@mrxak, on 30 August 2012 - 08:09 PM, said in GTW 41:
Actually, I think one of the games that was not the case. I could be wrong, but anyway, it's bound to happen at some point. It would be a shame to miss out when it happens.
Went back over them, and you're right. Game 39, the two players on the first mission were innocent.
Games 36 and 40, though, still had traitors on the first mission. Two on each, in fact.
Five people have voted.
... is retep998 one of the guy's we're waiting on? Because besides him, we've had five other players post in the topic since his proposal.
@eugene-chin, on 31 August 2012 - 02:48 PM, said in GTW 41:
... is retep998 one of the guy's we're waiting on? Because besides him, we've had five other players post in the topic since his proposal.
Yes.
Fun fact: The Vegetable Kingdom’s fresh-water battleships are made of hollowed-out peppers.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When the Vegetable King saw the current round of votes, he burst out laughing. "Five rejections in a row! retep998, you should work on your diplomacy." With a wave of his hand, he cleared the bowl of votes and pointed at mrxak. "Mrxak— it's your turn," he said. "Perhaps you can make a bit... better of a proposal?"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
mrxak votes REJECT at 9:44 AM.
Shlimazel votes REJECT at 10:52 AM.
Eugene Chin votes REJECT at 11:05 AM.
JacaByte votes REJECT at 2:21 PM.
Techerakh votes REJECT at 3:42 PM.
darth_vader votes APPROVE at 5:45 PM the next day.
retep998 votes APPROVE at 8:32 PM, to wit:
Quote
“s### s### s###
I FORGOT TO VOTE ON MY OWN PROPOSAL
I DO HEREBY APPROVE MY OWN PROPOSAL
HELLZ YEAH”
Nonetheless, motion is rejected.
mrxak , it is your turn to make a proposal. This proposal should have three names, and everyone will need to APPROVE or REJECT it.
Including yours, there is enough time for 4 more proposals.
This post has been edited by SoItBegins : 01 September 2012 - 12:24 AM
The second proposal of the second mission is:
Eugene Chin
mrxak
Shlimazel
I know some of you will bitch about it being the same as the last mission plus one name, but that's coincidental as far as I'm concerned. Eugene Chin and Shlimazel are the two people have some slight bit of trust in, based on their posting. If it wasn't me proposing, and thus I wasn't on the team, I'd still be wanting Shlimazel.
I don't want to be on a team with retep998, I don't really buy Techerakh's inactivity, especially compared to last game, and JacaByte is... I dunno. He hasn't impressed me yet. I could go either way with darth_vader, at this point.
I'll remind everyone that if we succeed on this mission with three good guys, and pick the same team again next round, we can wrap this up early. If you have genuine objections to Eugene Chin or Shlimazel, other than some vague probability fallacy, speak up now. Otherwise, just approve so we can get this over with.
... Huh.
I know I'm the one who complained about reusing committee's, but the worst case scenario here would still tell me there's a bad guy in a set of two - but I'd have less proposals on record to figure out who.
Best case scenario, innocent's win in mission 3.
I'll roll those dice. Accept.
@mrxak, on 01 September 2012 - 02:51 AM, said in GTW 41:
(. . .) I don't really buy Techerakh's inactivity (. . .)
Well I ain't selling it! But seriously, difference in posting amount is down to (a) busier IRL schedule and (b) less enthusiasm this time around. 
Your suspicion is understandable (and fine, for the time being), but my posting situation is unlikely to change over the rest of the game, so you're going to need to get over it eventually if we want this game for the civs.
@mrxak, on 01 September 2012 - 02:51 AM, said in GTW 41:
I'll remind everyone that if we succeed on this mission with three good guys, and pick the same team again next round, we can wrap this up early.
I know you're not this stupid, so why would you say this? I also think you're a civ, but then why would you say this?
Seriously—why would you say this?
This post has been edited by Techerakh : 01 September 2012 - 09:10 AM
Isn't it interesting how darth_vader has allows voted in line with retep998? (With the exception of the second proposal, first mission.) Right now darth_vader has my suspicion.
As for this proposal, while I feel good about this mission make-up I think we would be better off with a few more proposals, to see how everybody votes. I will be rejecting this proposal.
@jacabyte, on 01 September 2012 - 11:12 AM, said in GTW 41:
Isn't it interesting how darth_vader has allows voted in line with retep998? (With the exception of the second proposal, first mission.)
No, it's not, because the first round voting is 100% meaningless. But for the sake of argument, I'll pretend it's not: Are you suggesting that they are intentionally voting the same way in order to…what?
@techerakh, on 01 September 2012 - 09:09 AM, said in GTW 41:
I know you're not this stupid, so why would you say this? I also think you're a civ, but then why would you say this?
Seriously—why would you say this?
Uh, because it's true? If there are three good guys on this mission, and we use the same guys again, we win.
@mrxak, on 01 September 2012 - 01:40 PM, said in GTW 41:
Uh, because it's true? If there are three good guys on this mission, and we use the same guys again, we win.
That logic was used last game to great success, if I recall correctly.
Yes, obviously, if we only put good guys on each mission, then we win. However, that provides no justification for putting through this specific group of three players; you could say the same thing about any team.
But hey, maybe you're signaling your fellow spies that they should all vote SUCCEED on this mission so that they can assure themselves of getting put on the next team.
You're reading way too much into this. Or, you're upset that I've called you on your laying low, and want to get into a big fight and accuse me, so people think when I accuse you later, that I'm the one deflecting. Yes, it's obvious. Yes, it applies to any team. I never said otherwise. You're completely ignoring the second half of my paragraph, which asks for people to bring up any suspicions they have on Eugene Chin and Shlimazel, so we can try to get a group of three that everyone believes is innocent. I've proposed my three names. I'd rather not go to four. If anyone has a problem with my three, they should speak up. If they're just voting against just to vote against, and they actually agree with my three, why wait for a worse group or for somebody to propose it again?
@techerakh, on 01 September 2012 - 11:42 AM, said in GTW 41:
No, it's not, because the first round voting is 100% meaningless. But for the sake of argument, I'll pretend it's not: Are you suggesting that they are intentionally voting the same way in order to…what?
They did it again this during this round too you know. But for the sake of argument, all I'm saying is that they potentially have the same interests in mind. Or it’s a coincidence, and any ties they have with each other during the voting process will evaporate after this proposal. Innocent players typically go off and do their own thing, no? While we all want the same thing, to not have any traitors on our missions, innocent players will each have their own idea of who is and isn't a potential traitor. The traitors already know.
This post has been edited by JacaByte : 01 September 2012 - 04:34 PM
@mrxak, on 01 September 2012 - 04:04 PM, said in GTW 41:
You're reading way too much into this.
I don't actually think you're a traitor based on this, but given your last game nyah-nyah-everything-I-said-was-a-secret-clue nonsense, I have to cover my bases.
@mrxak, on 01 September 2012 - 04:04 PM, said in GTW 41:
Yes, it's obvious. Yes, it applies to any team. I never said otherwise.
If it's obvious and applies to every team, why did you say it? You unambiguously presented it as a rationale for supporting your team. Since it doesn't actually support your team over any other, this means you're just trying to trick other players into voting for your team. I'm not saying your team is bad (in fact, I think it's decent), but your behavior is not civ-friendly.
@mrxak, on 01 September 2012 - 04:04 PM, said in GTW 41:
If they're just voting against just to vote against, and they actually agree with my three, why wait for a worse group or for somebody to propose it again?
I don't know—maybe because the more votes we have, the more info we'll have to determine who the traitors are. Or have you abandoned that line of reasoning altogether?
You ignored 2/3rds of my post. Exactly, in fact, going by word count (unless my quick count was off). I see no point in arguing with you if you're going to take in only a third of what I'm saying and try to hang me with it, when anyone reading my complete post would see you're making a big fuss over nothing.
Fun fact: There is rumored to be a third kingdom, the Kingdom of Fish, beneath the Fresh-Water Ocean.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Vegetable King nodded. "We're getting better at this." He slid stacks of files over to Eugene Chin, mrxak, and Shlimazel. "While you direct the strike team, I'll visit the VIS" (Vegetable Intelligence Service) "and work up the third mission."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
mrxak votes APPROVE at 12:52 AM.
retep998 votes REJECT at 1:01 AM.
Eugene Chin votes APPROVE at 2:17 AM.
JacaByte votes REJECT at 9:13 AM.
Shlimazel votes APPROVE at 10:28 AM.
Techerakh votes REJECT at 5:07 AM the next day.
darth_vader votes APPROVE at 11:40 AM.
Motion is approved.
Eugene Chin , mrxak , and Shlimazel , please PM me a vote of SUCCEED or FAIL. Three SUCCEED votes will be needed for the mission to be successful.
This post has been edited by SoItBegins : 02 September 2012 - 02:32 PM
All votes have been received.
This post has been edited by SoItBegins : 02 September 2012 - 10:03 PM
