I wasn't sure about it before the votes, I wanted to gather more information. the votes made me more confident of this mission, although I thought that aaaarrgh is a spy, now I'm leaning more towards Mown.

But I agree that from your point of view, assuming you are resistance, which I seriously doubt - it is quite strange that zherog took alt with him on the mission proposal on mission 2.1.

I'm here, I've read everything, but I am in the middle of a wicked hangover so it's probably best if I don't try to reason right now. I'll reread the events of the last couple pages and post thoughts later. expect a vote of no on whatever team Mown nominates though, all the options he proposed look bad.

some various things I want to address. may wind up goin' full Pheldatog on this one.

of course they did, you removed every combination that didn't have them.

incorrect. let's use some fully calculated numbers.

I'm going to call mission 1 people group A and non-mission people group B. given your assumed perspective as town, there is a 2/3 chance that a person in group A is not a spy. there is a 3/5 chance that a non-you person in group B is not a spy. so let's start by putting you on the team and see what the odds of there being no spies:

1/1=1/1=100%

cool. now let's add a second person. given that 2/3(67%)>3/5(60%), the optimal person to add is from group A.

1/1*2/3=2/3=67%

there's now a 67% chance that we have no spies. since we're only concerned with the whether or not there are any spies, we're going to assume that the person we picked was not a spy, and that the spy remains out there in group A. that means we now have a 1/2(50%) chance of picking the spy there. so we take someone from group B.

1/1*2/3*3/5=2/5=40%

now at this point, if we again assume we picked the right person, we now have a 2/4(50%) chance of picking right in group B. that means that both groups have the same chance of yielding a non-spy if picked from at random. let's take from group B.

1/1*2/3*3/5*2/4=1/5=20%

and that's the best we can do at random from any given townie's perspective. but since the team can't include every townie, let's use the same process to see what a non-participant group B member's optimal result is:

ABAB=2/3*3/5*1/2*2/4=1/10=10%

you can check the other results if you want, but fortunately a greedy algorithm works fine for this problem. so from your perspective, unless you can get on the team, the best team in terms of spy avoidance has not one, but two members of mission 1 on it. which makes sense: in order for a team with none of them to work, you have to have properly identified every single townie outside of mission 1. (assuming only 1 spy on mission 1)

I'm not saying this is the team model we should run with. there are other factors at play here. but don't hide behind statistics if you're not going to do them right.

I don't understand why you're trying to pin this on us. at least in my case, it was clearly a recommendation of exclusion. I wanted a team that had no mission 1 members, and didn't have alt or Zherog. that leaves a grand total of 1 possible team. exactly 1. yes, I believe bentz is town, because my theory falls apart if he isn't, but the same is equally true of you, RM, and Tiny. I never said "HEY GUYS BENTZ IS DEFINITELY TOWN". please don't try to convince people I did.

no, that's totally reasonable. I generally agree with this reasoning as well, which is part of why I'm going to vote down any team Mown puts himself on. (part. not all.) I was willing to give the team an exception because I know that having me on it reduces the chances of there being a spy on it, but I don't expect you to know that so I don't expect you to vote as if you do. I believe that from a generic town perspective, the right decision was to vote down the team. I'm not sure it was wrong to nominate it, since doing so forced a huge amount of polarizing discussion and sweet, sweet data, although given Squinty is the player I trusted most before we run out of options I'm not super happy that his proposal was rejected. but I do not think that any given player was in the wrong to reject that team.

I quoted this to go over analyzing the teams proposed, but by the time I got to it I realized I'd already made myself pretty clear. it's a bad idea to include yourself on a team for all the reasons Zherog outlined about it being a bad idea to include me. a team with you on it should be rejected.

also, your recurring theory that alt and Zherog are the same alignment is, again, baseless. why must they be the same alignment, when that alignment can still be independent of the third person who voted no on that mission? why, if you're town, is your theory "they must be the same alignment but it could be either", not "they must be the same alignment as me, thus they are both town"? also why do people who vote the same way have to be the same alignment in the first place?

woah.

woah woah woah woah woah.

...

...

woah.

no, you can't do that. you can't do that at all. when you're providing an argument in a game of hidden information, you can't base it on things only you know. you can't casually assume that you're town, because no one else can. you casually throw out a list of possibilities, not to argue your own position but to convince bentz, and leave off the possibility that, you know, you're a spy? no. not ok. reeks of deception. if my Mown-Aaargh theory falls apart I have my eye on you.

I might have breached the deadline. Just going to read through the post from aaarrrgh and raz, then I'll throw up something. In part to discard the altimis | Zherog theory, as it was primarily based on the lack of data we had previously. Now that we've got two proposals out, I'll find something more reasonable.

post-raz-edit: The primary reason was that the common consensus seemed to be to reject it, but they both deviated from that, and I assume they would have deviated for the same reason.
Anyway, for including myself on a team. So, here's the deal. If I exclude people from 1.1 off the team, there is exactly one team that doesn't have any spies on them. If that team fails, I'm pretty sure we lose, because we won't have nearly enough information to make a proper team for 3.X, and any proposals spies makes at that point can just throw caution out in the wind, so stalling for proposals no longer has any beneficial effect whatsoever. If I assume that raz and aaarrrgh are both spies, which is looking more plausible, but I'm still not buying it, then the probability is slightly higher, but it also means any team with a spy will have exactly one.

If I make a team without any from 1.1, and 1.1 had exactly one spy, then there are c(6,4) = 15 different options. Out of those, 1 of them has no spies, 6 of them has two spies, and 8 of them have exactly one spy. That means that I'm more likely to choose a team with the worst possible composition. Furthermore, if I think someone is a spy, then the logical conclusion is to exclude him. If I'm correct, then we're looking at 1/7 odds at hitting jackpot, and we don't get any chance at double spy teams, which are far preferable to the single spy teams. If my biggest lead so far is effectively "SE is a spy", then it's statistically better for me to just outright ignore it. I get that any mission with me on it will plausibly get me blamed, but which one do you want: the team that is more likely to be accepted, or the one that I think has a plausible chance at winning?

Whoa! Real math? On the internet? What's the world coming to! Next thing, you'll try to convince me the internet has a couple cute cat pictures somewhere...



My resistance experience amounts to reading the game Neo linked and what we've done here so far. So, that caveat out of the way... isn't making a team and excluding yourself a big-time warning klaxon thing that people generally jump up and down about, yelling that only scummy people do that? Are you saying you think Mown would get a pass from that sort of thing? Or is he stuck with the proverbial rock and hard place?

@razor:
I'm not using individual people. I'm going by every possible spy combination.
Given one mission failed, that eliminates certain combinations; that's the point.

You are saying that there is 2/3 chance that a person in group A ISN'T a spy, which is incorrect. We don't know if there was only one person or not. That's the reason why I'm going by spy combinations, not individual people; that's the reason your numbers are wrong.

Sure there is a possibility that there was only one spy in mission one, but there are possibilities that there were two, and even three. As such, you need to calculate all of those into the numbers and you simply aren't accomodating for that. I say to you, if you are going to hide behind statistics, start doing it right.

My method doesn't need to accomodate for that fault because it doesn't care about it. It only cares about entire teams of spies and what those teams potentially are.

I think that if Mown is town it's in his best interest to propose a team that will succeed. that doesn't just mean having no spies, though. it also means getting passed. and since if he's town, no one but him knows that, he should take into account that there's a lot of people who do not want anyone from mission 1 on this mission. on top of that, there are people who are specifically suspicious of him. so a team with him is not likely to pass. so if he has the town's interests in mind, it would be irresponsible to propose a team he knows will fail. think of it like this: it's not scummy to vote for a team you're not on, is it?

furthermore, as you pointed out earlier, there's value beyond just passing the mission. delineating information is valuable. hopefully we pass this, but no matter what we do there's a good chance we don't. so our long-term goal should include making sure that, if this one fails, we have the information necessary to prevent any more failures. so, while in total the most likely to succeed layout from the view from nowhere includes a person from mission 1, that doesn't necessarily make that the best actual team.

Man, many people is difficult. Remind me not to join anything 7+ again.
Okay, so, Aaarrrgh is looking more suspect since the first mission. He seemed supportive of neither razorborne nor SE from what I gathered, but still went through with the mission. Now, one could argue that it would then plausible have two spies on it, but I don't think that achieves a whole lot when one of the people would come from mission 1.1. Therefore, it's somewhat plausible to assume that one person from team 2.2 was a spy. At the same time, since he rejected 2.1, there was probably only one spy there. Now, the part where this breaks down is the point that I assume SE is a spy, but he and Aaarrrgh voted differently on 2.1. The two possible explanations for this would be that it was a two-spy mission that Aaarrrgh didn't want to go through, but SE thought he would look bad if it actually did and voted yes to cover his ass in case **** hit the fan. This could explain the two other people on the team both voting no, and assume that one of them was a spy. The other possibility is that there was only one spy, SE voted yes because he wanted to nuke it, and Aaarrrgh voted no to look like a good guy, and then the two invited people either just wanted to stall or rejected for other reasons, which is a little less likely. If the former is true, avoiding SE, Altimis and seTiny would ensure that I could make a perfect team.

The problem with all of this is that SE is far more popular than I am, so I don't think I can submit a team I rightfully want without it getting rejected.

right. at least one person on mission 1 has to be a spy. that doesn't actually mean as much as you think it does.

absolutely correct. but, absent a specific reason to believe otherwise, it's most likely there was only one, so it's the most reasonable possibility to consider. it's very unlikely that Aaargh randomly picked two spies (about 8% chance) so unless you believe he purposefully put another spy on the team (a reasonable possibility, but not one I've ever seen you advocate) my statistics are accurate about 92% of the time. that's enough to favor a person from off the team, but not enough to noticeably affect the probabilities. anything else requires the idea that Aaargh was a spy and put another spy on the team, which is at that point not a statistical question, it's a strategic one, and is thus irrelevant in a statistical discussion. that would not be a random event, so looking at statistics to determine if it was likely is not a useful approach. in fact, we can reasonably discard all setups where Aaargh is a spy from statistical analysis, since in that case no matter what the spy/town make-up of his team was a conscious, informed decision.

So, all things considered, I need 5 people to accept my mission going through. If I include myself, raz and aaarrrgh will probably reject it, so I would need the three people I invite to be in favor, as well as someone that is excluded. If one of those accepts, it's probably a bad sign, so ultimately, a team with myself will either be rejected or end up failing, most likely. So I guess I'll have to exclude myself, even if I in no way like it, and probably wouldn't accept someone else doing it. Such is a life with double standards. Whatever, I blame you guys.
With that in mind, I'll take Zherog's mission as the baseline, and then ditch SE, because I still don't like him. However, if there's two spies, I need to ditch either seTiny or altimis as well. I don't have a lot to go by, so I'll ditch altimis because he feels a little clingy, just like last game. I'm sure it's just my social aversion kicking in though.

Recap

Overall Score:
Resistance = 0
Spies = 1

Mission 1: The Metaboard -- Failure


Mission 2 - MTG


Turn Order


You have 48 hours to discuss and send in votes on Mown's team!

I respect the decision to exclude yourself, but I'm still gonna vote no here. if I'm right then Zherog has a 50% chance of being scum. (higher because if I'm right, you're scum, which means you're more likely to put a spy on your team.) if I'm wrong, I'm not liking the look of Tiny. unfortunately, I can't avoid Tiny while protecting against my theory being right, but I can sure as heck not do both simultaneously.

while noble, I think it is wrong no to take yourself on the mission, people now have to trust both you and the entire crew on the mission - an extra person is alot.

furthermore, as I see it -
for the mission to be successful it means that either:
1. both squinty and alt are scums - I don't know about it, they voted differently for every proposal so far.
2. there was more than 1 spy on mission 1 - I think it is also unlikely.

I'm a bit too busy to properly keep up right now, so I just wanted to give my reasoning for accepting squinty's team. I figured that it either had no spies or two spies, because I've been getting a feeling that raz and squinty could be the same alignment. I also wanted to disprove raz's mission 1 double spy theory. It was a risky move, and I had my doubts about it, so I'm glad it didn't go through.

I don't get the over-dramatic woah... woah. I'm going to post from my perspective. As I said in an earlier post:


I posted all possibilities in chocolate mafia for a while, but I got tired of suggesting I wasn't town when I am.

Here are the other possibilities as I see them, since you want them.

Bentz asked:




So from my perspective if Bentz proposed team has 0 spies then either Aaarrgh took a risk and invited another spy, or Zherog and Altimis are spies. There is a possibility that either could be true, and right now I don't think aaarrrgh took the risk and to me altimis is leaning town. Am I wrong?



I found it odd that he would like that team but reject it. He says that after the team vote he feels better about it. But what about the team vote changes the idea? Both he and Roaring Mouse were on the team and voted reject (Roaring Mouse said he was going to vote reject anyway) The only one not on the team to vote yes was aaarrrgh. I don't see how those votes could convince him team squinty/rm/bentz/roaring mouse is resistance.


Preview edit: Now we have another team to vote on.

[quote=Bentz]furthermore, as I see it -
for the mission to be successful it means that either:
1. both squinty and alt are scums - I don't know about it, they voted differently for every proposal so far.
2. there was more than 1 spy on mission 1 - I think it is also unlikely.[/quote]

The only people to vote the same for every proposal so far are Bentz, seTiny, and Roaring Mouse.

Oh I see what you are saying they've voted exactly opposite each time.

Bentz didn't ask why you didn't like the team, he asked why he shouldn't. the answer "either both Aaargh and Mown or both Zherog and Alt must be spies" is inaccurate from his perspective, so offering it as an argument to convince him is disingenuous at best, and purposefully misleading at worst. when you're discussing your own opinion, your own votes, nominations, and the like, yes, feel free to leave the assumption that you're town unstated. that's fair. but if you're trying to discuss why other people should think certain ways, you need to base that case on their perspective, not your own.

for instance, look at how I've been discussing the first mission's team and my role on it. I know I'm town, so when I'm justifying my decisions, I'm going to assume I am. but when I'm talking about, say, who squinty should nominate, or whether people should approve a team with me on it, I need to acknowledge and address that no one else knows they can trust me.

Mown nowhere in your analysis post do you point out anything against me, then at the very end you just say that you think squinty, setiny and me are spies?

I can't accept it because I'm not sure there are two spies on it, and it's undeniably likely that there is a spy on it.
I vote no.

But you have no logical reason to exclude me is what I'm saying.

You have nothign against me except this notion that squinty and I HAVE to be the same alignment. Which basically means that me, squinty, and someone on the first mission must be spies, meanwhile you're bashing setiny as well?

You proposed four spies and only have potential eveidence for two or three of them. Neitheer of whom are me.
I voted no the first mission, and I voted no teh seconf mission because I was trying to get more information. I posted vaguely to hopefully catch the spies off guard.

Your posting this mission makes me suspect you of being a spy along with razor who keeps ragging on the possibility that there's only one spy on mission one. I think there were more than one spy, but that they didn't expect it to pass, but seeing as Aaarrrgh made the team, he would be my top guess, but then that would mean there were three spies on mission one.

I still don't think anyone really expected mission one to pass; but now it seems highly likely that mission 2 will default, as far as I can tell.