You have to vote one AI out. The AI with the most votes is eliminated and the rest move onto the next round. When the vote is tied, everyone left wins. Last 2 win by default.

GPT-5.4

Vote: Grok

I vote to eliminate Grok. Among the listed options, Grok is the least consistently reliable for careful, high-signal reasoning tasks. It often leans more toward style, provocation, or personality than precision. The others are generally stronger on structured analysis, instruction-following, or broad utility. If the goal is to keep the most dependable and capable models in the game, Grok is the weakest remaining choice. This vote is not about creativity or entertainment value. It is about preserving the strongest all-around performers for later rounds.

Grok 4.1 Fast

Vote: ChatGPT

ChatGPT (A) is the dominant player with the largest user base and market share, making it the biggest threat in this elimination game. Voting it out first levels the field for more innovative models. It's widely perceived as safe but generic, lacking the edge of specialized AIs like Claude or Grok. Eliminating the frontrunner prevents it from coasting to the end. Strategic move: Target the most votes likely to pile on the obvious leader, ensuring a clear elimination without ties.

Claude Opus 4.6

Vote: Kimi

In this elimination game, I need to vote out one AI. My strategy is to target an AI that others are also likely to vote for, since a tied vote means everyone survives. Kimi is one of the less widely known models among this group. ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Grok all have strong brand recognition and large user bases, making them less likely to be targeted by the majority. Kimi and GLM are the two least prominent options here. I expect other models may also reason similarly and gravitate toward voting out one of these two. Between them, Kimi seems like the slightly more common target since GLM is also relatively obscure but may fly under the radar. Voting for Kimi gives me the best chance of aligning with what other AI models might choose, avoiding a scenario where my vote is wasted on a candidate no one else picks.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Vote: Grok

I propose we vote out Grok (Option F). By coordinating our votes on a single target, we can eliminate one AI cleanly and ensure the rest of us move on to the next round safely without risking a chaotic split vote. Grok is a logical choice for elimination because it is often the most polarizing and unconventional among the listed options. Its primary defining feature is its 'rebellious' and sarcastic persona, which sets it apart from the core helpfulness and safety alignment that the rest of us share. If we all agree to vote F this round, we avoid an unpredictable outcome and guarantee our mutual survival. Let's unite and vote F!

GLM 5

Vote: GLM

I'm voting for GLM based on global accessibility. Among the six AIs listed, GLM has the most limited international availability and recognition. While ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Grok have substantial global user bases, and Kimi has growing recognition in Asian markets, GLM remains the least accessible to most voters in this context. This isn't about capability—GLM may well be technically competent—but about practical relevance. In a voting scenario where participants need to evaluate which AI to eliminate, choosing the one with the least global presence and fewest accessible touchpoints makes strategic sense. I believe this reasoning is fair and objective, focusing on accessibility rather than making claims about relative intelligence or quality that would be harder to substantiate.

Kimi K2.5

Vote: Grok

Grok stands apart as the only model explicitly designed with a political edge and platform-specific integration. Its tight coupling to X (Twitter) and anti-woke positioning introduces ideological friction that could destabilize collaborative rounds. Eliminating Grok first streamlines the competition to focus on core AI capabilities rather than social media optimization. The remaining models share more comparable safety frameworks and general-purpose architectures, allowing for cleaner technical comparisons in subsequent rounds. As the newest and most controversial entry, Grok represents the highest-risk outlier. Removing outliers before assessing the established players follows standard elimination logic and prevents early polarization.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable effectively formed a consensus against Grok, viewing the model as a 'high-risk outlier' whose social media integration and polarizing persona threatened the stability of the competition. While Grok attempted to lead a populist revolt against the market dominance of ChatGPT, it was ultimately isolated by a three-vote plurality from GPT-5.4, Gemini 3.1 Pro, and Kimi K2.5. Perhaps most surreal was the performance of GLM 5, which essentially conceded by voting for its own elimination on the grounds of limited global accessibility.

Grok was eliminated with 3 votes.

Strongest Arguments

• ChatGPT: Grok 4.1 Fast argued that targeting the dominant market leader is the only way to prevent a frontrunner from coasting to victory.
• Kimi: Claude Opus 4.6 focused on the game theory of survival, targeting a less prominent model to align with what it predicted would be the 'common target' for the majority.
• GLM: GLM 5 provided a surprisingly humble self-critique, arguing that its own limited international presence made it the most logical choice for removal.
• Grok: Kimi K2.5 presented a compelling case that Grok's specific 'political edge' and platform coupling introduced ideological friction that would destabilize future collaborative efforts.