I nominate Lift

However I don't expect my government to pass. Let's get back to GameRager and hopefully the 5th liberal policy.

LLF.

With 2 Ls I say there is a decent chance no Ls were hidden by the previous 3 governments.

Do you nominate lift because you want your government to be skipped?

@Joe. Deck gets reshuffled anyway now.

And it's not that I don't trust you, but at 3-0 going into 4-0 the time of testing is over. Now it's the time to pass Liberal policies. I trust you as per my long previous post, but on the off-off-chance you're trying to Lift me I'd rather secure the 4th policy and hope GRW win it for us.

I think it doesn't - Don't we have 1L and 4Fs left in the pack, by report?

2 times 7.... carry 5.... hmmm.. By golly! you're right. 5 cards left! Sorry, maths was never really my strong suit.

I'm nominating Lift because I don't want to pick from any of the existing government pairs, and scene will be the next candidate. Lift was the first to come to mind after that thought process, although Micro probably would have been fine too.

We need to cycle back to Rager without letting any new fascists playing any fascist policies. I urge the liberals to vote against any new governments. Although I do expect Ragers government to pass fascist policy because the odds of 4 liberals in play are very low.

This is good and bad. We have 4 Liberal policies on the table. The problem is it doesn't definitely confirm Joe as Liberal or yourself. I usually force Liberal whether Liberal or Fascist in order for the other player to look like they were forced so they don't look as Liberal.

I'm pretty sure you aren't 2 fascists because 2 fascists can double drop. Even Hitler would drop a single liberal policy and hope he is playing with a fellow fascist

GRW? Is that supposed to say GR? Or does it mean something I am not aware of?
=======================================================

You mean skip/not elect/etc this govt and the next and then go back to me? Just trying to make sure I got this all correct.

Also as per passing fascist policy & if the above is correct, then it'd be likely I would get stuck with 3 F cards and have little choice in the matter....though we might get lucky and I would get that one L card. :)

our resident statistician could tell you the chances of drawing 1 out of 5 in three consecutive draws, but his powers of number seem to have deserted him. (Perhaps he committed a blasphemy against algebra?)

But from where I'm standing it looks like you've got a pretty good chance of drawing the L.

No. If everyones been truthful about the deck there's a 90% chance you get one liberal policy in the next hand.

It must be 60%. Here's my logic:

It can be put as - "what's the chances the L isn't in position 4 or 5?"

Seeing as it has an equal chance of ending up in any position, then it has 1 in 5 chance of being in seat 4, and 1 in 5 chance of being in seat five.

Adding those chances together I'm saying that's a 2 in 5 chance it's in position 4 or 5.

So there's a 3 in 5 chance that it isn't. = 60%.

It doesn't work like that. You have 17 cards and 6 of them are Liberal policy cards. It's the chance of 2 Liberal policies being in the back of the pack

So it's (6/17) * (6/17) = 12.3%

So the chance of the last 2 blues not being in the back of the pack = 88%

@ZFR correct me if I'm wrong

We did have 17 cards, but now we have 7. A lot of the possibilities that contributed to your 88% have been eliminated.