Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.
Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).
Manta (retracted) for persistently voting on a hunch, not reasons.
This post has been edited by jrsh92 : 10 May 2008 - 01:21 AM
@manta, on May 8 2008, 03:10 AM, said in xander's Global Thermonuclear War:
Hypochondriac because I believe in following my first hunch.
Your hunch is based on me being too "quick" to vote for you. Sounds more vindictive than anything else.
darth_vader , trying to explain the rules, with a quote, and still misreading them, strikes me as somewhat suspicious. It's not much to go on, but there you have it.
I've also found out that the internet company is going to have an unexpected delay in setting up the internet at my new house, so I may be out of touch until monday/tuesday of next week, possibly longer. I'll be moving today and tomorrow, but had hoped the transition would be a bit smoother. My apologies.
@templar98921, on May 8 2008, 02:51 AM, said in xander's Global Thermonuclear War:
<snip>
I noticed you didn't deny that you jumped on the bandwagon in the last round very late in the round. Thank you for conceding point and admitting your guilt.
Hypochondriac I'm with manta on this one, but for more reasons. Terrorists are more likely to not care whether they take the dangerous position of voting first, as Hypochondriac did. Hypochondriac has also been speaking defensively against manta. Note how EKHawkman didn't really do much in self-defense, but Hypochondriac, like DA last round is earnestly attempting to cast votes away from himself.
Besides, I don't have any other good reasons to vote for anyone else.
Current vote tally:
Hypochondriac - 2 (Manta, LNSU) prophile - 1 (Templar988921) Manta - 1 (jrsh92) darth_vader - 1 (GutlessWonder)
Quote
Hypochondriac - 2 (Manta, LNSU) prophile - 1 (Templar98921) Manta - 1 (jrsh92) darth_vader - 1 (GutlessWonder)
That's a bit inaccurate. To make it a corrected list, you have to include
Templar98921 - 1 (mrxak)
@lnsu, on May 8 2008, 01:16 PM, said in xander's Global Thermonuclear War:
Besides, I don't have any other good reasons to vote for anyone else. Current vote tally:
So can I assume in the future you will also vote for anyone who questions a vote against them?
@hypochondriac, on May 8 2008, 03:48 PM, said in xander's Global Thermonuclear War:
No. If someone gave me other, more reasonable reasons to vote for someone else here, then I would switch to who I believe is the most likely terrorist. Given the currently known data, there is no strong evidence of anyone being anything yet. The only other votes that have a half-decent (maybe less than half) explanation and reasons that are at least understandable, if not logical, are jrsh92's vote agains Manta for voting on a hunch, and mrxak's vote against templar for bandwagoning (which we already know from history that bandwagoning is not a very good indicator of terrorist activity)
@gutlesswonder, on May 8 2008, 09:00 AM, said in xander's Global Thermonuclear War:
...what? I didn't misread anything.
manta retracted in hopes of staying alive. Still a bunch of undecided so lets see what happens.
This post has been edited by Hypochondriac : 09 May 2008 - 01:30 PM
@gutlesswonder, on May 8 2008, 10:00 AM, said in xander's Global Thermonuclear War:
@darth_vader, on May 8 2008, 05:55 PM, said in xander's Global Thermonuclear War:
darth is right about this, Gutless.
What darth_vader did in his explanation was to eliminate kickme as a potential terrorist, because kickme was Night-Killed, not because he was the SecGen.
While he wasn't as clear on that point as he could have been, his reasoning isn't wrong.
@gutlesswonder, on May 8 2008, 08:00 AM, said in xander's Global Thermonuclear War:
I find this post in itself a bit suspicious. GutlessWonder (retracted) tried to convince us all that Darth Vader was a traitor by mis-interpreting DV's post. Since we know that DV didn't misinterpret anything, even if his post was a bit foggy, could this post have been an attempt by a traitor to divert attention from himself? I admit, it's a tiny amount of information to go on, but after rereading this entire topic, I think it's the best I can do at the moment.
This post has been edited by JacaByte : 09 May 2008 - 05:30 PM
@soitbegins, on May 8 2008, 12:47 PM, said in xander's Global Thermonuclear War:
I take LNSU's leaving my vote off as a direct sign that he is working with Templar98921, and trying to avoid any attention to my vote against his fellow traitor. LNSU and Templar98921 are now the two most likely suspects in my mind.
@lnsu, on May 8 2008, 03:09 PM, said in xander's Global Thermonuclear War:
You're also ignoring my other reasons for voting for Templar98921. I merely added that as an attempt to gain favor with those who think bandwagoning is a criminal offense. If I believe somebody is a traitor, I will use any means at my disposal of removing them, even if I say different things to different audiences.
LNSU, you seem to be voting in a very predictable pattern. First you add your vote to EKHawkman's lynching at the very end, when it is very safe to do so. Then you come back and vote for the person who received the second-most votes the round before. It's a classic strategy, voting for those you're most likely to get a consensus on, staying with the safest path. First you vote on the same side as Hypochondriac, then you turn on him when he is the most likely to die this round. This lends credence to the idea that you and Templar98921 are both evil, and working together. I don't recall if you've been guilty in past games or not, but I believe this would be your first game. Perhaps you are voting so conservatively because you're unsure of your position in this new evil role. It's certainly understandable, but I'm afraid that your timidity will be your undoing.
LNSU, as far as I know, hasn't been one of the bad guys before. Maybe he is now. Maybe not. I don't know. What I do know here is that something smells worse than my old socks. Let's see who's being targeted, and why:
Hypochondriac (2 votes): Not much of a reason. I think Manta was grudge-voting against me the first round (I've done it myself, so I know what it looks like), then decided not to go through with it and has been targeting Hypo to save face (and keep himself alive). Or, maybe he's targeting Hypochondriac because he stood up for me. I don't know.
darth_vader (1 vote): Supposedly, darth_vader misinterpreted the rules, even after quoting them. I wouldn't really give this much credence-- it's the kind of mistake anyone could make.
GutlessWonder (1 vote): GutlessWonder was a bit... quick on the draw to convict darth_vader on his misstep. According to JacaByte, this could make him a terrorist. It's not exactly the easiest reasoning to follow, but Jaca could be on to something. Or not.
prophile (1 vote): Templar98921 voted for prophile, saying 'I agree with jrsh92'. Unfortunately, the post he was referencing took place the last round, when jrsh92 voted against prophile, because he voted against me for no reason. If you ask me, prophile probably doesn't have anything to do with this at all.
Manta (2 votes): While I do suspect Manta was grudge-voting against me in Round 1 (and not 'setting a clever trap', as he claimed), that's no reason to lynch somebody. Quite honestly, I think he's more misguided than anything else, but it's unlikely he's a terrorist. And that means there's no reason to target him.
Finally, Templar98921 (2 votes): Templar98921 seems to be, from certain angles, a bit more suspicious than some of the others. By itself, it's not much, but the angles add up.
1. He voted against prophile on some wacko reason. I know Templar is a new player, but he's quite perceptive (I noticed this while I was hosting Game 22-- it's how Templar ended up with the Ghost role in the first place), and this might be a rather skewed way of avoiding attention.
2. Last round, he voted against EKHawkman for the flimsiest of reasons (his 'Eco Friendly' comment.) This was simply jumping on a bandwagon. This isn't really suspicious in itself, but considering the other evidence, it's starting to seem a little bit fishy. How To Avoid Unwanted Attention For Dummies? Maybe.
3. mrxak believes him to be suspicious. This would usually be not enough to bother targeting someone, BUT by mrxak's most recent reasoning, combined with Templar's past behavior (as well as with my gut instinct), I'm led to believe that Templar98921 is one of the Traitors.
And the Traitors should be eliminated.
I'm VERY suspicious of Jacabyte, though not yet enough to make that suspicion into a vote. He seems persistent in voting on the premise that anybody who wants to draw attention away from themselves must be a terrorist. This logic is completely absurd. Nobody here wants to die! Plus, if an innocent prevents themselves from dying they have made it possible that a terrorist dies instead that round, because if you're an innocent your death is not constructive. A good innocent will want to live.
I had rather hoped to finish the round this morning, but there are still four people who have not voted. I'll give you until I get back from the only exam I have today to vote. If you do not vote, the normal penalties shall apply. The round ends at 2:00 PM PDT on 9 May 2008 (9:00 PM GMT on 9 May 2008), or in about 6.5 hours.
Eugene Chin, darth_vader, Mackilroy, and prophile -- I don't have any votes from you.
xander
I'm going for darth_vader.
prophile, you do realize that Gutlesses reason for voting darth was fallacious, right? We've been over it enough times.
So, by my count Templar, Manta, Hypo and darth are all tied at two votes each, with fringe votes on prophile and Gutless.
I don't like the way this is shaping up, something isn't right.
(EDIT) Last round, we saw a slew of people getting single votes. This round, we're seeing a fewer number of people getting double votes, right up till the last six eighteen hours of the round...
... And I can't help thinking that it's some method for the terrorists to evade attention.
This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 09 May 2008 - 10:39 AM
@mrxak, on May 9 2008, 12:47 AM, said in xander's Global Thermonuclear War:
I take LNSU's leaving my vote off as a direct sign that he is working with Templar98921, and trying to avoid any attention to my vote against his fellow traitor. LNSU and Templar98921 are now the two most likely suspects in my mind. You're also ignoring my other reasons for voting for Templar98921. I merely added that as an attempt to gain favor with those who think bandwagoning is a criminal offense. If I believe somebody is a traitor, I will use any means at my disposal of removing them, even if I say different things to different audiences.
this is my second GTW game. Last game I was innocent. I have my reasons
As for me leaving your vote off the list, I missed it when counting votes. But seeing as I will be accused for miscounting votes, I will stop this service.
As I said before: I have my reasons for voting for hypochondriac, even if they don't make sense. Its just that I don't have much to go on for anybody at this point.
In hindsight, I should have gotten rid of hypochondriac last round when I could have.
I'm leaning towards Hypochondriac myself, partly because of inertia from Round 1, and partly because I took a look at my mid-Round 1 vote tally to see who the singleton-voters were, compared it to a list of players who were on the two-vote-tickets this round, and saw Hypochondriac as one of the names in both lists.
In keeping with a hypothesis I'm running on concerning the terrorists trying to avoid attention by not all piling on the same target: Hypochondriac
Vote Tally: (Arranged by order of vote) Hypochondriac: (3) Manta LNSU Eugene Chin
Templar98921: (2) mrxak SoItBegins
Manta: (2) jrsh92 Hypochondriac
darth_vader: (2) GutlessWonder prophile
prophile: (1) Templar98921
GutlessWonder: (1) JacaByte
This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 09 May 2008 - 11:07 AM