It's GTW XXX

_11 countries possessed nukes, so 11 delegates arrived at a special meeting to save the world from going boom. Who and where the terrorists are, nobody knows, but it's certain two of the represented countries are supplying them with nuclear weaponry.

The delegates are all present in a large and uncomfortable bunker, safe from any nuclear attack.

"Greetings...", a man says, suddenly coming out of a dark corner of the conference room.
"My name is RJC Ultra, and since we all know the current military situation, I'll get straight to the point. There are two terrorists among us, and we really need to eradicate them before they can destroy our beautiful planet. It's your task to figure out who they are; if you can give me one name of a delegate each day, I'll take care of... the rest.
Of course the terrorists might try to get rid of us innocents one by one as well. Sounds simple, right? Are there any questions? I'll be back in the evening then. Good luck."
_

It'll be a simple game of GTW; rules are the same as last game, so a round lasts for 48 hours. Since I strongly believe eleven players is a bit too small for three terrorists, there are only two terrorists, an intelligence agent and an assassin among you. I'm sure you all understand it's the terrorists versus everybody else.

Once again, have fun killing each other.

Player list:

darth_vader
Eugene Chin
JacaByte
jrsh92
kickme
mrxak
orcaloverbri9
Rebelious
Templar98921
Shlimazel
SoItBegins

Round 1 ends at 6:00 PM UTC on Saturday.

Everybody should have received a PM by now. If not, please contact me.

This post has been edited by RJC Ultra : 28 August 2008 - 11:52 AM

Since random voting is counterproductive and doing nothing gets us nowhere, I'll start this out by

Spoiler

abstaining

but hopefully drawing people's attention to the topic
Let the random voting commence.

This post has been edited by jrsh92 : 29 August 2008 - 06:44 AM

Spoiler

SoItBegins

because he's been evil three rounds in a row. I'm sure RJC wouldn't want to break that pattern.

(No, this isn't serious.)

This post has been edited by orcaloverbri9 : 29 August 2008 - 06:55 PM

Spoiler

jrsh92

, because if you abstain, you're either helping the terrorists or are one yourself!

This post has been edited by JacaByte : 30 August 2008 - 08:54 PM

Doesn't not even showing up also help the terrorists by your logic, Jaca? Why not vote for one of the many who we haven't heard from?

Yeah,

Spoiler

Jacabyte

, why vote for me? (disclaimer: as is almost certainly the case with everyone else, most of my first round votes are made in jest or more or less randomly)

This post has been edited by jrsh92 : 29 August 2008 - 06:44 AM

Templar98921(retracted)

^feelin' angsty.

(Not really, just bored).

This post has been edited by Templar98921 : 31 August 2008 - 04:50 AM

Spoiler

SoItBegins

. We cannot assume he is innocent based on past games.

mrxak. We cannot assume I am guilty based on past games, either.

A classic revenge vote with no reason at all, whereas I'm voting for you to make a statement about assumptions.

mrxak: There is no reason to vote for me. I'm not making my vote out of revenge; I'm making it as a counter-measure, nothing more. I have no quarrel with you personally.

Retract your vote and I will gladly retract mine.

EDIT: extended argument

This post has been edited by SoItBegins : 29 August 2008 - 02:34 AM

Spoiler

mrxak

for being statistically most likely to be terrorist, and being a bit obnoxious.

This post has been edited by jrsh92 : 30 August 2008 - 10:14 PM

SoItBegins : You seem to be rather aggressive, like you were when you were last a terrorist... and that was when you were going after me.

I'm sorely tempted to go after SoItBegins out of self-preservation; in both of the past two games, I was nightkilled in the first round. While I know Mackilroy is now thinking along the same lines when he's evil (I still have that email from Game 25), Mackilroy isn't here this game, and didn't just have a three-consecutive evil streak.

SoItBegins: (3)
orcaloverbri9
mrxak
Rebelious

mrxak: (2)
SoItBegins
jrsh92

jrsh92: (1)
JacaByte

Templar98921: (1)
Templar98921

No Vote: (4)
darth_vader
Eugene Chin
kickme
Shlimazel

Round 1 will end one hour earlier, at 5:00 PM UTC. That means you've got 23 hours left to vote or PM me.

Y'know what? Screw it. I've got no reason to sit on the fence about this.

Say what you will about letting past games influence me, my assumptions were right last game. If SIB is a traitor and survives the first round, I have every reason to believe my chances of survival drop to nil.

And if it turns out that SIB isn't evil this time, then maybe he should come up with a better evil strategy than picking on me all the time.

Spoiler

SoItBegins

This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 30 August 2008 - 06:15 PM

I honestly suspect mrxak at the moment. It would be just too much like a terrorist to pick on somebody who had been evil for three consecutive games. Yet at the same time, that would be just like something a terrorist wouldn't do, if you catch my drift...

Hmm, I'm in a bit of a precarious situation now, aren't I? I'll retract my earlier vote for now, since it doesn't affect the score and I have no interest in being responsible for anybody dying or not dying when they should or shouldn't have, at least with the little information I have.

Eugene: Your argument displays signs of you being in a bad temper while writing. Furthermore, your reason for voting me out is based in small-minded fear-based self-preservation, and based on conjectures that aren't even valid.

mrxak said:

A classic revenge vote with no reason at all, whereas I'm voting for you to make a statement about assumptions.

mrxak: The purpose of GTW is not to make statements; the purpose is to help the innocents (that's me, and you) win.

Rebelious said:

You seem to be rather aggressive, like you were when you were last a terrorist... and that was when you were going after me.

Rebelious: I have recently been studying old GTW games in an attempt to improve my play style. As a side effect of this, I have started acting more aggressively across the board, and will most likely continue to do so.

@jrsh92, on Aug 29 2008, 07:44 AM, said in GTW Game 30:

mrxak for being statistically most likely to be terrorist, and being a bit obnoxious.

That makes as much sense as the people who think SoItBegins can't be evil because he's been evil the last couple games.

@soitbegins, on Aug 29 2008, 09:00 PM, said in GTW Game 30:

Eugene: Your argument displays signs of you being in a bad temper while writing. Furthermore, your reason for voting me out is based in small-minded fear-based self-preservation, and based on conjectures that aren't even valid.
mrxak: The purpose of GTW is not to make statements; the purpose is to help the innocents (that's me, and you) win.
Rebelious: I have recently been studying old GTW games in an attempt to improve my play style. As a side effect of this, I have started acting more aggressively across the board, and will most likely continue to do so.

Here's the situation I'm in now. I'm willing to retract my vote now that people have been convinced that you could be evil despite previous games. However, I don't know who I'd vote for instead, and if I retract my vote, we have a tie between the two of us. You said that you would retract your vote for me if I retracted mine, however my question to you is, would you be willing to do that even if it meant there would be more votes for you than me?