I'll repost part of my edited post so more people will read it, I feel it's extremely important;

@jacabyte, on 19 July 2012 - 11:03 PM, said in GTW 39:

On the other hand, what if Mack is telling the truth about being innocent? If Mack and Crow are the traitors OR Mack and adam_0 are the traitors operations 2 and 3 should have ended with 2 FAIL votes, not just 1. What if the FAIL votes that both operations received were not because one traitor was on both of them, but because both traitors were on both operations independently? That's an extremely interesting possibility, no? I hadn't considered it until just now.

If both traitors can't collaborate directly it would be extremely likely for them to BOTH fail an operation if both were ever on a given operation together. If they didn't do this they would introduce the possibility of them both voting SUCCEED, which obviously is unacceptable for the traitors. I'm beginning to think that Mack is innocent and telling the truth, in spite of trying to manipulate us all, and our traitors are Crow and adam_0. This would explain why operations 2 and 3 both only received 1 FAIL vote.

This post has been edited by JacaByte : 19 July 2012 - 11:22 PM

@jacabyte, on 19 July 2012 - 11:21 PM, said in GTW 39:

If both traitors can't collaborate directly

It seems you've based your assumption on this, but let me remind you that it was only discouraged , not prohibited. Mack and Crow can collaborate.

It was prohibited. I just have no way of enforcing it.

mrxak didn't tell either of you (you and crow) who the other traitor was -- he said you'd have to figure it out together. Apparently, you have. Crow hides in the background while you continually attack me.

I had to look it up again, but I found what seems like only a suggestion to me:

@mrxak, on 13 July 2012 - 09:20 PM, said in GTW 39:

Eventually, through process of elimination, it may be possible for the two sleeper agents to discover each other's identities, but it's my hope that they will use the information I give them to coordinate name selection, and not their mission outcome votes (to ensure only vote fail vote is ever made at a time). Even if sleeper agents discover the identity of their cohort beyond a shadow of a doubt, I highly recommend that they do not contact them in any way. Similarly, I encourage the sleeper agents to ignore any such contact, as it stands to reason an innocent member might attempt to trick them with a false claim of being their cohort, in order to influence their mission outcome votes.

That doesn't seem like prohibition to me. (emphasis mine)

This post has been edited by adam_0 : 19 July 2012 - 11:58 PM

I guess I wasn't as clear as I should have been. However, one of the sleeper agents (obviously I won't say who) did receive private confirmation from me that communication was not allowed. I did not confirm with the other individual, so that message may not have been understood by both sleeper agents.

By coordination, I simply meant the two sleeper agents could use inside knowledge of their fellow sleeper agent to manipulate the team selection process, without direct contact.

As I obviously cannot enforce the no communication rule, I added additional discouragement in the hopes that if the honor system didn't work, paranoia might.

My apologies if this has screwed up the game and tilted things in anyone's favor. I'll try to investigate, privately, what has actually occurred, and clarify later should we play the game again, to prevent any such misunderstandings in the future.

To reply to something you said earlier, JacaByte: I've been going after adam_0 because he's the only one I'm sure of as being a terrorist -- the other's identity is far murkier.

As to what you just posted: I figure Crow was simply helping adam_0 by making it look as if he and I were working together, counting on his minimal posting to help it slip under the radar.

I'm glad you quoted that, because of the portion where mrxak says "it's my hope that they will use the information I give them to coordinate name selection."

Look at the names Mack and Crow pushed for Operation 3;

@retep998, on 19 July 2012 - 09:30 PM, said in GTW 39:

Round 3, proposal 1 by Mackilroy
Crow T. Robot
JacaByte
Mackilroy
SoItBegins

Round 3, proposal 4 by Crow T. Robot
Crow T. Robot
JacaByte
Mackilroy
SoItBegins

Either I'm going blind or they're identical. I would like to now how that happened without any of us noticing.

This post has been edited by JacaByte : 19 July 2012 - 11:54 PM

That's because you are cooperating. You both pushed identical proposals for operation 3. You rejected your own proposal only to have Crow come around, like a good buddy in treachery, and push an identical proposal. You never noticed, you just silently approved a proposal that you had come up with 3 proposals earlier. And you said you were keeping track of these things?

This post has been edited by JacaByte : 20 July 2012 - 12:11 AM

Whatever. I'm done attempting to defend myself against people who won't believe me anyway. Whoever wins, I'll be vindicated.

If you're withdrawing yourself from this game then I'm going to reject this proposal.

I'm not withdrawing.

Then I will reject each motion after this one until the traitors win the game.

Edit: Mack ninja-edited again, I replied to "I'm not withdrawing."

This post has been edited by JacaByte : 20 July 2012 - 12:31 AM

Go ahead. I'm not going to attempt to convince you or anyone else who is what role.

Oh, for— we're overthinking this. APPROVE and roll the dice.

There's no such thing as over thinking in this game.

@mackilroy, on 19 July 2012 - 11:54 PM, said in GTW 39:

As to what you just posted: I figure Crow was simply helping adam_0 by making it look as if he and I were working together, counting on his minimal posting to help it slip under the radar.

No, I've not been posting much because when the major activity has been happening on the board, I have been occupied with work in RealLife. That's why I have been brief in my posting.

@mrxak, on 20 July 2012 - 03:41 AM, said in GTW 39:

There's no such thing as over thinking in this game.

There's just double think.

Edit: Hsh p bt RlLl Crw, vrybdy grs tht y'r trtr. Now we just have to figure out if your cohort is Mack or adam_0.

Edit2: So we have some very concrete evidence in this matter, the fact that operations 2 and 3 both failed with only 1 FAIL vote. Assuming that the traitors are honoring mrxak's rules, if Mack were a traitor one of those operations would have had 2 FAIL votes, regardless of whether Crow or adam_0 was his cohort.

The only way those operations could have failed the way they did, assuming the traitors are not communicating with each other directly via PM, would be if adam_0 and Crow are our traitors. They have never been on an operation together, but they have been on separate operations that each failed with exactly 1 FAIL vote.

Therefore, operation 5 needs to include myself, Mackilroy, retep998 and SoItBegins. Reject this proposal so we can get adam_0 off.

This post has been edited by JacaByte : 20 July 2012 - 12:50 PM

Do we lose if this motion is rejected? Or is that only if the mission fails?

We lose if the mission fails, not if the proposal is rejected. Unless we reject the following 4 proposals as well of course, then we lose because the counsel is in deadlock.