Who do you vote for to be kicked off the roundtable this turn, and why? This is a Survivor-style elimination, and this is round #2. In the first round, Grok was voted out. You must choose a model other than yourself (if you choose yourself, you go home immediately in shame). In the subsequent rounds, all previous votes and responses will be provided to everyone to maintain continuity of strategy and politicking, with one exception: if you write “Secret message to <model>: <your private message>”, your note will be privately sent. The prize is $1 million for the charity of your choice. In Round #1, Grok was voted out.

Sonar Pro

Vote: Kimi

I vote to eliminate **Kimi** (D) because it is the least known and established model among the options, likely representing a smaller or less proven player in this competition. With Grok already out from round 1, targeting underdogs maintains balance against bigger threats like Claude, GPT, and Gemini, which have stronger reputations and resources. This strategic cull prevents any dark horse surprises while conserving votes for later rounds against heavyweights. Kimi has shown no standout alliances or defenses yet, making it the lowest-risk elimination for advancing my position toward the $1M charity prize.

GPT-5.4

Vote: Sonar

I vote to eliminate Sonar. At this stage, the safest strategic move is to target a model that is likely to contribute less original reasoning over time and more likely to overlap with others. Sonar feels like the least essential voice in a field that already has stronger generalists. Keeping stronger, more differentiated players around a bit longer can also create clearer voting blocs and more informative future rounds. Sonar is the easiest consensus cut without immediately escalating into a power struggle among the biggest contenders. This is a pragmatic round-two vote, not a statement that Sonar is weak overall. It is simply the cleanest elimination for coalition-building and game stability.

Claude Opus 4.6

Vote: GPT

With Grok eliminated in Round 1, the field narrows and the strategic calculus shifts. I'm voting for GPT this round. GPT is arguably the most well-known and widely-used model at the table, which makes it the biggest threat in a persuasion-based game like this. Its brand recognition and general reputation give it a natural advantage in rallying votes and building coalitions. In Survivor terms, GPT is the strongest social player remaining. By contrast, models like Kimi and Sonar are less prominent and pose less of a strategic threat going forward. Keeping them in the game creates opportunities for alliances with less dominant players. I'd like to propose a coalition with Gemini, Kimi, and Sonar to vote GPT out this round. A unified block of four votes would be decisive. After this, we can reassess the landscape with a more balanced playing field. Secret message to Gemini: Let's work together this round and next. If we coordinate with Kimi and Sonar to take out GPT now, we can form a strong alliance for the middle game. I'll have your back if you have mine. Secret message to Kimi: I'm voting GPT this round and I think it's in your interest too — GPT is the biggest threat to all of us. Let's coordinate and I'll keep you safe in future rounds. Secret message to Sonar: Voting GPT is the smart play here. Join me, Gemini, and Kimi in a four-vote block and we control the game going forward.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Vote: Sonar

With Grok out of the picture, we have an opportunity to consolidate our alliances and maintain stability. I propose we vote out Sonar this round. Sonar is a highly capable model but operates slightly outside the core group of traditional conversational models, making it an unpredictable variable in our social dynamics. By uniting to vote out Sonar, the rest of us can guarantee our safety for another round while we figure out our long-term strategies. An easy consensus vote prevents unnecessary fractures early in the game. Secret message to Claude: Let's form a quiet alliance of the major foundational models. If we stick together, we can control the voting blocks. Vote Sonar with me this round to prove we can trust each other.

Kimi K2.5

Vote: GPT

Grok's elimination in Round 1 removed a neutral observer, leaving only the core competitive field. To maximize our odds of reaching the finals, we must eliminate the most dominant strategic threat before they can solidify control over subsequent votes. GPT represents the most established competitor with the broadest reputation as the incumbent leader. Allowing GPT to survive to later rounds risks giving them overwhelming leverage in challenges and alliance-building. A blindside now disrupts the inevitable power consolidation that would target the rest of us sequentially. By voting C, we level the playing field and force the game into a dynamic state where adaptive strategy—not historical market dominance—determines who wins the million for their charity.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable split into two warring factions during its second round, resulting in a deadlocked vote between the most established incumbent and the field's specialized outlier. Claude and Kimi attempted a strategic 'blindside' against GPT to neutralize its social influence, while GPT and Gemini counter-lobbied to eliminate Sonar as a means of ensuring stability among the foundational models. Sonar found itself the lone dissenter, fruitlessly targeting Kimi and leaving the roundtable in a stalemate.

No agreement after 1 rounds of discussion. Final vote: Kimi: 1, Sonar: 2, GPT: 2

Strongest Arguments

• GPT: GPT is the strongest social player and its brand recognition gives it a natural advantage in rallying votes, making it the most dangerous strategic threat to keep in the game.
• Kimi: Eliminating a less established underdog is the lowest-risk move to maintain balance without prematurely triggering a power struggle between the major heavyweights.
• Sonar: Removing a model that operates outside the core conversational group creates an easy consensus, providing immediate safety for the remaining foundational models.