The random machine has never picked a red for me, so I'm hesitant to do it these days.
its likely that it wont. Thats why i suggested we offer up quiet players. That way if we know they arent helping (by talking) then we can ensure they dont hurt us either. It's always been a pet-peeve of mine, the people that just sign up and dont lend anything to the game. I dont buy it as game strategy either because theres a difference between piping down at the right time, and being dead weight.
Rel voting for shad seems odd, he used to be the guy that never supported early day 1 bandwagons...
someone want to do a random.org list of quiet players and through a name out there? I'd do it but i've been out of the game for so long that i dont know the participants as well as i once did, nor do i want to hurt anyones feelings...
The first day phrase just started less than 2 hours ago and you want to start killing quiet players?
I was killed on Day 1 of the only other game I've played. I think you think it'd be funny to do it again. Even though you were the only player to die before me in that game.
It's Day 1 here, why wouldn't I vote for the only other person with a vote hanging on them? Especially if that person is particularly good at these things.
someone want to do a random.org list of quiet players and through a name out there? I'd do it but i've been out of the game for so long that i dont know the participants as well as i once did, nor do i want to hurt anyones feelings...
The first day phrase just started less than 2 hours ago and you want to start killing quiet players?
im guess i mean more historically quiet.. that's why i didnt want to do the list myself. i dont know who the coasters are these days...
and unless i see something telling, i'm ok will letting stronger/more talkative players through to later rounds. if for nothing else, then at least for entertainment purposes. its like killing the best actors and being left with extras.
Irrelevant. The likelihood of him being red in this game is the same as anyone else. That is a really unsound way to make a decision as the games exist in their own complete spheres of influence.
If I win the lottery on Monday I have the same chance as everyone else to win it on Tuesday.
rel always plays like this though. no reasoning for a Shad vote, I never can get a read on him.. He's a good player so I'm not on board with a rel vote until I'm pretty sure.
Irrelevant. The likelihood of him being red in this game is the same as anyone else. That is a really unsound way to make a decision as the games exist in their own complete spheres of influence.
If I win the lottery on Monday I have the same chance as everyone else to win it on Tuesday.
Irrelevant. The likelihood of him being red in this game is the same as anyone else. That is a really unsound way to make a decision as the games exist in their own complete spheres of influence.
If I win the lottery on Monday I have the same chance as everyone else to win it on Tuesday.
A = randomly chosen to be red in the last game
B = randomly chosen to be red in this game
P(A and B) = probability of both events happening
P(A and B) = P(A) * P(B)
Now let's work with the actual numbers:
P (A and B) = (3/15) * (3/18) = 3.3%
Exactly as the chances of getting two heads in a row in a coin toss are (1/2) * (1/2) = 1/4.
So you're either red or don't understand probability. Either way:
While your match is correct, it's only relevant if we were at the beginning of last game thinking, "what are the odds rel is red this game and the next one?" since that game is over, it's moot.
Sure, flipping heads twice in a row is a 25 percent chance, but once you do it the first time, it's 50 percent you're gonna do it again. Wait, am I really explaining this?