And how was I supposed to know the specific subset of my post that was supposed to quote? Please.

I'm informing you that you made a mistake in your post. If you don't care about what you were trying to tell me, then why did you respond in the first place?

No. He's explicitly calculating under the assumption that 1.1 only had one spy.
Your numbers don't make any sense to me until I get the math behind them.

That was actually sarcasm.

It's not "simply because you voted no". It's because you voted no to a mission that he assumed had two spies on it. I obviously disagree, but I can't say that the theory is too absurd, which is the only "argument" I remember coming from you.

It is.

Words have subtle and important cues. I don't see why I should ignore them.
I was also talking about internal contradictions with that statement of mine.

No, you're just falsely accusing razorborne of something I am more to blame for. If you're resistance, then it serves me better if you're not chasing ghosts.

when did I go after Squinty? and why isn't Zherog on that list?

nah, actually, this's been a shockingly accurate and fair portrayal for a theory that paints you as scum. somewhat reinforces my belief that, if I'm wrong, then Aaargh is the spy.

anyway:

scenarios in which Aaargh is a spy are not relevant in a statistical sense, because in those scenarios his nomination was deterministic. he knew the spy-town ratio he wanted, and chose accordingly. you can't approximate his results with die rolls. thus, the only way more than one spy was on team 1 in a way that is relevant to a statistical analysis is if myself and Mown are both spies. there's about an 8% chance that Aaargh chose two spies at random, meaning that there's a 92% chance he didn't. that's a huge majority of the times, so it's the logical one to look at if you're looking for statistical results. if, on the other hand, you suspect Aaargh is a spy, then every number you use is meaningless because he didn't choose at random. so either you suspect Aaargh is a spy, or you accept that the first team almost certainly had 1 spy on it. if you think the former, that's fine. I do too. but then don't use statistics to make points because they're irrelevant.

see, you're just focusing on one part of the theory. you think I think you're a spy just for voting no, but that's not it. there's an entire framework around it that justifies that idea, which you've not taken the time to understand before slinging accusations.

true. and?

well, yeah, we're not voting down RM's, but since we're stuck with bentz's if we reject RM's, it's in our best interest to know exactly what the options are. and as Mown said, it ties bentz's hands while we still have some control. he (presumably) knows that if he says something now and then changes it when it fires, everyone will assume he's a spy.

for completeness, I want everyone to know that I'm going to be suggesting Squinty here. Neo has confirmed that that vote was a mistake, and of the two available choices (Squinty and Tiny) Squinty strikes me as the more trustworthy in case my theory is wrong.

I really don't like where this is going. I made bad choices, and now I'm in a really bad place. Turns out that bringing two of the most articulate players in the game on the same mission was not my optimal play, because I constantly find myself unable to keep up with the arguments, and it makes me look like a spy. I do not see how I can fix this, because I'm highly unlikely to have more time anytime soon. It also doesn't help that both Razor and Mown have a lot of good things to say, and I would want to trust both of them if I didn't know that one of them is a spy...

Right now I'm leaning more toward trusting Mown than Razor, but I don't have anything solid in either direction.

There's Zherog as well. Just, so we don't pretend he doesn't exist.

oh, I meant available in relation to my current theory. I'm not proposing anyone who could be on the spy team in that model, so Zherog isn't an option.

Right, should have guessed that because altimis want there, but it seems I forgot him. Or assumed he was on the team, for some reason.

Yeah, that makes sense now. I blame my post on being up late last night getting a freelance project done and making that post before I hooked up the coffee IV this morning.



Aw... somebody likes me!

*ahem*

I hope nobody else is as confused as I feel right now. My head is spinning trying to figure this out. At least in mafia, when somebody dies you get facts. I'm really not at all sure how I'm supposed to piece things together without facts like that. (I mean, correct me if I'm wrong; the only fact we know right now is that at least one of Razor / Aaaaaaarrrrrrrgh / Mown is a spy. Right? everything else is all theory.)

Maybe my lightbulb moment will come later, like it did somewhere around the late-middle of my first mafia game...

@Mown: In my book, you're digging yourself a hole the more you respond to me Mown. Right now it looks more like three spies went on mission one, or that Aaarrrgh isn't the spy. More likely the first one, but I'm concerned about Aaarrrgh.

1) You're telling me, that you had no intention whatsoever or being sarcastic when you asked What thread I had been reading? If so, then you should know. Unless, you were being sarcastic with more than just that one satement; in which case this shouldn't have even been brought up at all. Neither way looks good for you.

2) Forgive me for making each point/counterpoint easier to read for you. You mentioned that the links I posted were identical. That's the point.
NOTEDIT: I have been unfairly critical of this post as you meant they all linked to the same post. I will try to correct that. But they are all regarding the statistics argument. They shouldn't be hard to find from that one that is linked.

3) THAT'S THE MISTAKE! You don't simply say this person has X% chance of being a spy based on one scenario. That person has a different chance of being a spy in a scenario where there's two spies, or three spies. Then you need to calculate the "weight" of each of those scenarios and factor that into your final numbers. It's not simply 33%.

The math behind mine? Really? There are 84 possible spy combinations. Based on what I know I can cut it down to 46. Who shows up the most among those 46 combinations? What voting patterns benefit which combinations? NOTE: I said "somewhat calculated" numbers, not actual and not correctly calculated numbers. I left that part out to keep it simple for the sake of the game. The numbers, in relation to each other were correct; as individual numbers they were not.

4) Thus the shortest response. Heavens forbid I call you out on sarcasm again.

5) He assumed is the key part here.

6) ...

7) I never said to ignore them, I said to look beyond them, read into them find the reason they are being said; not just what is being said. Otherwise I'd be a hypocrite.

8) What am I falsely accusing razorborne of again? the fact that he has disagreeing statistics with me. My statisitcs are confirmed at my end, so I will fight to say they are correct. He has not given out explicitly correct numbers as far as I am concerned. THAT is what I am accusing him of.

==xx==

@razor:
1) You're right. I meant zherog, not squinty. I went after squinty.

2) You were talking to mown...

3) Those numbers are WRONG again.


Show me, where your statistics are correct, otherwise I'm not going to listen to you when you bring them up.
Of course these numbers change if you suspect him of being a spy. Put him as A, and spies as A, B, C. But then the teams wouldn't be "random" so it's irrelevant.

4) That's the reason why I'm confused as to why you so diligently think I'm a spy? If A is true, and B, and C, and D, and E, and F... THEN G must be true. There's too many possibilities, too much room for error. Which I HAVE taken into consideration before slinging accusations as I wasn't really slinging accusations about this. I was slinging accusations about your improper statistics. Your worse than squinty, because you claim to know what you're doing, and then not doing it properly. Squinty admitted he wasn't doing it properly.

5) Simply going by vote counts means nothing. There are other factors in play.

==xx==

The way I see it, Mown and razor are spies. My question is who is the last? The chances are low that Aaarrrgh would randomly pick two spies on mission one; but in all technicality all possible teams have the same chance, so it's not a big theory, but it's more plausible given the circumstances.

I shouldn't have spoilered my list. I would've made Zherog proud.

You're learning, kid. Keep trying, and somebody you can be a professional athlete wall-of-text builder like me!

you are correct, I did my calculation wrong. my reasoning was as follows:

assume Aaargh is town. in order to get a team with two spies, he has to pick one spy (3/9 chance), then another. (2/8). that amounts to 1/3*1/4, or 1/12, which is roughly 8%.

however, I forgot to include that those numbers don't account for the fact that Aaargh is picking from the subset of players that are not him, not from all players. the actual things that should be multiplied together are 3/8 and 2/7, which becomes 3/28, or as you demonstrated, about 11%.

it's still over 8 times more likely that there was only one spy on team 1 unless Aaargh was a spy, but you are correct that my quick calculation included a mathematical oversight. it does not, however, change the total premise, which is that if Aaargh is town we should definitely be assuming that there was only one scum on mission 1, because again, it's still true that vast majority of the time. the fact that my results were off by about 2.5% is true but doesn't change much of anything strategically.

but if you insist on using your numbers, can you show how a given individual on team 1 has a 15% chance of being a spy? given that at least one of us must be, that number should be at least 33%.

yeah, it's a guess. I think Mown's vote is best explained by him and Aaargh being spies. if that is the case, then it follows that either you or Zherog must be spies. I currently think it's more likely Zherog because Mown nominated him, and my theory has so little traction outside of me that I don't think it's in Mown's interest to propose an all-town team just to mind-game me. but then you're acting a lot like Aaargh did, until he suddenly realized he was incriminating himself and pulled a 180.

weren't you the one arguing that words didn't matter, only actions did? because vote counts are actions, so I'm not really seeing the argument that I should ignore them.

1) You get a "wag of the finger" razorborne. I still dont' trust you, but this explanation is sound.

2) The thing is, I'm not incriminating myself, so i have no reason to 180. Plus, (the usual) I know my alignment blah blah blah.

3) Votes are just words to me. Certainly saying you'll vote one way and voting a different way is an exception to this. But if you look at the vote counts as strictly a numbers / statistical grouping, you are missing out. You need to look into why people voted, and what was going on at the time, and who contradicted themselves.

Once again, I am NOT saying ignore everything people say; I am saying don't take everything at face value. There is a BIG difference between the two.

As for your how did I come up with the numbers?
Here is my "updated" possible spy combinations chart (hey it looks familiar ). Each player has a letter assigned to them. I removed ALL combinations that don't have someone from mission one, and I have removed every combination that includes me. There are 46 combinations remaining.
Go to bottom...


As you can see, in alphabetical order, the following numbers show up X times:
A = 15 out of 46 teams
B = 15 out of 46 teams
C = 21 out of 46 teams
D = 15 out of 46 teams
E = 15 out of 46 teams
F = 21 out of 46 teams
G = 0 out of 46 teams
H = 15 out of 46 teams
I = 21 out of 46 teams

Now using just these numbers 15 / 46 and 21 / 46 yields 32.xx and 45.xx respectively (which is incorrect.) What I did was added up all the numbers before the "out of" (totalling 138). 15/138 and 21/138 yields 10.xx and 15.xx (which is still incorrect but sends the ratio correctly as now all percentages add up to 100).

I'm not going to claim I know everything about percentages and as such I don't quite know how to exactly handle the overlap here; I'm slowly figuring out where to go from here. I know when I see incorrect numbers, and I point it out.

Either way, I'm still correct in saying that inviting a person from mission one team is statistically more dangerous than not doing so.
My opinion, that two or more spies went on mission one narrows down this list considerably which is why I'm asking that we have a 100% different team than last time. That is the point I'm arguing.

As a note to another thing I mentioned a while back, while I'm on numbers.
Sure, we KNOW that at least one of those three is a spy. This means we have the following scenarios (again involving A, B, and C,)


In a vaccuum they all have a flat percentage of possibility. But when you add logic to it, we know that ABC has less of a chance than the individuals, which have (slightly) more chance than the doubles. Then figuring in what individual players would gain the most, benefit the least etc. It's a mess, which is the reason I don't look at individuals anymore. My numbers certainly look less accurate, but technically they are more accurate (statistically) because it doesn't involve bias. but that's increasingly difficult math mumbo jumbo etc.

However, when you ignore the possibility that there could be more than one spy on mission one, you are ignoring more than half of the possible outcomes which I do not agree with. I know this is a long-dead horse I'm kicking, bu that is why I brought statistics up in the first place IIRC.

I hate these kind of days. I am tired. Since the mafia game hasn't moved I am posting to this one first.

@Altimis: Great wall of text.




No, you are not the only one. I tried to go through the team votes and kept getting into Wine in front of me moments. Did blah vote no for mission8.0.2 because he thought everyone else would pass it? Did he vote no because there are no spies on it? Did he vote no because he wasn't on it and is resistance? Did he vote no because there are two spies on it? Trying to figure out someone's motives without knowing whether or not they are town is tough. I think I am going to stick with mafia, and if I play resistance again it will be a small group game.

So far the only one to explain how they are looking at vote count is bentz. I'm liking his last few posts as they are a little helpful to me. I still have to look at the last vote count to see if it adds or takes away patterns, but not tonight.


We have until about 9PM EST tomorrow to get our team vote in correct?


Preview edit: Altimis is the Zherog of resistance apparently.

you play mafia, so I'm sure you know what OMGUS means. and it's hella what you're doing.

if votes are words, then what isn't words to you?

a) that's not how its works. since there are multiple spies, you're going to have overlapping percentages. if you add all of them together, you should get 300%, not 100%. so the 32% and 45% statistics are correct.

only if you view each selection in a vacuum, though. first, again, let's remove the ones where Aaargh is scum, as they're not relevant here. I'm going to do this in real time, I do not know what the results will be before I finish.

that leaves us with 25 possibilities. of them, a random person off the team is in 9 and mown and I are 15. which is 36% and 60%, respectively. which is larger than I was expecting, but hey, we are where we are.

so obviously, it makes sense to put someone from off the team first. (I'm going to assume here that you're not on the team.) let's make that person A. so if A is a spy, we've already sunk the mission, so the rest of our choices don't matter. so we remove the teams with A on them. we're down to 16 teams, 7 for the people off team 1 and 10 for the people on it. that's 44% and 63%. notice how on-the-team people's chances changed much less.

anyway, now, we add a second off-the-team person. let's say B. same reasoning, assume B is town. we're down to 9 possible teams, 5 for off-mission and 6 for on, or 56% and 67%.

add person D. same reasoning. that leaves us with 4 possible teams. off team are on 2 and on are on 3. that's 50% and 75%.

so it looks like you're right. assuming Aaargh is town, a better team is one with no one from mission 1 on it. but that's slightly paradoxical, because assuming Aaargh is town, the best team has Aaargh on it. so that's what it comes down to. either Aaargh is probably town, in which case he should be on the team, or Aaargh is probably not town, in which case, all this statistical meandering accomplished nothing.

I'm not ignoring it. like Mown pointed out, my leading theory right now is that that's exactly what happened. I just don't think it's very likely to have happened by accident, which means that in statistical analysis it's a fair thing to not consider heavily. and as I pointed out above, you can't assume that your statistics are meaningful without assuming that Aaargh is town, at which point you should be putting Aaargh, a person on mission 1, on your team anyway.

The thing is that I took you-razorborne and roaring mouse with me because your name starts with 'R' as does resistance.
Squinty name starts with 'S' like Scum and spy - so I don't know about him.
How about seTiny?

But seriously, I wanted and still want to keep '?' as unknown so spies will still not know if I'm taking 0 or 1 spy/1 or 2 spies.

Hence, I rather we do the process mentioned of selecting the 4th after and if roaring mouse proposal drops.

that's understandable, but realize that that makes it harder for people to know what exactly you'll be doing so it makes it harder for town to choose too.

however, if you promise to stick by that system, then I think I'm gonna take my chances on bentz's team. sorry, mouse, nothing personal.

No, Alt's math is correct. The "15s" are worth 10.86; the 21s are worth 15.21. (10.86 x 5) + (15.21 x 3) = 100. (OK, actually 99.93 due to rounding.)

Well,

I guess it's not a true game unless I post under the wrong account...