Nope, that's not even close. I know I can explain this. Say scum bus their partners roughly 1/4 of the time on D1. I think this is high, but I'm making a point. So one out of every four times the scumbag will bus, 3 out of every 4 times they will not.farside wrote:@SC: Clearly I'm getting the impression you have never seen a scum buss another scum day 1.
That means that purely statistically, the liklihood of someone pressing hard for a scum lynch D1 is 75%. This does not clear them (and will never clear them totally) but IT DOES MAKE IT SIGNIFICANTLY MORE LIKELY that this person is town.
Now in real life, you can look at other motivations - scum are less likely to bus early, and to push hard against their partner. They are more likely to jump on the wagon when it looks inevitable that that person will be lynched. So you can factor in those variables.
But the key point here is that although there is WIFOM, there is a conclusion you can draw as to what is more likely. It is clearly possible that your conclusion will be false, but it is also clearly more likely that the conclusion is correct, and in a game of limited information this is crucial. Saying it's 50/50 because scum could bus or not bus is naive and incorrect, in my opinion.
@elvis - don't lose sight of the goal. I get into these positions more than most, I have a slightly odd playstyle that often means I have little political capital. But remember that you have the ultimate tool - you can be confirmed upon death. When your targets start flipping scum and you flip town the town can check out what you said and you'll have done your part to win the game.
@farside - if buttonman gets credit for trying to break the game in the town's favour, why don't I?
@ buttonman thank you for answering. we as a group do indeed need to have the right to ask questions, and often explaining their motivation fully may cancel out the reason for asking them. If I said 'why do you support a lynch of person A' and when asked why replied 'because you never supported a lynch of person A and I want to try and trip you up' the question isn't going to work.
As it was, this is a question designed to get you and the group thinking about who is voting to imprint you and why. If you think there are likely to be no scum on your imprint list, as well as you not being scum yourself, you suddenly have 6 people of which 4 are scum. It's possible, but unlikely.
Also, DeathNote is imprinting all of you. This is surely somewhat suspicious given apparantly everyone now seems in the mood to lynch him. Why did you think 0 scum on your imprint list was an option when your biggest suspect was on there? Are you reasonably happy thinking that if he's scum the other 4 are town?
In all - Ohio (5) - Nevada, Florida, Arizona, Ohio, Colorado
Colorado (5) - Nevada, Ohio, Colorado, Iowa, Florida
Hawaii (5) - Nevada, Arizona, Kansas, Colorado, Hawaii
Deathnote, Starbuck, Limerick, Vala Del M, Messiah, XRECX farside and Buttonman are the unique individual members who are voting to imprint these three people.
Plum, Serial, elvis and Pug are not on this list.
I know for sure that there is scum on this list because I know my alignment, but surely most of you can see that with that many unique people there's almost certainly a heavy scum presence.
For me, I'll add to that that the four people off the wagon are perhaps the four people that I have the largest town read on.
Add to THAT the fact that the FIRST THREE PEOPLE on the DeathNote wagon are Plum, elvis and Pug. I would be on that list too were it not for the fact that I am voting Starbuck.
So of the people who found and started pushing the wagon that we all now think is scummy and have all jumped on, NONE of them are imprinting ANY of the 3 major imprint candidates.
There is definitely scum amongst those three, possibly 2/3 of them. I remain heavily not in favour of an imprint.
