[Lock]

Denul, on 16 April 2014 - 03:43 PM, said:

Maybe I missed certain games that would explain it but is it weird to anyone else how Tiam and Shadow are worshipping the ground Gust walks on?

The Second Coming of Hubb was long prophesied, and lo it was glorious.


Work distracted me from real business, but I'm back and will get to looking at Korabas' posts now.

This post has been edited by Lock: 16 April 2014 - 03:49 PM

[Denul]

Korabas, on 15 April 2014 - 11:12 PM, said:

I think it was Shadow too suggesting that Denul was the first to claim that there was only one scum, which is blatantly false. Pretty sure that got cleared up on thread though, but it still bothered me some.

Didn't see this corrected downthread yet - Alkend was the one who temporarily got the one scum/not one scum claims backwards, but he and I cleared up the confusion on thread. Shadow was the one who took my half-the-predator joke seriously as if I was putting forth that I seriously believed there were paired killers, each half of Kenshiro. I don't actually believe that to be at all likely, it was just a joke (funnier if you played the first aliens vs predator game, where morgy and someone (JA? Dibs?) were each half of the predator and no one saw it coming obviously).

Korabas, on 15 April 2014 - 11:12 PM, said:

I'll be honest. Monok's case felt good to me. Not necessarily because of any concrete, on-thread, evidence, but mostly because he knew the game well and proposed a case based on observed behaviour that he has probably seen in many other games. In my opinion, that kind of case was a bit premature.

As JA's mafia tutorial says, there are as many ways of playing scum as there are players. Making a case based on eccentric, aggressive behaviour won't do you any good if Silencer is scum. I don't think it was wrong of MO to make a behaviour case (even if I think it was terrible), but when you make a behaviour case you have to explain your findings to link the behaviour to being scum. MO's case did not do this, it just pointed out a behaviour and concluded that I was scum without making any attempt to explain why the behaviour lead to that conclusion. I certainly think behaviour cases can be very good and in this particular game I think we will really need them (more on that in a second), but they need to be thoroughly constructed not slapped together with duct tape.

[Denul]

Okral Lom, on 16 April 2014 - 12:39 AM, said:

Lock, on 15 April 2014 - 11:57 PM, said:

Alright, here is my current thinking. The premise below is based on a complete supposition, so may be entirely inaccurate. Similarly, the narrowing down of the suspect pool is largely based on reasoning rather than evidence - but this is the track I've decided to follow for now. In any event, I do think the scenario is a plausible one - plausible enough to be worth investigating anyway.

So, the theory is: Monok was killed because of the irritating RP, and nothing more. This leads to the suspicion that the killer was not around at the time when 1) Monok started getting heat themselves, and 2) Monok had actually dropped the RP, and when Serc was eventually lynched.

Those who did not post in that time: Bek Okhan, Denul, Galayn Lord, Korabas, Lock (yes, me), Rikkter, and Ruse.

Of these, Bek, Rikkter, and myself all posted shortly after the 9th vote was laid down - so too late to change anything if that was the very moment that we had arrived on thread, but it is also plausible that these players were around and reading a little while before posting (I know I was, at least). Similarly, while Denul did not post after Monok dropped the RP, they had just posted a few minutes before then (and not an "I'm leaving now" type of post), so it is also reasonable to think they could have been around to see Monok's post dropping the RP.

So that leaves us with Galayn, Korabas, and Ruse. It is these three which I will be looking at tomorrow after I get some sleep.

The thought did occur to me, although the argument is a little too meta for my tastes. But I'll look forward to seeing what you come up with .

As for myself, I agree with BO (sorry, I'm going to keep calling you that. I'm sure your armpits smell like roses in RL ) that Shadow's determination to press obviously inconsequential points seems unusual. But I'm more worried about the players who have been able to fly through the game so far without drawing any attention to themselves. I don't like it when players end up making it deep into the game without any serious questioning. For that reason, top of my list to look into is Eloth, who has made 20 posts, but made no waves at all. My impression of him before re-reading is that while he has been willing to chime in on a variety of topics, I cannot remember him holding a controversial opinion. Unfortunately my eyelids are closing of their own accord so I shall have to leave that until the morrow.

EDIT: Formatting

Certainly you can take meta considerations like player timezones into consideration on this if you want, but that would all have to be personal thoughts and stay off-thread per meta rules. Discussion of timings based simply on when alts have posted is usually fair as it is "in game" information that everyone can see, so I think we're okay to discuss that meta-wise unless PS says otherwise. If it makes you feel uncomfortable, you don't have to join in though


As to Lock's suggestion itself, I would say it is sound speculation, but it doesn't go much more beyond that. From a purely "who would benefit the most" POV I agree scum at the end of day 1 would not have much reason to NK MO, but as always there is wifom involved. Or simply an early submission by scum who were on later anyways but were too distracted to change it.

Definitely worth keeping in mind, but not solid enough that it'll have much sway on who I look at closely.

[Alkend]

I apologize in advance that I may not be around much today. I will vote, but I cannot put in the time I did yesterday. I will be able to in the next day or so but all I can do is add my vote to the horde. (That is how I foresee things anyway, it may be that I have more time later)

[Lock]

Korabas. Marginally more posts than Galayn, but even less to talk about. Really the first post below is perhaps the most interesting.

Korabas, on 14 April 2014 - 09:46 PM, said:

Checking in. I apparently missed the spam part of day 1. Not too bothered really.

There might be something to the Serc situation. After one of you picks at Serc's wording with regards to the Kenshiro's role, and possibly looking for symps, serc posts:

Serc, on 14 April 2014 - 05:00 PM, said:

Denul, on 14 April 2014 - 03:54 PM, said:

Her name is Yuri and she looks like this:

Spoiler

I love RA2 so much. the Soviet briefing chick was hawt.

Now this might be the most blatant signalling to Denul. I find it rather more likely, as one of you mentioned, that the obvious question posed by serc is probably an attempt to draw out some kind of reaction and stir the pot a bit. Serc's worth watching, but not really worth a vote at this point. Too early day 1, too thin of a case.

Also, that game was great.

Korabas is late to the mafia party, this is their first post quite a bit into Day 1. Korabas actually dismisses the signalling accusations, which is where much of the Serc/Denul trouble originated, and instead focuses on Serc asking whether Kenshiro might be all alone in this game.

Galayn Lord asked who it was that labelled Serc as trying to draw out scum with his post (something which they thought Serc had said but Serc denied), and I believe we've found it here - it was Korabas, in the bolded part.


In the post below I've bolded what Korabas claims that Serc claims ( ). I think it's a bit strong to say that Serc was "claiming" there was only one scum - he posited a question, i.e. do we even know if Kenshiro has allies.

Korabas, on 15 April 2014 - 05:23 AM, said:

I decided to look into Denul based on Monok's post. Denul does avoid the Serc symp case, but he does not defend Serc's mistake (his claim that there is only one scum).

Denul, on 14 April 2014 - 06:09 PM, said:

Path-Shaper, on 11 April 2014 - 02:07 PM, said:

Victory Conditions

Town: Eliminate Kenshiro

Scum: Achieve majority OR Kenshiro kills the 3 warlords. If a warlord is lynched, it does not count toward this VC, which becomes null.

This makes me think that there are other scum roles beyond Kenshiro.

Denul, on 14 April 2014 - 06:53 PM, said:

...also the second part of that scum VC definitely makes it seem like Kenshiro is the only killer - no other scum kills/vigs nor is he partnered with anyone (though he could still have a lover but not be partnered) - since it only talks about Kenshiro killing the warlords or them being lynched. I could see a town vig being present without murkying up that scum VC too much, but any other scum kills/vigs beyond Kenshiro would get into too much cross-interpretation of the OP if they killed a warlord to be included in this game.

These comments, if anything, make Serc's mistake more evident. If there is some sympage going on here, either:

1) It is non-applicable
2) Denul missed it
3) Denul is distancing himself from Serc without directly addressing the issue.

Again, Korabas talks of it as if it was a 'mistake' on Serc's part. But Serc never claimed to believe this, as far as I'm aware (perhaps I'm wrong), he merely asked whether the context of the game allows for allies to Kenshiro.


From day 2, Korabas takes a different tack, and readjusts focus to Shadow.

Korabas, on 15 April 2014 - 11:12 PM, said:

I just caught up. That's a rough conclusion to day one, to say the least. I pulled some quotes as I caught up.

Shadow, on 15 April 2014 - 04:43 PM, said:

After reading and rereading the thread now. The things that stand out is Denul. He was a middling poster until Alkend started to pressure Serc. Then he exploded into the scene. While there was talk about scum having more then one member there was absolutely no talk from anyone about there being paired killers until Denul brought it up. I think that was a slip up. Yes I know there are a bunch of potential sympage things going on with Serc. I like Denul for being scum.


Vote Denul

Lock, on 15 April 2014 - 05:11 PM, said:

Shadow, you are either not reading the thread as clearly as you might think you are (and your comment on 'some potential symp linkages' suggests that you aren't), or you're wilfully placing a post out of context. Personally, it seems pretty clear to me that that was a non-serious comment. We don't need more things like this muddying up the thread even further.



Edit: Changed 'haven't' to 'aren't'.

Glad to see someone call Shadow on that nonsense. I think it was Shadow too suggesting that Denul was the first to claim that there was only one scum, which is blatantly false. Pretty sure that got cleared up on thread though, but it still bothered me some. I'll start watching shadow a bit more from now on. Not to mention he's still going after Denul for some reason.

Okral Lom, on 15 April 2014 - 07:32 PM, said:

Alright, I've had a thread read and had a think, and unfortunately it's looking like a Denul or Serc lynch today. I don't think either of them rate out as any more than an average candidate (by which I mean essentially they've suffered from the luck of the draw).

That being said, they've been discussed to death and that discussion is not particularly interesting, so I'm going to point out a few things about some of the other players instead.

I'll start off with the player who interests me most at the moment: Monoch Ochem (henceforth MO). And that's not just for the Librarian RP.

I made an (admittedly weak) case on Korabas, and was immediately met by two responses from someone other than Korabas (which seemed surprising). There was a query about my logic from Bek Okhan (henceforth BO) and a surprisingly vigorous rubbishing from Monoch Ochem (henceforth MO). BO's interest seemed legit, but MO put quite a bit of time into attempting to disparage all those associated with the case:

Here he is initially (I've snipped the flavour text and the pictures for clarity) implying that the aggressive players (at that point myself and Tiamatha) are over-stepping their bounds:

Monok Ochem, on 15 April 2014 - 01:35 AM, said:

What the Librarian is trying to say is that the response to the vote on Master Korabas was a little sudden and aggressive. The Librarian is not so sure that at this stage of Day 1 "antics" such a case should garner such heat.
:
Now Librarian, I also thought that Master Tiamatha also seemed particularly aggressive as well...
:
What I'm saying is that Master Tiamatha seems to be jumping the musket, so to speak.

And again trying to sow suspicion on those who hold any weight in my case on Korabas:

Monok Ochem, on 15 April 2014 - 04:34 AM, said:

Now, what he wanted to express is that from the history of past games, signalling cases are kind of in a hang up, so to speak. They can't be discounted because of a couple of games back, but given that bloke Tatt's show last game, we all have to be wary. Now, seems to me, and the Librarian, that there is two sides to this coin, so to speak. We got a group really looking mean and hard into that Serc fellow, but harder in to his so called "symp" Korabas, or maybe that was Denul being the ringleader, I'm already getting turned around.
:
But here's the thing gentlemen: that Korabas fellow puts a little too much weightiness on the Serc "situation" to be trying to interrupt the show. The lack of conviction in that wishy-washy post itself is the problem, and I'll bet bananas to peanuts that the people playing up that post are more trouble than the guy posting the post himself.
:
So the question I have is why are we arsing about spending so much bloody time or Korabas when if he's the so-called symp, we ought to be focusing on Serc! I think this is all smoke and mirrors, and really, we ought to be testing by stringing up that Serc fellow, or maybe one of the supposedly upright citizens trying so valiantly to make a case on them!

So that's two posts devoted to making sure that the Korabas case is buried. In the process of doing so, he finds himself saying we should lynch Serc instead, despite previously making disparaging comments about the motives of Tiamatha in starting the case in the first place.

Then we come to his case on Denul. It seems to consist wholly of the over-aggressive clutching at straws Tiamatha and myself employed earlier. Here is the text of his argument - again I have snipped out the RP and the quoted posts themselves, which he doesn't analyze properly:

Monok Ochem, on 15 April 2014 - 04:52 AM, said:

Master Denul announced himself in the standard, provocative manner. Interestingly enough, as the Librarian pointed out, this manner quickly degenerates into base tomfoolery, making light of the last game's fake signalling, and a humorous switchero with a male picture where there ought to have been a more, er, beautiful lady. The quote (third below in the amazing MultiQuote device) that bothered him and myself the most was a comment about absence, not reading the OP, and speculation on a "symp" girlfriend. Quite the post for someone seemingly unengaged. Then Master Serc seems to "signal" closely followed by Master Korabas, and then it all just falls apart from there. But it comes back to Master Denul, don't you see? Master Denul's seemingly simple and easy going posts seems flippant, maybe even elusive, especially in context.
:
(QUOTED POSTS)
:
Vote Denul.

Now, let's get to the meat of that case...oh wait, there isn't any. An inconsistency in seriousness between posts is possibly the flimsiest argument constructed this year.

So basically MO's play last night was an inconsistent mess that he hid behind his posting style. He was very strongly trying to rebut and discredit arguments against another player (Korabas) by dismissing others as aggressive, but then turned around and posted one of the most powderpuff cases in the history of powderpuff cases! And somehow it worked.

So MO and by extension Korabas are the players I find the most suspicious at this point and I will be looking at them with a fine-tooth comb tomorrow.

I'll be honest. Monok's case felt good to me. Not necessarily because of any concrete, on-thread, evidence, but mostly because he knew the game well and proposed a case based on observed behaviour that he has probably seen in many other games. In my opinion, that kind of case was a bit premature.

Now he's dead. If Denul is scum, then he took out a threat. I think we can all agree that would be an incredibly obvious move, and any decent scum would probably not go after the thread directly like that day one. So I'm left feeling that scum might be setting up Denul in their own obvious fashion. I have to go over Denul's posts again to get a better picture, because I'm fucking confusing myself here.

It might be worth looking into some of the low posters at this point too.

I'll pop in and out over the next couple hours for discussion.

Above, Korabas gives us their current view on Denul, which at this moment seems more drawn to believing that the Monok kill was designed to incriminate Denul. The main thing in the post above, however, is the set up of a forthcoming case on Shadow. Korabas promises to watch Shadow closer, and fifteen minutes later...

[Lock]

Korabas, on 15 April 2014 - 11:31 PM, said:

All right. Quick correction. I mentioned Shadow falsely accused Denul of suggesting there is one killer, which I don't think he did. Shadow did go after Denul on a paired killer suggestion. I've pulled Shadow's relevant posts, as most early in the day is simply spam.

Shadow, on 15 April 2014 - 03:36 PM, said:

Denul, on 15 April 2014 - 01:46 PM, said:

Tiamatha, on 14 April 2014 - 02:55 PM, said:

Rikkter, on 14 April 2014 - 02:00 PM, said:

Okral Lom, on 14 April 2014 - 01:39 PM, said:

Rikkter, on 14 April 2014 - 01:34 PM, said:

checking in

I was hoping for more like a 7.2 from you...that was barely a 2.9! /terrible earthquake joke

That is a terrible earthquake joke. It's so bad that it gave me tremors.

signalling?

Hey look, someone uses the phrase "terrible earthquake joke" and then someone else replies to it using the exact same phrasing, and tiam questions it as signaling! Rikkter and me must each be half of the predator Kenshiro!

Why would you suggest that there are paired killers in the game? That just seems like a slip up to me.

So here's the crux of his paired killer case against Denul, I guess. I'm not really sure where it was supposed to go.

Shadow, on 15 April 2014 - 04:43 PM, said:

After reading and rereading the thread now. The things that stand out is Denul. He was a middling poster until Alkend started to pressure Serc. Then he exploded into the scene. While there was talk about scum having more then one member there was absolutely no talk from anyone about there being paired killers until Denul brought it up. I think that was a slip up. Yes I know there are a bunch of potential sympage things going on with Serc. I like Denul for being scum.


Vote Denul

I understand and empathize with the case, weak as it was day one, on Denul based on his explosive posting after the Monok vote. Other than that though, the paired killer angle is contrived. Lock called him on this.

I'm thinking that Shadow spammed as much as he did day one to inflate his post count. When you look at what he has actually contributed, it is absolutely worthless and misleading.

vote Shadow

...we get the case on Shadow, and a vote early doors on day 2. Not one that I inherently disagree with, because Shadow's play has struck me as pretty bad so far. Indeed, the accusation that Denul seriously suggested paired killers is downright ridiculous-seeming.


So the main thing here - if there is a main thing - is that Korabas made a bit of mountain out of a molehill with regards to Serc's question about whether Kenshiro could be all alone. Korabas depicts it as a statement and a belief, rather than the question it was. This is more than a bit of a stretch to me. Subtle nudging to get the lynch and look like they're contributing something original? Ugh, well, it's more than what came up for Galayn thus far.

[Denul]

Tiamatha, on 16 April 2014 - 10:26 AM, said:

Shadow, on 15 April 2014 - 08:36 PM, said:

9 votes to lynch, 8 to go to night.

1 vote for Okral Lom : Serc
3 votes Denul: Monok Ochem, Bek Okhan, Shadow
9 votes Serc: Alkend, Korabas, Lock, Denul, Galayn Lord, Okral Lom, Tiamatha,Ampelas,Eloth

Players not voted: Ampelas, Kessobahn, Rikkter, Ruse


That is a lynch

it was actually shadow did the lynch vote count, not denul, I stand corrected, but denul was clock watching and vcing the page previous (just saying)

why was shadow so keen to confirm a lynch? Confirm? Affirm?

keen to see shadows response to Korabas' vote on him, for such a helpful vote counting lynch confirming chap his contribution outside of that does not add up to much, lets give him a hurry along to get some word.

vote shadow

talk to us little.man

I did do a vote count for PS when there was about an hour left. Then Shadow posted the count when the lynch happened.

[Eloth]

Okral Lom, on 16 April 2014 - 03:26 PM, said:

Kessobahn, on 16 April 2014 - 02:58 PM, said:

Monty Hall is a probability problem and does not in any way apply to this game at this juncture. Clearing or voting Denul based upon a flawed application is stupid.

Are you trying to argue that Day 1 lynches are not essentially random? When the cases are built up from whatever random post someone decides looks like signalling? The exact probabilities may not be accurate, but the general principle is - a case built with the extra information we've gathered over the past day of play is going to be better than one created from signaling only, and furthermore we are more likely to disturb scum with a non-Denul case than lasering in on Denul and Denul only at this juncture.

I'm not saying we should clear Denul, I'm saying we should be trying our hand at turning up some new suspects because those cases are likely to have more basis. Let's see what happens when the focus is pointed elsewhere - it can always be put back on him later. I don't really subscribe to the whole "Oh, but leaving him around will end up muddying the thread" line of thought. The thread should be muddy - if it's clean and there's only one or two options each day, how can you hope to find the scum in time?

No, he's saying you can't do math and don't understand probability. God. I'm going to break it down for you.

You don't even need to go into the details of the Monty Hall problem to see this (by the way for whoever asked, Monty Hall was a game show host). Just do some basic math. If it's day 1 and I'm RI with 16 players in the game, for the sake of argument let's assume 1 scum to make the math easier, as it represents the original problem better. The odds of you lynching scum are 1/15 - a 6.67% chance. Move to day 2, 14 players alive with two RIs gone. Now your odds of lynching scum (at random) are 1/13 - a 7.69% chance. Not much of an increase, is it?

Now let's actually take the details of playing with doors and goats and all that. Let's take Denul as the "door" we choose based on your comments. Now we get two CFs from players that are not Denul. Assuming X number of doors (players) total and p number number of doors opened (player CFs), this is the math of how the probability of switching your "door" will change your chances of success:

     (N - 1)
-----------------
(N * (N - p - 1))

So starting with N = 15 players and p = 2 CFs, plug in the numbers and you'll get a whopping .078. Assuming you are switching to another random "door", your odds of successfully choosing another player besides Denul as scum increase by 7.8%. That is almost nothing. If you factor in the actual game and how people are playing and what your personal opinion is, that number gets modified a whole fucking lot. (For anyone who doesn't believe me, try plugging in N = 3 and p = 1 to simulate the original Monty Hall problem and you will get the correct answer of 2/3).

So no, Okral, the Monty Hall problem does not apply at all with so many players in the game. The fact that you are still pursuing this line of thought despite Kesso's rebuttal means either a) you don't understand the math, or you are deflecting from Denul. Either way, it gives me very little faith in you at the moment.

[Kessobahn]

Okral Lom, on 16 April 2014 - 03:26 PM, said:

Kessobahn, on 16 April 2014 - 02:58 PM, said:

Monty Hall is a probability problem and does not in any way apply to this game at this juncture. Clearing or voting Denul based upon a flawed application is stupid.

Are you trying to argue that Day 1 lynches are not essentially random? When the cases are built up from whatever random post someone decides looks like signalling? The exact probabilities may not be accurate, but the general principle is - a case built with the extra information we've gathered over the past day of play is going to be better than one created from signaling only, and furthermore we are more likely to disturb scum with a non-Denul case than lasering in on Denul and Denul only at this juncture.

I'm not saying we should clear Denul, I'm saying we should be trying our hand at turning up some new suspects because those cases are likely to have more basis. Let's see what happens when the focus is pointed elsewhere - it can always be put back on him later. I don't really subscribe to the whole "Oh, but leaving him around will end up muddying the thread" line of thought. The thread should be muddy - if it's clean and there's only one or two options each day, how can you hope to find the scum in time?

No, I'm not. Now go the fuck away. I'm trying to lay a trap for 'urple dragons not brown bears.

Korabas, why do you wish to dismiss Denul from consideration based upon application of the Monty Hall problem? Who is Monty Hall in your analogy? PS is simply the bimbo in the low cut dress who opens the door.

[Denul]

I like the comments on GL from Lock (I wouldn't call it a case ). I think I had already mentioned upthread how GL's posts are few but cut straight to the point with insight. If he is scum he is playing it cool and calculating and it'll be hard to levy anything against him except being too smooth. I'd definitely like to see more interaction from him - right now most/all of his posts look like open comments, not personal responses.


Shadow annoys me, but at this point I can't imagine he is actually scum playing like that.


I took a little dive into Ruse. Really not much there and I've already mentioned the lynch+NK reaction post I find odd. There's also this:

Ruse, on 16 April 2014 - 12:33 PM, said:

Seriously, why would scum kill someone for being annoying? Thats good for scum, annoying people draw thread attention away from them.

I am firmly in the 'lynched cause he was on to something' camp.

Either that or Monok was a scum FM that jumped.

Seems like a pretty confident attitude in the first two paragraphs. But if you are so firmly decided, why not vote? Plus you didn't vote yesterday?

Throwing out the FM idea is also all sorts of weird, as many have already commented on. While it's not impossible, us having no other evidence to suggest this makes it a very strange idea for a townie to just toss about. I wouldn't call it fearmongering, just stupidideamongering? Yet, if Ruse is so confident with his lynch candidate (whom he won't vote for), why toss out an uncertain idea like that? So, very inconsistent overall.

[Eloth]

So to actually make my point here, comments like "I'm not saying we should clear Denul, I'm saying we should be trying our hand at turning up some new suspects because those cases are likely to have more basis." are completely fucking false.

Anyone who suspected or voted Denul has just as much reason to suspect him now as they did yesterday, all else being equal (including the two CFs). So I find it suspicious to see focus on Denul fade away based on bad logic like Okral's.

Now that I have officially disabused Okral of his poor understanding of probability, I will try to read up as I can.

[Denul]

Eloth, on 16 April 2014 - 04:43 PM, said:

Okral Lom, on 16 April 2014 - 03:26 PM, said:

Kessobahn, on 16 April 2014 - 02:58 PM, said:

Monty Hall is a probability problem and does not in any way apply to this game at this juncture. Clearing or voting Denul based upon a flawed application is stupid.

Are you trying to argue that Day 1 lynches are not essentially random? When the cases are built up from whatever random post someone decides looks like signalling? The exact probabilities may not be accurate, but the general principle is - a case built with the extra information we've gathered over the past day of play is going to be better than one created from signaling only, and furthermore we are more likely to disturb scum with a non-Denul case than lasering in on Denul and Denul only at this juncture.

I'm not saying we should clear Denul, I'm saying we should be trying our hand at turning up some new suspects because those cases are likely to have more basis. Let's see what happens when the focus is pointed elsewhere - it can always be put back on him later. I don't really subscribe to the whole "Oh, but leaving him around will end up muddying the thread" line of thought. The thread should be muddy - if it's clean and there's only one or two options each day, how can you hope to find the scum in time?

No, he's saying you can't do math and don't understand probability. God. I'm going to break it down for you.

You don't even need to go into the details of the Monty Hall problem to see this (by the way for whoever asked, Monty Hall was a game show host). Just do some basic math. If it's day 1 and I'm RI with 16 players in the game, for the sake of argument let's assume 1 scum to make the math easier, as it represents the original problem better. The odds of you lynching scum are 1/15 - a 6.67% chance. Move to day 2, 14 players alive with two RIs gone. Now your odds of lynching scum (at random) are 1/13 - a 7.69% chance. Not much of an increase, is it?

Now let's actually take the details of playing with doors and goats and all that. Let's take Denul as the "door" we choose based on your comments. Now we get two CFs from players that are not Denul. Assuming X number of doors (players) total and p number number of doors opened (player CFs), this is the math of how the probability of switching your "door" will change your chances of success:

     (N - 1)
-----------------
(N * (N - p - 1))

So starting with N = 15 players and p = 2 CFs, plug in the numbers and you'll get a whopping .078. Assuming you are switching to another random "door", your odds of successfully choosing another player besides Denul as scum increase by 7.8%. That is almost nothing. If you factor in the actual game and how people are playing and what your personal opinion is, that number gets modified a whole fucking lot. (For anyone who doesn't believe me, try plugging in N = 3 and p = 1 to simulate the original Monty Hall problem and you will get the correct answer of 2/3).

So no, Okral, the Monty Hall problem does not apply at all with so many players in the game. The fact that you are still pursuing this line of thought despite Kesso's rebuttal means either a) you don't understand the math, or you are deflecting from Denul. Either way, it gives me very little faith in you at the moment.

What's this? We've got some mafiascum.net players in our game?!

[Kessobahn]

Eloth, on 16 April 2014 - 04:43 PM, said:

Okral Lom, on 16 April 2014 - 03:26 PM, said:

Kessobahn, on 16 April 2014 - 02:58 PM, said:

Monty Hall is a probability problem and does not in any way apply to this game at this juncture. Clearing or voting Denul based upon a flawed application is stupid.

Are you trying to argue that Day 1 lynches are not essentially random? When the cases are built up from whatever random post someone decides looks like signalling? The exact probabilities may not be accurate, but the general principle is - a case built with the extra information we've gathered over the past day of play is going to be better than one created from signaling only, and furthermore we are more likely to disturb scum with a non-Denul case than lasering in on Denul and Denul only at this juncture.

I'm not saying we should clear Denul, I'm saying we should be trying our hand at turning up some new suspects because those cases are likely to have more basis. Let's see what happens when the focus is pointed elsewhere - it can always be put back on him later. I don't really subscribe to the whole "Oh, but leaving him around will end up muddying the thread" line of thought. The thread should be muddy - if it's clean and there's only one or two options each day, how can you hope to find the scum in time?

No, he's saying you can't do math and don't understand probability. God. I'm going to break it down for you.

You don't even need to go into the details of the Monty Hall problem to see this (by the way for whoever asked, Monty Hall was a game show host). Just do some basic math. If it's day 1 and I'm RI with 16 players in the game, for the sake of argument let's assume 1 scum to make the math easier, as it represents the original problem better. The odds of you lynching scum are 1/15 - a 6.67% chance. Move to day 2, 14 players alive with two RIs gone. Now your odds of lynching scum (at random) are 1/13 - a 7.69% chance. Not much of an increase, is it?

Now let's actually take the details of playing with doors and goats and all that. Let's take Denul as the "door" we choose based on your comments. Now we get two CFs from players that are not Denul. Assuming X number of doors (players) total and p number number of doors opened (player CFs), this is the math of how the probability of switching your "door" will change your chances of success:

     (N - 1)
-----------------
(N * (N - p - 1))

So starting with N = 15 players and p = 2 CFs, plug in the numbers and you'll get a whopping .078. Assuming you are switching to another random "door", your odds of successfully choosing another player besides Denul as scum increase by 7.8%. That is almost nothing. If you factor in the actual game and how people are playing and what your personal opinion is, that number gets modified a whole fucking lot. (For anyone who doesn't believe me, try plugging in N = 3 and p = 1 to simulate the original Monty Hall problem and you will get the correct answer of 2/3).

So no, Okral, the Monty Hall problem does not apply at all with so many players in the game. The fact that you are still pursuing this line of thought despite Kesso's rebuttal means either a) you don't understand the math, or you are deflecting from Denul. Either way, it gives me very little faith in you at the moment.

Yeah. What he said.

@Eloth I'm more interested in Korabas for bringing it up in the first place. Superficially it looks like a good logical argument to go away from Denul. I think Okral just fell into that.

I'm not saying we should laser in on Denul. But dismissing him out of hand via an invalid argument rubs me the wrong way.

[Denul]

I'm going to go grab some food and think about how I want to present the next thing I want to bring up. Back in a little while.

[Kessobahn]

Eloth, on 16 April 2014 - 04:49 PM, said:

So to actually make my point here, comments like "I'm not saying we should clear Denul, I'm saying we should be trying our hand at turning up some new suspects because those cases are likely to have more basis." are completely fucking false.

Anyone who suspected or voted Denul has just as much reason to suspect him now as they did yesterday, all else being equal (including the two CFs). So I find it suspicious to see focus on Denul fade away based on bad logic like Okral's.

Now that I have officially disabused Okral of his poor understanding of probability, I will try to read up as I can.

Ditto

The true test of another's intelligence is the degree to which they agree with one's own opinions. Therefore Eloth is a genius.

[Eloth]

Kessobahn, on 16 April 2014 - 04:54 PM, said:

Yeah. What he said.

@Eloth I'm more interested in Korabas for bringing it up in the first place. Superficially it looks like a good logical argument to go away from Denul. I think Okral just fell into that.

I'm not saying we should laser in on Denul. But dismissing him out of hand via an invalid argument rubs me the wrong way.

Where did Korabas bring it up? Sorry, I'm wading through pages of WIFOM at the moment.

[Eloth]

Kessobahn, on 16 April 2014 - 04:57 PM, said:

Eloth, on 16 April 2014 - 04:49 PM, said:

So to actually make my point here, comments like "I'm not saying we should clear Denul, I'm saying we should be trying our hand at turning up some new suspects because those cases are likely to have more basis." are completely fucking false.

Anyone who suspected or voted Denul has just as much reason to suspect him now as they did yesterday, all else being equal (including the two CFs). So I find it suspicious to see focus on Denul fade away based on bad logic like Okral's.

Now that I have officially disabused Okral of his poor understanding of probability, I will try to read up as I can.

Ditto

The true test of another's intelligence is the degree to which they agree with one's own opinions. Therefore Eloth is a genius.

Clearly.

[Okral Lom]

Eloth, on 16 April 2014 - 04:43 PM, said:

No, he's saying you can't do math and don't understand probability. God. I'm going to break it down for you.

You don't even need to go into the details of the Monty Hall problem to see this (by the way for whoever asked, Monty Hall was a game show host). Just do some basic math. If it's day 1 and I'm RI with 16 players in the game, for the sake of argument let's assume 1 scum to make the math easier, as it represents the original problem better. The odds of you lynching scum are 1/15 - a 6.67% chance. Move to day 2, 14 players alive with two RIs gone. Now your odds of lynching scum (at random) are 1/13 - a 7.69% chance. Not much of an increase, is it?

Now let's actually take the details of playing with doors and goats and all that. Let's take Denul as the "door" we choose based on your comments. Now we get two CFs from players that are not Denul. Assuming X number of doors (players) total and p number number of doors opened (player CFs), this is the math of how the probability of switching your "door" will change your chances of success:

 	(N - 1)
-----------------
(N * (N - p - 1))

So starting with N = 15 players and p = 2 CFs, plug in the numbers and you'll get a whopping .078. Assuming you are switching to another random "door", your odds of successfully choosing another player besides Denul as scum increase by 7.8%. That is almost nothing. If you factor in the actual game and how people are playing and what your personal opinion is, that number gets modified a whole fucking lot. (For anyone who doesn't believe me, try plugging in N = 3 and p = 1 to simulate the original Monty Hall problem and you will get the correct answer of 2/3).

So no, Okral, the Monty Hall problem does not apply at all with so many players in the game. The fact that you are still pursuing this line of thought despite Kesso's rebuttal means either a) you don't understand the math, or you are deflecting from Denul. Either way, it gives me very little faith in you at the moment.

Pff, I understand the maths fine. A ~7% improvement in your odds is nothing to be sniffed at. Do you think Denul's play lifts his % chance of being scum by significantly more than that? It certainly didn't move the needle that much for me.

And yes, I suppose I am deflecting from Denul, insofar as I would like other candidates to be looked at today. This is not a permanent state of affairs, but I am making my motives plain here.

[Kessobahn]

Eloth, on 16 April 2014 - 05:02 PM, said:

Kessobahn, on 16 April 2014 - 04:54 PM, said:

Yeah. What he said.

@Eloth I'm more interested in Korabas for bringing it up in the first place. Superficially it looks like a good logical argument to go away from Denul. I think Okral just fell into that.

I'm not saying we should laser in on Denul. But dismissing him out of hand via an invalid argument rubs me the wrong way.

Where did Korabas bring it up? Sorry, I'm wading through pages of WIFOM at the moment.

Shit. That's my mistake. It was Okral that brought it up, not Korabas. http://forum.malazan...ost__p__1119686

[Galayn Lord]

Ok finally out of work. I fololwed thread but need a recap. I gather we're debating denul now?

I mentioned id be looking at new cases but i dont mean to assume denul isnt worth looking into. More from me when i get home.