i guess i'm doing a bad job of explaining it, so i'll try harder, using your pretty logic symbols no less.
Town!Llama
is a result in which it is revealed that Llama is town aligned. This can be the result of him dying, or possibly power-role related whatnot, or maybe even a really really convincing argument. anything that lets us know he's town aligned. the same symbol will be used to scum aligned and for other people.
a scum aligned Llama would imply that Tripod is not scum aligned, because Tripod L-1'd Llama on page 2. scum can't communicate during the day (Right, Mod?) and because they couldn't have known where the random votes would fall, it couldn't have been planned. Without planning it, it is unlikely that scum would L-1 scum. or to put it in logical symbolism:
1)
(A) Scum!Llama
-->
(D) Town!Tripod
--> is 'implies'. A --> D means 'if A is true, then D is true'. We aren't using it in its true meaning right now, because its sort of a math thing and we don't have mathematical accuracy here. i'm using it to mean '... then D very well probably is true.'
Implication statements don't say anything extra about the situation. This statement is only meaningful if the antecedent A is true. it becomes meaningless if A is not true, or if the consequent D becomes known. so keep that in mind.
Llama flipping scum would be doubly good for us, because we'd have killed a scum, and provided a very convincing argument for Town!Tripod, and then we could ignore and minimize his anti-town behavior, and everything would be happy. we'd deal with a scum and an anti-town in one go, it'd be amazing.
now then, there are other conditionals my previous posts talk about.
2)
(B) Town!Llama
-->
(C) Scum!Tripod
This one is even less definite. i wish i had other symbols to represent degrees of certainty. However, llama flipping town would mean that Tripod really did L-1 and ask to hammer a known townie on page 2. That might very well tip the scales from Anti-town to you-dirty-scum. it would be a stronger argument than anything we have right now, but there might exist other strong arguments by the time we get this one, so we'll just have to deal with it again when it comes up tomorrow.
Ya know, i'm going to use length of implication arrow to represent degree of certainty. a longer arrow is more likely than a shorter arrow.
----> i'll eat my keyboard if this isn't true
---> very probably true
--> probably true
-> mebbe...
so those are:
1)
(A) Scum!Llama
--->
(D) Town!Tripod
2)
(B) Town!Llama
-->
(C) Scum!Tripod
could either of these fuck up? sure. it is remotely possible that tripod L-1'd his scumbuddy on page 2, but yeah it seems pretty damn unlikely. its only a degree of certainty after all.
Now we will explore lynching Tripod first, which is not something i recommend.
3)
(C) Scum!Tripod
--->
(B) Town!Llama
for the exact same reasons as used in conditional 1. Because one L-1'd the other, they very probably aren't both scum.
4)
(D) Town!Tripod
->
(A) Scum!Llama
yeah i dunno about this one. If this happened all we'd know is that a townie known for bullshit behavior L-1'd someone of unknown alignment on page 2. it IS a confirmed townie'd suspicions of another player, so weight can be placed on it, but not too much. i probably wouldn't lynch Llama from this evidence alone.
And so because the net results of a Llamalynch, regardless of result, are better for town than a tripod lynch, i prefer lynching Llama over Tripod at this time. Derangement, you like your logic symbols, so please indicate which bit in there you don't like and we can hash it out. They seem pretty good as far as i can think. Keep in mind that these are conditionals and only mean exactly what they say. they don't work backwards or anything like that.
![:]](./images/smilies/icon_smiling.png "Cheerful Smile"){kind=icon}
