Oh, yes, thanks for reminding me about sinjin. After you pointed out that sinjin didn’t vote to reject the last team, I was going throw up my hands in confusion, so to speak. But then you had to accuse me of being a spy once again, which drove all those thoughts out of my mind.
I’ll replace TexCat with sinjin on my list of suspects.
Team 1: Terminus, Bricker (accepted by all)
Team 2: Texcat, Stanislaus, Clairobscur (rejected by Mahaloth, Terminus, Texcat)
Team 3: Terminus, Clairobscur, Mahaloth (rejected by Clairobscur, Stanislaus)
I still remain convinced that there was exactly 1 spy on team 2. And probably 1 spy on team 3.
A. I thought the spy on team 2 was Stanislaus. Which left me and Clair as town. And would mean that either Terminus or Mahaloth is a spy on team 3.
A1. Clair seems convinced that the spy is Terminus which would mean town: me, Clair, Mahaloth, {sinjin, Bricker} and spies: Stanislaus, Terminus, {sinjin, Bricker}.
A2. Otherwise with Mahaloth spy, we have town: me, Clair, Terminus, {sinjin, Bricker} and spies: Stanislaus, Mahaloth, {sinjin, Bricker}.
B. If the spy on team 2 was Clair, then Stan and I are town and if there was a single spy on team 3 then Terminus and Mahaloth are town. That would leave spies Clair, sinjin, and Bricker.
If we start team 4 with either team 2 or 3 and add a person, when it succeeds we would know for sure the added person was town. Is there an optimal way to do this?
I can’t see how, since it works with anybody. If the team I propose succeeds, then Mahaloth is innocent, If I add Terminus instead of Mahaloth to team 2 and it succeeds, then Terminus is innocent. If I add Bricker to team 3 and it succeeds, then Bricker is innocent, and so on…And every time, there’s 50% chance that the added person is a spy and the mission fails.
I officially proposed the team : Texcat, Clairobscur, Stanislaus, Mahaloth
Of the four potential additions to the team, I think Mahaloth is one of the more trustworthy, although I would probably have accepted Bricker. I’ll accept this, in the interest of confirming someone as Resistance.
I’ll accept this.
clairobscur has nominated the following team for mission 4.1:
TexCat
clairobscur
Stanislaus
Mahaloth
Players, please PM your accept or reject votes by 8:00 pm central time on Tuesday, December 9th.
A team that includes neither of the two people that went on our only successful mission?
Nope.
But I think we’re dead.
If you are a loyal member of the resistance then you should consider it your duty to reject this team. clairobscur, I’m looking at you. Don’t believe their lies. Don’t be their patsy. VOTE TO REJECT.
Vive la résistance!
This team will fail if and only if Mahaloth is a spy. Bricker and Terminus, are you both saying that you think Mahaloth is a spy?
I don’t agree that the only possible failure condition is “Mahaloth is a spy.”
But I am beginning to think this game played without a chance to listen to voices and see faces is lacking something.
Actually I didn’t vote to reject the last mission, because I don’t trust Textcat but I didn’t get my vote in on time because I’m on the west coast and forgot the time difference. And I also screwed up sending any message at all because I once again forgot to put in a title which seems to be required on this board.
I am going to reject this mission because I still don’t trust Textcat.
clairobscur and Mahaloth were with me on the last failed mission, so I know that at least one of them is a spy. There’s a good possibility that both of them are.
there is a missing “get” in my post above.
Both??
There was only one fail vote. One f them took the chance of voting “succeed?”
It’s finally stopped raining here and we’re probably no longer in any danger of losing power, so I feel confident enough to put in the time to compose a longer post. Here’s my analysis of the four nominees for mission #4:
The case against TexCat
Never pinged my radar. sinjin doesn’t like her for undisclosed reasons. Stanislaus doesn’t like her either, possibly because she accused him.
The case against Stanislaus
Started out strong with all sorts of analysis and discussion. Then came out with that utterly bizarre statement against TexCat’s team:
TexCat rightly called him out on this. If there aren’t any other options, then wouldn’t that mean a team proposed by a spy doesn’t have any spies on it? After this, he’s gone suspiciously quiet, posting only once without any of that fancy analysis. Better to just shut up and let clairobscur do the spies’ work for him.
TexCat vs Stanislaus
If Stanislaus is right, TexCat is a spy. If TexCat is right, then Stanislaus is a spy. Either way, one of them is a spy.
The case against clairobscur
Uses the classic spy technique of accusing one other player (me) of being a spy without much evidence to back it up. Doesn’t much consider the possibility of others being spies. May not actually be a spy but might as well be working for them.
The case against Mahaloth
Very eager to add himself to the initial of Bricker and me. If that had gone through, it would have tainted the only winning team in the game.
clairobscur vs Mahaloth
As I said before, both were with me on that last mission that failed so I know that at least one of them is a spy.
In summary:
{Stanislaus, TexCat} -> at least one spy
{clairobscur, Mahaloth} -> at least one spy
There are definitely at least two spies on this mission. A good rebel and loyal member of the Resistance must vote to reject the team.
Correct if you aren’t a spy. And I’ve already said so much. And contrarily to what you try to assert, I’ve good reasons to suspect you. You tried to bury the fact that the first team was pretty much guaranteed to suceed to assert that it should be reconducted. You made twice “mistaken” statements about odds and player behaviour. Your alternative to my team was another that included you and the two players with the worst objective track record based on proposals and votes.
I’ve no real reason, on the other hand, to suspect Mahaloth.
In any case, any team that I could propose had a 50% chance of including a second spy at this point. And it would be the same for any team proposed by anybody else. Except that the anybody else could be a spy and actively try to create a failing team.
At this point, you and Mahaloth are the only ones who know for sure whether or not this team will fail. I’m going with Mahaloth being innocent, and I advise everybody else to do the same.
Then I repeat my congratulations to the spies. Good job, clairobscur. The spies win because of you.
Actually, I’ve just been busy. But I will say this: I don’t see what’s so odd about my statement. I was on a team with TexCat and clairobscur. Our team failed, so one of them was a spy. TexCat then proposes a team with clairobscur on it. That team is either:
Proposed by a Spy (TexCat) or
Has a Spy on it (clairobscur).
There aren’t any other options. It goes without saying (I thought) that if it’s proposed by a Spy then it will in some way be dodgy - one of the other nominees was a Spy, or it was intended to win TexCat some cred for the tricky Mission 4. But it doesn’t matter in what *particular *way TexCat-as-Spy wanted that team to advance the Spies cause - it just matters that any team proposed by a Spy should be rejected.
I will note at this point that bizarre though that logic was, it somehow led to me *rejecting *a failing team whereas your calm and thoughtful approach led you to vote *for *it. And now you’re trying to smear me for making the right call.
Do you think there were two spies on Mission 2: Texcat, Stanislaus, Clairobscur (rejected by Mahaloth, Terminus, Texcat) ??
I was pretty sure there was only one. So if you take those 3 and add Mahaloth, the only way you get two spies is if Mahaloth is a spy.