Board Thread:Debate of The Week/@comment-28112409-20171101070508/@comment-32881402-20171108190424

Addfire wrote: ProfessorArceus wrote: Addfire wrote: Jallybwan wrote: I knew what you meant, but this debate isn't about me. You need to be very literal with what you say - always assume someone's going to take you at face value. It's the best way to avoid misinterpretation.

Your "ToS vs Texas" analogy might fit, but the data is hardly parallel. There are a max of 15 players in a game of ToS, and... what, 323 million people in the USA? 1/15 is obviously going to be more likely than 1/323,000,000. I'm disregarding the population of Texas in general because you said an American, as in, one person. There's a 12% chance that if you meet an American, the American will be a Texan. There's a 16% chance that you'll find an NK night two. I think I need to improve my analogies. 16% is still very unlikely. It's closer to 1/5, which is unlikely. I won't point out my 1 fucking HUUUGGGEEEEE flaw which nobody has picked up on so far. /relief

Note that finding the NK doesn't mean much anyway, since the buff only comes in if they die AND find the NK on the same night, which isn't 16% on n2 at all. Debate's over.

What was the flaw, if you don't mind me asking? I don't want the judges using it against me. Once they read it, they'll read what I said and might claim the flaw as their own. I don't want to nullify flaws in my arguments by pointing them out and claiming that they wouldn't have realised them, but I don't want to amplify the flaws by pointing them out and making judges look into greater detail.