Why couldn't you, RJC, have voted for the other guy?

Edit: vote retraction confirmed.

This post has been edited by SoItBegins : 05 January 2008 - 09:41 PM

@soitbegins, on Jan 4 2008, 07:54 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:

Why couldn't you <snip> have voted for the other guy?

Y'know, something about this was bugging me.

Then I remembered that there's one Dictator on each side...
... And only Two Southerners.

Each side (North and South) can be examined as a separate GTW game.

Looking at the South, we have SoItBegins and 1Eevee1 as the only remaining players.

Manta was Night-Killed, so we know he's Innocent.
kickme was Lynched, but Mack revealed him as Innocent too.

So. There's still one Dictator on the South, and one Innocent.

And now, SoItBegins is saying "Why couldn't you have voted for the other guy"?

If SoItBegins Revoked had really been Innocent, and wanted the Dictators to get beaten, then why not out 1Eevee1 himself? He's had the time to do it, and it seems he's realized it too.

It's about time we made some headway on this.

This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 07 January 2008 - 11:37 PM

FYI:

1. I am innocent.

2. I calculated that if I voted against 1Eevee1 (who, yes, I now know to be a terrorist), he would vote against me; more importantly, you Northerners would have seen my voting against one of my teammates as suspicious, and voted against me as well. I try to keep myself alive, and so far (this game, anyway) I've been pretty good at it.

Don't worry, if you prove to be innocent after all, I'll vote 1Eevee1 as well.

AND I will apologize.

@soitbegins, on Jan 5 2008, 12:21 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:

<snip>, you Northerners would have seen my voting against one of my teammates as suspicious, and voted against me as well.

Y'know who else said this kind of thing?

The Dictators in Game VI.

@rjc-ultra, on Jan 5 2008, 05:33 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:

Don't worry, if you prove to be innocent after all, I'll vote 1Eevee1 as well.

AND I will apologize.

If he somehow proves to be Innocent, then the game is over. There's Two Dictators left, and only Five Players fully alive. If SoItBegins isn't a Dictator, then there'll be only One Innocent Player to Two Dictators next round.

This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 05 January 2008 - 12:43 PM

Well, if nothing else, it looks like this'll make my non-survival streak three games!

1Eevee1 , I just have a feeling. About Eugene Chin too.

I'm probably wrong.

Sorry to disappoint you, gentlemen, but I am not a dictator.

Countervote foooor...

... SoItBegins. Get out of (our/my) direction, terrorist.

Changing my vote to 1Eevee1 , because (1) yes, he is a terrorist, no matter what he says, and (2) it might just keep me alive...

This post has been edited by SoItBegins : 05 January 2008 - 09:40 PM

I'm too prettyful to be a terrorist, SoItBegins(HisReignOfTerrorism).

'...and he shall reign forever and e - - ver. HALLELEUJAH! HALLELEUJAH! HALLELEUJAH!'

(To 1Eevee1: I'm not talking about you, o terrorist.)

"Until the Russians come a marching iiiiiin."

(To be honest, what if both of us aren't the terrorists?)

@1eevee1, on Jan 6 2008, 09:14 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:

"Until the Russians come a marching iiiiiin."

(To be honest, what if both of us aren't the terrorists?)

@mackilroy, on Dec 21 2007, 02:02 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:

This time around it's the North vs. the South - a sort of resurgent US civil war, if you will. Only this time, we have nuclear weapons, and there are traitors on both sides. These people want to destroy everyone, and they don't care what the cost is.

There's Traitors on both sides.

An Eight player game is too small for more than Two Traitors, so I'm concluding One Traitor per side.

Manta was Night-Killed. Thus, he can't have been the Traitor.

kickme was revealed as Innocent when he was Lynched.

The Southern Traitor hasn't been killed yet, so it's got to be one of you.

(EDIT) Further, if neither of the Traitors is on the Southern Side, in spite of Mack's statements to the contrary, then that could mean

1. Mack is pulling an nfreader on us,

2. They're both on the Northern side, or

3. That there was only one Traitor to begin with.

4. The participation has been low recently, and it would be absolutely foolish of Mack to drive away the few remaining players by doing something stupid. So, unless Mack secretly wants the GTW Games to end, I'm ruling 1) out. For the moment, at least.

5. Putting both of the Traitors on the North unbalances the game. The very first order of business for them would have been to Annihilate the South with every Lynch and Night-Kill. Once the South was completely annihilated, they could then win by default, since there were only Two Northern Innocents to begin with, at least in the above case.

6. Having only a single Traitor in this whole game seems unlikely to me, but if this was the case, then he would have begun by Night-Killing a player on the opposing side, as to do otherwise would have eventually guaranteed his own death by Lynching later in the game. If there is only one Traitor, though, then we'll have one last round to ferret him out, even if an Innocent gets killed this round.

Hmm. That doesn't exactly rule out 3), does it? I'll have to consider it a bit more.

Still, if Mack's statements in the opening post prove to be false, then our best course of action is to vote against him next round.

This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 06 January 2008 - 04:49 PM

@eugene-chin, on Jan 6 2008, 03:23 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:

1. Mack is pulling an nfreader on us

I guarantee I'm not pulling what he did. There are two terrorists, and they're both still alive.

@mackilroy, on Jan 6 2008, 09:43 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:

I guarantee I'm not pulling what he did. There are two terrorists, and they're both still alive.

If any of my speculations offend you, you'll have to forgive me, but I'm still leery after what you chose to do at the end of Game XII, and what it encouraged nfreader's to do.

I do see a connection there, in a succession of "Evil" themed Game Hosting, beginning with mrxak being covertly sided with the Dictators in Game 11, you yourself killing the Innocents after their 'victory' in Game XII, and culminating in nfreader's masturbatory behavior here. (This does still irritate me, in part because I consider 13 to be my personal lucky number. The surreptitious renaming of kickme's game from "GTW XIII," as it started and should have been, to "GTW XIV" once it was in progress irritates me for that self-same reason.)

This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 06 January 2008 - 05:05 PM

Well... so that means that if SoItBegins dies, I die, because his north buddy kills me.
If SoItBegins doesn't die, then somebody else dies.

If I die, well, I die.

My north buddy? What north buddy?

@eugene-chin, on Jan 6 2008, 10:23 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:

There's Traitors on both sides.

An Eight player game is too small for more than Two Traitors, so I'm concluding One Traitor per side.

Manta was Night-Killed. Thus, he can't have been the Traitor.

kickme was revealed as Innocent when he was Lynched.

The Southern Traitor hasn't been killed yet, so it's got to be one of you.
(EDIT) Further, if neither of the Traitors is on the Southern Side, in spite of Mack's statements to the contrary, then that could mean

1. Mack is pulling an nfreader on us,

2. They're both on the Northern side, or

3. That there was only one Traitor to begin with.

4. The participation has been low recently, and it would be absolutely foolish of Mack to drive away the few remaining players by doing something stupid. So, unless Mack secretly wants the GTW Games to end, I'm ruling 1) out. For the moment, at least.

5. Putting both of the Traitors on the North unbalances the game. The very first order of business for them would have been to Annihilate the South with every Lynch and Night-Kill. Once the South was completely annihilated, they could then win by default, since there were only Two Northern Innocents to begin with, at least in the above case.

6. Having only a single Traitor in this whole game seems unlikely to me, but if this was the case, then he would have begun by Night-Killing a player on the opposing side, as to do otherwise would have eventually guaranteed his own death by Lynching later in the game. If there is only one Traitor, though, then we'll have one last round to ferret him out, even if an Innocent gets killed this round.

Hmm. That doesn't exactly rule out 3), does it? I'll have to consider it a bit more.

Still, if Mack's statements in the opening post prove to be false, then our best course of action is to vote against him next round.

Couldn't it also be possible that both traitors are on the South?

@rjc-ultra, on Jan 7 2008, 09:15 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:

Couldn't it also be possible that both traitors are on the South?

No. Why would they have eliminated so many Northerners? Also, that would unbalance it just as much as if both traitors were Northern. There must be two evil players, one in the South and one in the North.

<no longer applicable>