like his saying more then "Yeah I agree". And it's very certainly fluff because he doesn't reach a conclusion with it. What do you mean I don't bring up anything new? I'm the first person to bring up that supporting RNG lynch is scummy. Whether or not you agree w/ it, it's something new. And who really cares if I brought up something new? I commented on the main topic of conversation. And what exactly do you mean by "he doesn't reach a conclusion with it"? What conclusion could I have reached? No, oats said why we shouldn't rng. You just talked some general reasoning for why scum/town would or wouldn't want to rng. You said townies shouldn't want to do it and that scum wouldn't want to do it. A lot of people were confused to what you actually ment. And that was because you didn't type it with any conclusion in mind. You could had reached a conclusion by for example saying. I believe scum wouldn't do this because the risk it pose to themselves are high, so rng supporters are town.or I believe townies wouldn't do this because it's bad play so rng supporters are scum.Regardless if what you choose is true or not picking one side means you believe in it or are pretending to believe in it. Picking neither means you're full of fluff. But fine, so what do you mean by rng is scummy, which was what you were first to bring up?, Is it that it is bad townplay and scummy because of it. Then how was it you and not Oats who brought that up? Oats said RNG was bad. I said the people that were supporting it were scummy. Not exactly the same thing.
And I explained what I meant about why townies and scum both wouldn't really want it. It's not just a black and White conclusion like you're making it out to be. What do you think about RNG lynching? For someone claiming that my posts are full of fluff, I sure don't know what your opinion is on pretty much anything.
|
Oats said it was bad you said it was scummy, which is exactly the same thing unless you mean that it's scummy from another reason then it being bad?
On October 31 2013 23:19 Laughing Jack wrote:
I believe scum wouldn't do this because the risk it pose to themselves are high, so rng supporters are town.
or
I believe townies wouldn't do this because it's bad play so rng supporters are scum.
Those were examples on how to have a conclusion and not my thoughts. I know well they are not black and white, and both teams might support rng for different reasons. It gives town nothing to bring it up if that's what you're going to say.
Like saying,
"mkfuba could be scum... but he could also be town" -Wow I contributed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
