Seriously: Those of you who still have votes against me: You're making a mistake.

I have never acted in anything but my own defense (except for my whole 'random vote' thing, and that was me simply being the GTW equivalent of class clown). Why are you voting against me?

After some careful deliberation: Eugene Chin

@soitbegins, on Jan 31 2008, 06:40 PM, said in GTW Game 18:

Seriously: Those of you who still have votes against me: You're making a mistake.

This early in the game, chances are that no matter who we vote for we're making a mistake.

_The Big Board reads:

Anon - Shlimazel
darth_vader - nfreader
1Eevee1 -
Eugene Chin - nfreader
GutlessWonder - Eugene Chin
Hypochondriac -
JacaByte - Eugene Chin
kickme -
Mackilroy -
Manta - SoItBegins
nfreader -
prophile - SoItBegins
rebelswin_85 - SoItBegins
Rickton - SoItBegins
RJC Ultra - Shlimazel
Shlimazel - Eugene Chin
SoItBegins - Eugene Chin_

Eugene Chin: 4
nfreader: 2
Shlimazel: 2
SoItBegins: 4

29 hours to go.

So is voting for SIB any smaller mistake than voting for Eugene Chin?

Well if things stay as-is, neither will die and the rogue members will take full control of the round. If I was a player, I'd be more concerned about ending up with a tie than killing somebody that might be innocent.

Gee, thanks mrxak.

It's nothing personal to you or Eugene Chin. I'm just trying to get you all to kill each other.

It's all just fun and games until someone dies from painful, radioactive, puss-oozing boils.

I for one am totally willing to kill either one if it prevents the evil players from having undue influence. I don't think either of them are actually guilty, but we hardly ever kill a guilty person in the first round.

I don't think that people should be voting for Eugene Chin just because of his rants. He's somewhat hot-headed, and has ranted like this in games before. No offense Eugene, you're a very good player, but you do get emotional. Nor do I think that people should be voting for SIB for anything he did or said last game. That has no bearing here.

With only 27 hours left in the round, I would like to see more people PMing me with stuff. Remember I won't be waiting after the deadline, I will assume you just don't want to use your ability. Five of you also still need to vote. That's enough people to kill off somebody that doesn't have a single vote against them yet, so I won't be ending this round early.

I'm going to vote Eugene Chin 'cos he voted for me first.

In the interest of getting the first round over as soon as possible, my vote now goes (again) to Eugene Chin. Nothing personal, Eugene, but I have no idea who the dictators are, and hopefully more information will come after this round is over and the group has voted to nuke someone. Better we get rid of someone than they get to choose who dies every round.

I doubt either of the top two are terrorists. In my opinion we should let the first round end in a draw and see who the terrorists kill. We might be able to draw some conclusions from that. The longer civilians live the better chance of catching the terrorists. Can I make my vote provisional? I want to maintain a tie in the first round.

So if there is a tie only one person dies correct?

@hypochondriac, on Jan 31 2008, 08:53 PM, said in GTW Game 18:

So if there is a tie only one person dies correct?

That's the way that I'm understanding it.

Good then there is no reason to kill someone in the first round. Most likely we will be killing an innocent which helps the terrorists. I'd say wait till at least the second round. It will be interesting to see who the terrorists go after.

@hypochondriac, on Jan 31 2008, 09:53 PM, said in GTW Game 18:

So if there is a tie only one person dies correct?

If the round ends in a tie, nobody will die because of the vote. As it stands, a tie does not appear to be likely:

_The Big Board reads:

Anon - Shlimazel
darth_vader - nfreader
1Eevee1 -
Eugene Chin - nfreader
GutlessWonder - Eugene Chin
Hypochondriac -
JacaByte - Eugene Chin
kickme -
Mackilroy - Eugene Chin
Manta - SoItBegins
nfreader - Eugene Chin
prophile - SoItBegins
rebelswin_85 - SoItBegins
Rickton - SoItBegins
RJC Ultra - Shlimazel
Shlimazel - Eugene Chin
SoItBegins - Eugene Chin_

Eugene Chin: 6
nfreader: 2
Shlimazel: 2
SoItBegins: 4

I also strongly discourage trying to force a tie so nobody dies in the vote, but I'd much rather not have to deal with tiebreaker rounds, so whatever.

why not have a tie? Right now we have no idea whose guilty. So wouldn't it be better for only one innocent to die rather then two? If you think I'm wrong please explain?

I really shouldn't get involved, but here goes...

There are four reasons why you should always lynch somebody:

1. It gives some measure of control over the game for the innocents. For innocents, it is their only way to win. If they give up their right to kill somebody in a round, they are in effect handing complete control over to the bad guys.
2. There is a small percentage chance that the vote will kill a bad guy, but there is a zero chance of killing a bad guy if the innocents don't vote somebody out.
3. Voting records are an important part of trying to determine who is guilty.
4. A smaller pool of players benefits the innocents. It increases the likelihood of an intelligence agent discovering a bad guy, and it also increases the chance that innocents will successfully target a bad guy.

There is risk, certainly, but the odds of winning for the innocents increase with every death they themselves cause. Even if it was guaranteed that you were killing an innocent player with your vote, it can still be beneficial for those with investigative skill. But it's not guaranteed, you do have a real chance of killing a bad guy with every vote, and the fewer innocent players there are, the chance is ever higher.