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).
I will be amazed if this succeeds. Happy, but amazed.
Actually, considering it was approved without me, I know for a fact it will fail. At a minimum one sleeper agent voted in favor of the mission, which they would have only done if the mission could be failed with the people on it. I suspect it's more like two or three sleeper agents who voted for it. That means one or two good guys need to step up their game if we want to win.
retep998's rejection is surprising. Perhaps he is innocent, and merely really bad the game (still). That would make darth_vader the likely third suspect.
Next mission, let's have Eugene Chin, mrxak, retep998, and Shlimazel.
Disclosure: This
@mrxak, on 04 September 2012 - 02:15 PM, said in GTW 41:
was a ninja edit.
Fun fact: The Candy Queen wears a wig. She has a set of them, to match her wardrobe.
MISSION RESULTS SUCCEED: 2 FAIL: 1
Infrastructural: Power Generation (Military Facilities) (Capital) ~ FAILURE!
It seems a traitor on the council misled the demolition team; not only did they get nowhere near the power generation stations, once they had finished their work on what they thought were the power stations, they were captured.
So far, there have been 2 successful missions, and 1 failure.
**~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~** When the advisers returned, they spotted an unusual sight. The Vegetable King was sitting in his chair, watching something on the room's projector screen... and facepalming.
"Have a look at this," he said, tossing a Candyian newspaper at them. The headline read, PEACE AND FRIENDSHIP MONUMENT DESTROYED. The subheading, PRELUDE TO WAR? The article explained that last night, an unknown group had detonated an enzyme device on the Peace and Friendship Monument at the Candy/Vegetable border. The newspaper continued to ask who had done such a thing— and the primary suggestion was Vegetable-sponsored terrorist groups.
"In addition," the King said, "they took advantage to launch a blow at our LCB production. A saboteur was able to place a caramel-foam device in a number of the bomb casings. The bombs are ready to go, but the construction teams say they'll need one more day to clean up the mess. We'll have to keep them busy properly, this time."
The King clicked his remote. "As if that's not bad enough news, we now know the fate of the strike teams." He used his remote, and a video— starring the Candy Queen— appeared on the screen.
"A computerized gait analysis has confirmed the two backup dancers to be the two newly captured team leaders. We can only conclude the rest of the forces have been converted into technical staff or palace retinue."
When everyone was done watching, the Vegetable King spoke once again. "We must be careful with our proposals from now on. Three of you are traitors. At least one was on the past mission. Hereafter, think before you speak. Think before you vote.
JacaByte, you are next to propose a set of names. Think before you choose. Good luck."
**~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~**
Target #4 Morale Attack: Propaganda
After the abject failure of the previous mission, the VIS has come up with an alternate approach. A series of propaganda videos will be commissioned, and an agent will be sent to the Candy Kingdom to insert them on major TV networks. Of course, the videos will have to be tailored to the tastes, and current mood, of people of the Candy Kingdom— or the videos could backfire in a very embarassing fashion.
JacaByte , it is your turn to make a proposal. This proposal should have four names, and everyone will need to APPROVE or REJECT it. Note that once a proposal is approved, two FAIL votes will be needed for this round's mission to fail. Including yours, there is enough time for 5 proposals.
Well shoot, now we're in trouble.
So, the next proposal. Well. I obviously want myself on this mission. The people I trust the least so far are Techerakh and mrxak, so I will avoid them. That leaves me with Eugene Chin, who has been on 2 successful missions, Shlimazel, who has also been on 2 successful missions, and retep998 and darth_vader, both of which have not been on any missions.
We should probably stick with Shlimazel and Eugene, in the event that the fourth mission does fail we want to be able to narrow down who the traitors are. Given darth_vader's absence and voting history (his approval vote launched the second and third missions) that leaves me with retep998.
First proposal, fourth mission; Eugene Chin JacaByte retep998 Shlimazel
This post has been edited by JacaByte : 04 September 2012 - 09:50 PM
Oh yes, by all means, try to ram through a mission without any discussion. A real advisor would have wanted to actually discuss things first. I'll take this as evidence that retep998 is a bad guy after all, and you are confessing to being one too. At least you have finally given up all pretense. At the very least, you are using retep998's idiotic strategy just as I did last game to ram through a fourth mission with two fail votes on it.
Would you like to do some discussing? There hasn't been a whole lot of discussing in this thread, I figured I wouldn't make everybody wait until tomorrow to vote on their next proposal.
You might also want to take up your implication that Techerakh is a traitor up with him, he might not like that.
Edit: You kind of cornered me, you know, because if I had chosen darth_vader over retep998 you probably would have chided me for my poor selection and then come to the conclusion that I'm a traitor who's trying to protect retep998. If I had used your mission line up that you pulled up earlier you would have taken that as a declaration of my guilt. (As it is, but no sane person is going to leave themselves out of a proposal.) Again with your McCarthyism, it's not fun to play with you when you stubbornly dog us for being "traitors" every time you draw a breath.
This post has been edited by JacaByte : 04 September 2012 - 10:11 PM
retep998's rejection is surprising. Perhaps he is innocent, and merely really bad the game (still).
My rejection is surprising? Really? When I clearly state that I will absolutely reject anything without me, you still think I'd approve this? Mrxak, you're really disappointing me.
Anyway, considering we just got a failed mission, I'm going to start off by rejecting Jaca's proposal and getting some more proposals/votes/discussion in. The only thing we know for certain is that at least one of Tech, Shlim, or Eugene is a traitor. This means there's probably two traitors out of the four who weren't on the mission. So, in the mean time I'll be doing some statistics to find out what the percentages of us getting a successful mission four are.
@jacabyte, on 04 September 2012 - 09:49 PM, said in GTW 41:
You're jumping the gun so hard you're crediting me with stuff I didn't actually do. It's not leaving a good impression on what sort of judgement is going into this proposal.
I've been on one successful mission, Mission #2.
mrxak and Shlimazel have both been on two successful missions.
(EDIT) Mission results come in at 10:26, and you have a proposal out at 10:50? It's canned. I'd bet money that there's two traitors on that proposal.
Reject.
This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 04 September 2012 - 10:28 PM
I feel best about mrxak and least good about Jaca. Reject this proposal. If I had to guess, I'm say Shlim failed that mission.
Quote
(quoting manually to ninja-edit proof this post to avoid looking like an idiot if mrxak changes it)
....his mission is identical to yours, except for putting himself on the mission instead of you. To do anything else would be the suspicious act. I know I would never trust someone willing to put someone other than themselves in their place on a mission. I don't see where he's tried to ram anything through, either, he's laid out his choices and his reasons for voting that way. You yourself wanted retep on the last team, so what exactly did you mean for us to take from that third sentence? On the whole, unless I'm missing something, this post seems to have abandoned all reason and gone flying with the pigs.
The only obvious motivation I can see for this post is the fact that you are not on it. I'm disbelieving you would say that retep's strategy of voting out anything that does not have himself on it is idiotic and then proceed to vote out anything that does not have you on it, because if any action is hypocritical, that definitely is (your reason for voting out the last mission, regardless of the fact that in hindsight it was a wiser choice, fell into this category, and I assume you intend to vote out this proposal as well).
In conclusion, I more or less believed you were innocent before you made that post, mrxak, but that post made you far more suspicious in my eyes. I was uncertain about voting for this proposal due to mrxak's absence, but now I will be Accepting this proposal because of it.
@techerakh, on 04 September 2012 - 10:29 PM, said in GTW 41:
Yeah, you said pretty much the same thing here, and then spent the rest of that round slamming on him. Why did you pull mrxak off the roster for your proposal then?
(EDIT)
@shlimazel, on 04 September 2012 - 10:51 PM, said in GTW 41:
This is an extremely bad idea - JacaByte's proposal was clearly prepared in advance, in expectation of Mission #3's failure.
It's either that, or he put all of twenty-four minutes into thinking about it.
(EDITx2) There are three traitors and four innocent's. If even one innocent get's suckered by a proposal that favor's the traitors, they can ram it through as a monolith.
This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 04 September 2012 - 11:03 PM
Oof. Could have sworn Eugene was on the first mission. But I can assure you, I did put 24 minutes of thought into my proposal because I was certain it would get rejected. We should know better than to approve first proposal for missions by now. It wasn't canned. But while you're on my case for being negligent with my proposals and/or canning proposals, why doesn't this make mrxak suspicious for putting forward his own name sheet before the results from the third mission were in? He correctly guessed that the mission would fail, I never did.
This is why I hate it when people ninja me-four people posted before I was done writing my post.
I agree that the speed of Jacabyte's post-which I didn't notice when I accepted it-does make for a poorly thought through proposal. Perhaps it would be best to consider a different one for mission 4. Is it possible to change a vote once it's made?
Just re-PM SIB.
Vote changes will be gladly accepted, but both the original vote and the change will be listed in the results.
Also: Six people have voted.
This post has been edited by SoItBegins : 04 September 2012 - 11:33 PM
I've changed my vote to Refuse.
@soitbegins, on 04 September 2012 - 11:32 PM, said in GTW 41:
Six already? It usually takes a day or more to get five.
@jacabyte, on 04 September 2012 - 10:08 PM, said in GTW 41:
You expect me not to corner somebody I believe is obviously behaving in a malicious way? You've already proven your guilt, why should I give you even an inch? I said two rounds ago, I would reject any proposal that you made because of your behavior. Well, here we are, and here I am rejecting.
@retep998, on 04 September 2012 - 10:10 PM, said in GTW 41:
My rejection is surprising? Really? When I clearly state that I will absolutely reject anything without me, you still think I'd approve this? mrxak, you're really disappointing me.
You're right, I overestimated you. My apologizes, I will try not to do it again.
I'm glad to hear you're going to come up with more pointless and unhelpful statistics though. That will sure entertain us a little while.
@eugene-chin, on 04 September 2012 - 10:25 PM, said in GTW 41:
Yep.
You don't see where he's ramming it through? He's doing exactly what I did in round four last game, right down to including retep998 who always votes so predictably, but without the pretense of reviewing the topic first. If it wasn't Techerakh, it's certainly you.
@jacabyte, on 04 September 2012 - 11:14 PM, said in GTW 41:
Ah, so what you're really saying here is that you were waiting eagerly for SoItBegins to post about the failure, refreshing the page constantly so you could immediately write out your proposal before anyone could start talking about it. Right. That makes you sound much more innocent.
@eugene-chin, on 04 September 2012 - 11:55 PM, said in GTW 41:
Well, this is pretty open and shut, is it not? There's no way this proposal is any good. Might as well reject it quick and move on to your proposal. When we get there, I do hope you exclude JacaByte, retep998, and Techerakh. It's okay if Shlimazel is the bad guy, it will take two votes to fail this one, and at least two of the bad guys will be excluded. At this point, darth_vader is looking rather unsuspicious by comparison to some of these others.
Shoulda held this game hostage for a while. That would have made everybody so much more happy.
@eugene-chin, on 04 September 2012 - 10:54 PM, said in GTW 41:
My feelings on mrxak have fluctuated (that's what happens when someone posts a lot—would you believe my feelings on darth are practically unchanged?). Seeing the results for round 3 I do feel better about him, though. Obviously I was going to pull SOMEONE off the round two team; it seems I picked the wrong guy though.
I would recommend keeping Jaca and Shlim off the next team.