Yeah, EK, calm down.

@mrxak; Sorry I didn't respond to your post earlier; I was too busy killing people with my bare hands. (hint, hint)

(ok, so it was just Halo, but still...)

Look at it this way. Your tactics are in many ways as hazardous as random voting. You don't care if somebody's innocent or not, you'll kill them if you think you can kill a terrorist by doing so. This is not a strategy that inspires confidence in you, in my opinion.

So, I have a few choices. I can vote on SIB to support the elimination of random voting. I can vote on you and support the elimination of a hazardous strategy. I can vote on some other random individual.

Given that I don't care if SIB votes randomly, I choose to vote for you.

mrxak, if you truly wish for me to stop voting randomly, please say so, confirming you said this in front of everyone here. Everyone will take multiple screenshots, and keep them in a secure place.

I will then vote for you every first round, as a quick, simple and easy alternative to what you deem an unfavorable tactic. Sound better to you?

Also:

@jacabyte, on Jun 2 2008, 02:12 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

...well, look what the cat drug in...

AAAAAHH! THE CAT DRUGGED HIM!

This post has been edited by SoItBegins : 02 June 2008 - 05:28 PM

mrxak thus causing a tie because soitbegins always votes randomly and mrxak always votes for him. Either one of them or both could be terrorists and are just following set patterns. I'm distrustful of both of them and want them to have an equal chance of being lynched. Hope whoever breaks the tie choses the right one.

@mispeled, on Jun 2 2008, 03:37 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

Wrong answer. We win by killing terrorists.

If killing annoying people is really all you care about, then EVHawkman is a much better choice, anyway.
The only thing I have an issue with is equating "voting randomly" with "killing randomly". No vote is set in stone until the end of the round. If SIB is willing to change his vote when he finds someone more suspicious, there's nothing anti-town about his initial random vote.

Is SoItBegins willing to change? The way I remember it, he sticks with his target pretty much no matter what.

@jrsh92, on Jun 2 2008, 03:39 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

darth_vader for challenging the tradition of voting for SIB.

This is a more reasonable response to votes against SoItBegins. Of the three votes against him, darth_vader's has the least merit.

@shlimazel, on Jun 2 2008, 05:07 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

Look at it this way. Your tactics are in many ways as hazardous as random voting. You don't care if somebody's innocent or not, you'll kill them if you think you can kill a terrorist by doing so. This is not a strategy that inspires confidence in you, in my opinion.

So, I have a few choices. I can vote on SIB to support the elimination of random voting. I can vote on you and support the elimination of a hazardous strategy. I can vote on some other random individual.

Given that I don't care if SIB votes randomly, I choose to vote for you.

You may not like my tactics, but they win games. It's your choice if you want the innocents to win or not. I offer good strategy, and uncanny good luck picking out the bad guys. SoItBegins offers a random shot determined by a computer.

Perhaps the question you should ask yourself is, has LNSU done anything to warrant a vote against him? If no, you should vote against SoItBegins for starting an attack against somebody who does not deserve it.

@soitbegins, on Jun 2 2008, 05:27 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

mrxak, if you truly wish for me to stop voting randomly, please say so, confirming you said this in front of everyone here. Everyone will take multiple screenshots, and keep them in a secure place.

I will then vote for you every first round, as a quick, simple and easy alternative to what you deem an unfavorable tactic. Sound better to you?

Also:
AAAAAHH! THE CAT DRUGGED HIM!

You are welcome to try any strategy you want, but until you pick one that is actually reasonable, you will continue to appear on my unhelpful people list, and thus open to attack. Perhaps if I am voted out after this round and proven innocent, the other innocents will turn their attention rightfully to you.

@hypochondriac, on Jun 2 2008, 06:07 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

mrxak thus causing a tie because soitbegins always votes randomly and mrxak always votes for him. Either one of them or both could be terrorists and are just following set patterns. I'm distrustful of both of them and want them to have an equal chance of being lynched. Hope whoever breaks the tie choses the right one.

I'm not going to spend the time going back and tallying up all my first votes, but I'm sure if somebody else does they'll see that the alleged pattern of me voting against him every round is false. No doubt I've voted against him before in the first round for voting randomly, but it's not something I do every game, and any claims that I do just distract from the real issue. Really, the people twisting this around should be looked at closer.

I have yet to hear a legitimate reason for voting against me. It seems like people are just doing it because they want to protect SoItBegins, and targeting the most vocal of his opponents because there's already votes against me. I think Hypochondriac's vote in particular is especially dangerous.

@hypochondriac, on Jun 2 2008, 07:07 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

mrxak thus causing a tie because soitbegins always votes randomly and mrxak always votes for him. Either one of them or both could be terrorists and are just following set patterns. I'm distrustful of both of them and want them to have an equal chance of being lynched. Hope whoever breaks the tie choses the right one.

@mrxak, on Jun 2 2008, 07:51 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

I'm not going to spend the time going back and tallying up all my first votes, but I'm sure if somebody else does they'll see that the alleged pattern of me voting against him every round is false. No doubt I've voted against him before in the first round for voting randomly, but it's not something I do every game, and any claims that I do just distract from the real issue. Really, the people twisting this around should be looked at closer.

He's complaining about your advocation of pattern behavior, not of an actual pattern.

You did say you would be voting SIB every time he random-votes in the first round, yes? Advocating a pattern.

Quote

Perhaps the question you should ask yourself is, has LNSU done anything to warrant a vote against him? If no, you should vote against SoItBegins for starting an attack against somebody who does not deserve it.

Take a second look at this logic; by this logic, Anyone who casts the first vote in the first round Always deserves to get voted out.

This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 02 June 2008 - 07:01 PM

@mrxak, on Jun 2 2008, 04:51 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

Is SoItBegins willing to change? The way I remember it, he sticks with his target pretty much no matter what.

I will only change my vote in the first round if it is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY to save my own skin. And then only some of the time.

Quote

You may not like my tactics, but they win games. It's your choice if you want the innocents to win or not. I offer good strategy, and uncanny good luck picking out the bad guys. SoItBegins offers a random shot determined by a computer.

Wow, big ego much? I only vote randomly once, at the beginning of the first round. After that, I offer strategy as well. It may not be good strategy, but it is strategy.

Quote

Perhaps the question you should ask yourself is, has LNSU done anything to warrant a vote against him? If no, you should vote against SoItBegins for starting an attack against somebody who does not deserve it.

It could have as easily been anyone that I voted against. You may not know that my name came up second in the randomized list that I generated, but it did. A screenshot is available if you wish to see it.

Quote

You are welcome to try any strategy you want, but until you pick one that is actually reasonable, you will continue to appear on my unhelpful people list, and thus open to attack. Perhaps if I am voted out after this round and proven innocent, the other innocents will turn their attention rightfully to you.

Ok, let's see here. You just implied that not only is my strategy bogus (which it may well be for all I know or care), but that using it makes me a terrorist.

I am innocent, and if/when I am killed, lynched or otherwise knocked off, you will have the proof of it.

Quote

I'm not going to spend the time going back and tallying up all my first votes, but I'm sure if somebody else does they'll see that the alleged pattern of me voting against him every round is false. No doubt I've voted against him before in the first round for voting randomly, but it's not something I do every game, and any claims that I do just distract from the real issue. Really, the people twisting this around should be looked at closer.

(emphasis added by SiB)

If you did this every game, it would be less suspicious-- as it is, you look like you are picking on me, simply because I make a great target of opportunity.

Quote

I have yet to hear a legitimate reason for voting against me. It seems like people are just doing it because they want to protect SoItBegins, and targeting the most vocal of his opponents because there's already votes against me. I think Hypochondriac's vote in particular is especially dangerous.

I have yet to hear a valid reason for voting against me as well!! One possible reason that those people are 'protecting' me, as you call it, may well be that they think your reasons are hare-brained and unworkable. I certainly do, and would vote for you if I didn't vote randomly the first round of every game (see the first point I made, up above.)

In short:

I am innocent, mrxak is attacking me for no reason, and now he's trying to shift the blame over to the people who are trying to defend me. Do I really want to be in the same room as this guy?

This post has been edited by SoItBegins : 02 June 2008 - 07:19 PM

@eugene-chin, on Jun 2 2008, 07:01 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

He's complaining about your advocation of pattern behavior, not of an actual pattern.

You did say you would be voting SIB every time he random-votes in the first round, yes? Advocating a pattern.

Take a second look at this logic; by this logic, Anyone who casts the first vote in the first round Always deserves to get voted out.

Fine, I apologize for advocating a voting system that eliminates computers from the game. From now on I'll advocate that we just have the computers determine the outcome of the game. Hey, I bet we could play thousands of games each second if we do that, that would be loads of fun :rolleyes:.

Look, I get it, not everyone thinks it's a big deal that SoItBegins has turned over his player slot to a computer. I happen to prefer a human playing this game with me because it's more enjoyable and the odds are better we'll all do better. So go ahead and vote me out for wanting to play with humans, whatever. Maybe if he had signed up under the name random.org, I'd feel less upset about it.

I am not proposing the first person to vote is guilty, or deserves to be voted out. Had SoItBegins voted second, or third, or tenth, I'd still have voted for him if he used a random generator and nobody else had yet voted in a suspicious way. Perhaps if he hadn't been so blatant about voting randomly, he would have avoided my ire.

Again, it comes down to wanting to have fun in a game. SoItBegins apparently doesn't want to play with us, so I'm voting that he doesn't get to anymore. If he really wanted to play this game, he'd be involved in it, instead of turning over control to a machine. I'd rather the people that last the longest in this game are the ones that are willing to put a little thought into it and actually make their own moves. It would be different if he simply voted for LNSU because he hates capital letters. It would be potentially just as damaging, but at least he's doing it for a reason.

Don't you see what kind of a distraction his random vote has already become? People like prophile, GutlessWonder, and EKHawkman have all gone completely unnoticed by most of you, not to mention the folks who have been posting but haven't voted yet. I'd really rather one of them gets voted out first, but no, we have to deal with a robot first, and so many of you are now voting against me simply because I want to play with actual humans.

In summary, take a stand against the robot army that will doom us all, and get rid of SoItBegins, who doesn't really want to play with us anyway. If you disagree with my vote or my play style, show me a better way and vote for a lurker or somebody who said very little at all about their vote.

I'm doing this for you guys, who may be next on his random list some game, for those of you who will be voted out not for any reason other than some random number table stored in a computer somewhere cast the vote.

@hypochondriac, on Jun 2 2008, 07:07 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

mrxak thus causing a tie because soitbegins always votes randomly and mrxak always votes for him. Either one of them or both could be terrorists and are just following set patterns. I'm distrustful of both of them and want them to have an equal chance of being lynched. Hope whoever breaks the tie choses the right one.

I see no reason at all to believe that either of them must be the right choice. This kind of absolutism feels like a terrorist trying to get the town on a leash to me. vote Hypochondriac

@soitbegins, on Jun 2 2008, 08:19 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

I will only change my vote in the first round if it is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY to save my own skin. And then only some of the time.

I'm not going to comment on suspicion at this point, but I really think this is just bad play. Really, thinking of any vote as permanent, especially a random one that you yourself admit is nothing more than an "opening shot", is simply naive and unhelpful. I really want to discourage everyone from voting with the mindset that the person you're voting for is the only person you'll be focussed on for the whole round.

Ok so mrxak way to be over dramatic. He votes random the first round. Never again. So you think he is a robot? Yes lets all kill the robot army that is active the first round and then becomes a human. You are the one most people are worried about cause you can twist peoples mind against others. You are deceptive and should be treated with caution. I believe you just posted a 8 paragraph post that comes down to this: OH NOES GUEYS TEH ROBOTS ARE GONNA OWNZORZ US ALL! DEATH TO TEH ROBOT MEANACE!!

@mrxak, on Jun 2 2008, 06:39 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

Again, it comes down to wanting to have fun in a game. SoItBegins apparently doesn't want to play with us, so I'm voting that he doesn't get to anymore. If he really wanted to play this game, he'd be involved in it, instead of turning over control to a machine.

In the Days of Yore, I used to pick the random votes arbitrarily, off the top of my head. Then, you complained I was biased.

Next, I started using my calculator, and you complained it wasn't random enough.

Finally, I began using random.org, and you complain I'm giving over control to a machine! Read my lips here: I CHOSE to make a random vote. I do this in the first round as my way of clowning around a little before the real game starts (i.e. after someone gets killed.)

You say I should want to have fun. I do want to have fun. And I have a lot of fun by clowning around and being random.

Notice SIB has no rebuttal against Mispeled. I also again point out that I find Hypochondriac's attitude and vote to be incredibly dangerous.

about 24 hours left.

Just a reminder, all PMs need to be in before the end of the round.

@mrxak, on Jun 3 2008, 07:51 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

It's your choice if you want the innocents to win or not. I offer good strategy, and uncanny good luck picking out the bad guys. SoItBegins offers a random shot determined by a computer.

Wonderful. So get to choose between luck and chance.

@mrxak, on Jun 3 2008, 09:39 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

Don't you see what kind of a distraction his random vote has already become? People like prophile, GutlessWonder, and EKHawkman have all gone completely unnoticed by most of you, not to mention the folks who have been posting but haven't voted yet. I'd really rather one of them gets voted out first, but no, we have to deal with a robot first, and so many of you are now voting against me simply because I want to play with actual humans.

His random vote would have been less of a distraction if you didn't make such a big deal out of it. Jeez.

However,
Hypocondriac , for not capitalizing SoItBegins' name, and for not seeing past the mrxak vs. SIB argument.

@mrxak, on Jun 2 2008, 08:24 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

Notice SIB has no rebuttal against Mispeled.

Mispeled didn't vote for me; you did.

Also, to break the tie and save my own skin, I change my vote to mrxak. Retracted again! So much for voting randomly at the start of each round.

This post has been edited by SoItBegins : 03 June 2008 - 08:57 PM

I'm going to change my vote to SoItBegins , because random voting isn't going to help anyone.

I also will vote for SoItBegins. The random voting is very old to me too. Better to have over 600 KB of befuddled statistics to have no sense then to randomly vote.

NB - Yes, I have over 600 KB worth of spreadsheets. It's for my hobby.

FYI, I'm innocent. And when I'm nice and lynched, then I advise you take a long, hard look at a certain person who started this all...

I will be voting mrxak next round. His over agressive yet heavily justified reasoning for votes that in reality aren't as definitely useful as he says they are, is EXACTLY how I played last round-- when I was a terrorist. As far as I am concerned, if he lives through tonight, something the terrorists rarely let mrxak do, he's almost certainly a terrorist.

@soitbegins, on Jun 2 2008, 10:42 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

I do this in the first round as my way of clowning around a little before the real game starts (i.e. after someone gets killed.)

This is really quite bad. Our goal is always to get terrorists, no matter what day it is.

Quote

Mispeled didn't vote for me; you did.

<_<

jrsh92 said:

I will be voting mrxak next round. His over agressive yet heavily justified reasoning for votes that in reality aren't as definitely useful as he says they are, is EXACTLY how I played last round-- when I was a terrorist.

mrxak is always an aggressive drama queen. I see no reason why we should assume he'd play the same way that you do.

Quote

As far as I am concerned, if he lives through tonight, something the terrorists rarely let mrxak do, he's almost certainly a terrorist.

Yeah, and hopefully they'll completely miss your post so they won't get the idea to let him live, right? :rolleyes:

I really think that our tunnel vision on SIB and mrxak is dangerous. Mackilroy and 1Eevee1 quite blatantly jumped on the bandwagon without having said anything else this entire game.

@jrsh92, on Jun 3 2008, 05:27 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 25:

I will be voting mrxak next round. His over agressive yet heavily justified reasoning for votes that in reality aren't as definitely useful as he says they are, is EXACTLY how I played last round-- when I was a terrorist. As far as I am concerned, if he lives through tonight, something the terrorists rarely let mrxak do, he's almost certainly a terrorist.

Great, now I'm sure they will let me live, just to make me a suspect next round. It wouldn't much surprise me if you even said this to set me up.

Look, I know this will make it a tie again, and might even doom me, but I'm going to change my vote to Hypochondriac. His vote did not sit well with me at all. Maybe this will convince some of the people voting for me that I'm not just going after SoItBegins, but anybody who is doing dangerous votes, and Hypochondriac's is probably the most dangerous of all so far.