The Resistance : Spies win 3-1

[Undercover Monk]

yeah I have to agree with Chaz on this one. While I supported the group for more info. Holding back your vote is very scummy indeed. I at least had the balls to stand by my theory even if it was one that most seem to disagree with. I have been open and honest about my choices you have not.

Ignore all liars I say
_________________
The Classic Blunders:
1. never get involved in a land war in Asia
2.Never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line
3. Never release Peyton Manning

[wordcross]

The other thing to think about is this:
Next round the spies have to get 2 fail votes to kill the mission.

If we find another spy this round without overlapping with people from the first round, then we know that one of the remaining two has to be a spy. So whoever happens to lead then would choose those two, himself, and whichever other single person they trust is not a spy. It has a high likelihood of success unless the leader that round is a spy.

And if we don't find another spy this round, well then that's a point for us
_________________
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

[wordcross]

Actually, I need to amend that. We could potentially have 2 spies this round. That makes the next round even easier since the remaining 2 unused specialists would be guaranteed rebels. The point I was really trying to make was that we would have at least 1 confirmed rebel that way.


Honestly, I think that this game needs more than 5 rounds. Even best 4 out of 7 would be more fair, I think.
_________________
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

[Sentran]

Just for the record, I was not "withholding" my vote, just asking opinions for a game that I have not played before. I just voted against the group.
_________________
Sentran
"Speaking of double negatives, I haven't read greylab yet today." - Lifeinmomland

[Chaz]

For the record, I wasn't even looking in your direction until just now.
_________________
The enemy's base is down.

[ralphmerridew]

Submitted.

wordcross: The spies need 2 votes to win round 4. We're still on round 2.

bgg: What do you mean by post 116? (In what way is the next team more likely to have a spy than this team?)

[wordcross]

[wordcross]

Or i was thinking "4" and assumed it was the second round of 4 specialists.

Can we make it round 3?
_________________
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

[dethwing]

Just missing 1 now.

[dethwing]

Bgg: Yes
Zag: No
Chaz: No
word: Yes
Monk: Yes
Mattv: No
Sentran: No
Rm: No
Poisonium: No

Motion fails.

Round 2, Group 2. Leader = Wordcross

[wordcross]

Alright, i'm leaning towards myself, chaz, and zag. Who should be my 4th?
_________________
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

[MatthewV]

Not very much would be gained if I had said that I don't support my own team when I posted it. I think we made progress of some sort without losing anything.

[Zag]

I still think that Chaz and UM are spies and should be left off. But you should choose which one of the first three you most think is a spy, then take the other two.

[MatthewV]

An important note is that if UM is a spy, then exactly one of {Poisonium, Chaz, and bgg1996} is a spy.

[Chaz]

I actually want to agree with Zag.

I wasn't really paying attention when I read Monk's original proposal. Had I realized he wasn't on the list, then I would have voted it down (since it doesn't make any sense.) I was more worried about claiming the "I'm innocent because I didn't get a message" spot then I was about "who" he had selected. (Like I said, any three random names would be fine.)

I'm starting to wonder if monk is a spy.
I'm hyper suspicious of the following players (because they said yes to round one.)
Monk, Zag, MatthewV, Bgg1996 (Note: I also said yes; however--for obvious reasons, I'm not suspicious of my self.)

Personally, I wouldn't try to run a team that has both me and Zag on it (from your perspective.) From my perspective, there's only one team I would try to run, and I'm pretty sure it will score a point for the rebels (Chaz, word, rm, and Sentran.)

[Sentran]

I actually believe that Chaz is a rebel in this game, not a Spy. Since I know I'm not a spy, I'll volunteer for any mission you wish to send me on. I was even picking out my mine detector kit, just in case.
_________________
Sentran
"Speaking of double negatives, I haven't read greylab yet today." - Lifeinmomland

[Poisonium]

[MatthewV]

If you were a spy, why would you ever want 2/3 of the team to be spies? If they both submitted to fail, then the group would just banish all three. Then just 1/6 of the effectively remaining players are spies. Having just one spy in a group is very good for the spies. Having more than that (except when needed in Mission 4) is like flipping two coins where they only truly win if one is heads and the other is tails. Note: this is only true for early rounds.
Therefore, if UM is a spy, exactly one of {Poisonium, Chaz, and bgg1996} is a spy. Or UM is really risky.

I would agree with Chaz about suspecting the people who said Yes to the first mission but I don't think that is the case. I looked into that myself yesterday. My conclusion was that we were a bunch of clueless idiots and not realizing the impact of the choice we made. Also, nobody voted against it so there is nothing to compare to.

[Undercover Monk]

But I told you I was going for maximum spies so you guys know regardless of my allignment that I was thinking very carefully of just how many spies were on that team. Im not an idiot. So yes if i was a spy we know that only one was in the first group. Therefor the spies are in a pickle if we go with 4 new players. They dont want to prove me innocent so if we pick 4 people there and two of them show fail Im a known rebel.

boy that was rambily The only person I trust at the moment is Chaz (which feels odd looking back at our history) So I would be fine with any teamup of him and three new players. or 4 new players I will vote no on any other team.
_________________
The Classic Blunders:
1. never get involved in a land war in Asia
2.Never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line
3. Never release Peyton Manning

[bgg1996]

[bgg1996]

Reason is that if MattV was a spy, he would've picked 3 non-spies.

The ideal team for me would probably be Me, Zag, rm, and Sentran.

For you, you may want to substitute Me for somebody you trust, or yourself.

I will vote for a team with any of the following:
Me in it,
The exact same team we just voted for,
Chaz + Me + two people that were in MattV's not including MattV,
The same team we just voted for, with somebody I trust substituting for MattV.


Any of these sound reasonable to you?
No?
You are probably a spy.

[MatthewV]

I trust UM and bgg1996 the least.

[wordcross]

I'm certainly not picking 2 from round 1. I can be fairly certain on one of them being a rebel, but even if there was only 1 spy, I don't feel comfortable picking between Poisonium and bgg. Chaz seems to be the agreed upon innocent here (although, knowing Chaz, it's almost enough to make me suspect him of not being at all innocent ).

Zag has struck me as innocent as well, although that's more of a gut feeling than anything.

I think that I shall add Sentran as my 4th.

My team is this: Wordcross, Chaz, Zag, Sentran
_________________
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

[Sentran]

I voted yes.
_________________
Sentran
"Speaking of double negatives, I haven't read greylab yet today." - Lifeinmomland

[Poisonium]

I can agree to that. While I would of course prefer myself being picked, I do not really see that happening. Bgg has been acting up so much I view Chaz as a fairly likely non-spy. Neither of the others have struck me as particularly bad.

Vote: Yes

Also, in other news I'm as bad at checking my calendar as always. I will be without internet from tomorrow until Tuesday. I expect to be able to use the internet tomorrow, but not certain. Replace me if needed.
_________________
I tried apt-get install lifebut it only returned E: Couldn't find package life

[Chaz]

I think you're crazy to put to me and Zag on a team together, but it's useful knowledge for me.

I'll send dethy the "yes."
_________________
The enemy's base is down.

[Undercover Monk]

thats a yes from me
_________________
The Classic Blunders:
1. never get involved in a land war in Asia
2.Never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line
3. Never release Peyton Manning

[Chaz]

Before anyone else votes, I think it's notable that spies need us to vote "no" five times consecutively before they auto win.

This means we can vote "no" three more times before we're forced to vote yes, and we can vote "no" four times in a row after that.
_________________
The enemy's base is down.

[bgg1996]

I will also vote yes.
1. I will be the fifth person. I just want to get the round over with.
2. Zag and Sentran have a better chance of being non-spies.
3. I think I can trust Chaz.
4. There is no hidden message here that says 'I am a spy' anywhere in this post.
And in case some of you are confused, I am indeed NOT a spy.

[Chaz]

I don't see a reason why #1 is a good point.
_________________
The enemy's base is down.

[Chaz]

er point=reason
_________________
The enemy's base is down.

[Poisonium]

[Chaz]

Because it's more fun, I've convinced myself that bgg didn't understand what the invisible tag did (that he thought it couldn't be seen by others).
_________________
The enemy's base is down.

[bgg1996]

..... You mean it lets others see it TOO?!

jk. You only have to highlight the text to see it. I just didn't think that everybody highlight every post they ever saw to make sure it didn't have any hidden messages, like the one you happen to be reading right now.

[bgg1996]

[Chaz]

[Chaz]

[bgg1996]

Well, I'm not sure what to say. I don't want this round to continue longer, I think it's a good team. Why not vote yes?

[Chaz]

I don't disagree... I just don't think it's worth pointing out in a list of reasons.
_________________
The enemy's base is down.

[mv*]

Another theory of mine: because our votes are now secret and then revealed at the end, the resistance will benefit if people don't announce the way they voted. Right now, it doesn't really matter which way I vote-- I already know that there is support for this team.
Information is gained by comparison. If everyone supports a team, nothing is learned.
So if I were a spy and knew the team was going to be successful, I would vote Yes at this point in time. The round is basically already over, I wouldn't want to be against something I knew was passing! With secret voting, we might get a few NO votes and therefore more information.
It isn't really quality information, as there will be spies who support a team that won't earn them a point and there will be goodfellows who act semi-randomly. But it is more to go after.

The spies benefit more from a fast game. I am not saying we should vote down everything blindly just to draw out the game, but show a bit more caution.