03-01-2022, 03:19:21 AM
Alright, great, thank you, Tom. Anyway, Mila, you totally missed the point of my math. That wasn't the entire numbers argument. My argument for why it is PROBABLY Spamton is a statistics one. There are more scenarios where Spamton is the killer than there are where anyone else is.
Spamton does the murder thinking on one level. "Frame someone". Easy enough, and it's been done before. Spamton does the murder thinking on three levels "Frame someone for framing me for framing someone". This relies on people assuming it's actually a coverup or just assuming Crepe isn't bothering at all with framing, and both are pretty common levels to try to go through.
Most people stop at one to four levels. Almost no one stops at zero levels, and levels get increasingly unlikely as you go up from there. One is more likely than two which is more likely than three which is more likely than four.
So that gives Crepe Cookie the following options. Stop at two "frame someone for framing me" in which case, she did a poor job, she didn't even pick a specific target. Or she thought on four levels, and "framed someone for framing me for framing someone for framing me." At that level of deception, you're relying on everyone else thinking on three levels of deception, which someone using that level of deception would know most people won't without a lot of prompting.
Statistically, it's more likely and more reasonable to assume this is Spamton making good decisions about who to go for than Strawberry Crepe making extremely bad decisions about who to frame. And if you're going to bring up an "it isn't spamton or the cookie" argument, please, come up with an actual piece of evidence that could be interpreted to point to "neither".
Anyway, the point is, that statistics argument plus the numbers argument plus a second statistics argument of "6-1 favors us so much that we could execute randomly and have at least a 50% chance of winning." is the numbers argument, and you're focusing on one part of it.
Spamton does the murder thinking on one level. "Frame someone". Easy enough, and it's been done before. Spamton does the murder thinking on three levels "Frame someone for framing me for framing someone". This relies on people assuming it's actually a coverup or just assuming Crepe isn't bothering at all with framing, and both are pretty common levels to try to go through.
Most people stop at one to four levels. Almost no one stops at zero levels, and levels get increasingly unlikely as you go up from there. One is more likely than two which is more likely than three which is more likely than four.
So that gives Crepe Cookie the following options. Stop at two "frame someone for framing me" in which case, she did a poor job, she didn't even pick a specific target. Or she thought on four levels, and "framed someone for framing me for framing someone for framing me." At that level of deception, you're relying on everyone else thinking on three levels of deception, which someone using that level of deception would know most people won't without a lot of prompting.
Statistically, it's more likely and more reasonable to assume this is Spamton making good decisions about who to go for than Strawberry Crepe making extremely bad decisions about who to frame. And if you're going to bring up an "it isn't spamton or the cookie" argument, please, come up with an actual piece of evidence that could be interpreted to point to "neither".
Anyway, the point is, that statistics argument plus the numbers argument plus a second statistics argument of "6-1 favors us so much that we could execute randomly and have at least a 50% chance of winning." is the numbers argument, and you're focusing on one part of it.
I am the They who says it!