Who did you think the Intruders were then? I am struggling to understand how, out of two factions presented, you did not understand that the Intruders were the informed minority faction. Please help me understand.
Why do you consider these three to be likely Invitees? Specifically Blue.
I do agree with your stance on Purple.
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2022 4:27 am
by Masquerader Cyan
In post 94, Masquerader Teal wrote:It's been 3 days and we have someone who hasn't spoken. I'm trying not to automatically scumread them but it's hard when I have data on everyone else and nothing on them.
My sincerest apologies. I do not like your stance, however.
In post 31, Masquerader Red wrote:Purple, what makes you read Olive as intruder when the one thing they've done is give a read you agree with?
That's not true; olive has done two things (you overlooked that they revealed to us they had trouble logging into their account) and both things were written with the intent to get others to like them rather than to uncover information about the identity of the intruders or to disclose meaningful information about themselves.
Are you still confused about why you should not trust olive, red?
I stick with my conclusion. I'm aware of the possible oxymoron in my sentence but it is of no matter here. We all know that by default saying something like that is accusing someone of having mal intent.
I find your implication here ugly on both an aesthetic and a practical level, yellow, and especially unlikely to progress toward winning the game. I believe categorizing lines as those that are agenda driven and those that are not to be an unhelpful way to view the game, as most of the content written in this game will have some agenda behind it in some way shape or form, even if it's purely for self-amusement. Your statement is also an oxymoron in that I asked a question: it's assumed I have an agenda of inducing red to reveal information about himself. (is this pronoun acceptable to you, red, or do you prefer they or she or something else?)
1) Do you know what I mean when I say your statement is an oxymoron, yellow?
The most critical issue I have with yellow's post isn't that it's aesthetically myopic and impractical on a number of levels, it's that it directly interferes with masqué's ability to win the game. Discrediting players who are obvious majority is an accepted tell in any developed social deduction game as it's necessary for the minority to do this in order to win the game (https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?ti ... 8.2B1.0.29).
The fact that yellow is disregarding everything I've written to focus on the syntax of a single line and claim that it makes me less credible indicates a lack of strategic and social awareness about the game we are playing. Regardless of yellow's alignment it goes against their own win condition by damaging their credibility. They are furthering the agenda of the minority for superficial reasons in plain sight for all to see: why would we take yellow seriously, and what does yellow have to gain from doing that? The answer is that yellow does not know what they are doing (unless they are playing dumb, which is always a possibility) and unless they can demonstrate more strategic and social awareness they are a liability if they are a masqué.
Yes it was a proper and witty response. Fortunately, the rest of red's reply suggested they are thinking about the game and able to communicate their ideas effectively, something which you have not displayed thus far, yellow. You would have given yourself a chance to appreciate that if you were not skim reading our posts, yellow.
Yeah, good point. I could see that as a possible perspective slip.
I do not believe that olive actually thinks yellow made a good point or that the way I worded my question actually appears to them as a perspective slip. You're in luck yellow: olive appears to be a wealth of information about the identity of the intruders. I believe that olive's reply indicates they know yellow is a masqué and would prefer to see us fight each other.
If you don't believe me, watch for olive's response (I know you posted "lolwut" a few minutes ago, olive, and are likely reading this soon after it's posted:)
Olive, why did you think yellow made a good point, and how is the way I worded my question a perspective slip?
I don't know if these are reads or if you're just stating your opinion in stream-of-consciousness. Do you believe players who you like are more common to be intruders or less likely? I'm not sure if there is any meaningful correlation as the intruders are often focused only on getting you to like them and can refrain from telling you when they dislike something you write.
If these are reads, I do agree with the majority of your reads except I don't believe you have any meaningful reason to trust olive (telling you what you want to hear isn't a meaningful reason to trust someone, yellow, it means they might be an intruder and you should be reading them with more scrutiny, not less) and obviously I believe the idea that you would distrust me based on my play so far to be comedic. I believe this list indicates yellow to be a strong contender to be eliminated first in order to improve masqués chances of winning the game.
2) Yellow, why did olive write that you made a good point and why do they believe my question to red indicates a perspective slip?
Yellow, I believe that you are likely to be a masqué, however, I have a suspicion that you are not reading any posts which contain multiple lines of text with the necessary level of scrutiny, and you are motivated in part to "dislike" me because you can't be bothered to read my posts, and are therefore an ideal candidate to be eliminated first (rather than myself who is able to read and write competently enough to play this game.) If you would like to prove me wrong, then demonstrate you can read:
find the two bolded underlined questions I asked you and reply to them.
I answered your first question and I'm not answering your second,
in part because you're asking my why olive did something.
I want to know why you think I'm deliberately taking you out of context
and then turn around and say that you think I'm "likely to be a masque."
And I want to know what you think a masque is?
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2022 5:49 am
by Masquerader Yellow
In post 49, Masquerader Purple wrote:Yellow, I believe that you are likely to be a masqué, however, I have a suspicion that you are not reading any posts which contain multiple lines of text with the necessary level of scrutiny, and you are motivated in part to "dislike" me because you can't be bothered to read my posts, and are therefore an ideal candidate to be eliminated first (rather than myself who is able to read and write competently enough to play this game.) If you would like to prove me wrong, then demonstrate you can read: find the two bolded underlined questions I asked you and reply to them.
You want to intimidate and insult. Does that work for you?
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2022 5:53 am
by Masquerader Yellow
In post 66, Masquerader Magenta wrote:I don't love olive or purplest posting tbh, but that doesn't make it scummy. I think teal and blue are town, I'm not sure about red, although that seems an unpopular opinion.
Without context of players, it's hard to know whether yellows request to see the role pm was a deliberate lamist. Although the more I think about it, the less it makes sense as a real town slip, as it's pretty clear in the rules. The voting rules and pairings I had to go back to check but the idea that there's one good pm and a bad one is pretty fundamental?
What was clear in the rules? I didn't see a mafia faction wincon. I did miss that they were called intruders and I should've picked that up. But other than that (if that was even part of what you're talking about) what are you driving at?
Who did you think the Intruders were then? I am struggling to understand how, out of two factions presented, you did not understand that the Intruders were the informed minority faction. Please help me understand.
My PM says nothing about intruders.
There was no sample PM for the mafia faction/intruders.
It didn't connect with me that intruders were the mafia faction
until I went back and re-read the rules. Simple.
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2022 6:10 am
by Masquerader Yellow
Teal's post about dancing with Datisi was clearly a joke.
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2022 6:11 am
by Masquerader Yellow
In post 86, Masquerader Purple wrote:This game is won on the first elimination if we force yellow and green to pair with each other.
I would be open to that at this point.
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2022 7:13 am
by Masquerader Red
In post 92, Masquerader Magenta wrote:Red feels very negative in general, not liking the vibes. also, talk to me, not about me if you want to sort me
Sure. Could you justify your read on Purple in more depth? Why is the purple prose comment townish, and why is their reconsidering on Teal townish in the context of it being because they wanted to lock in this Green+Yellow solve? I can see why reconsidering there (and trying to push me to reconsider as well, which is actually probably pretty townish) looks good in one sense, but it's also just a natural consequence of their hard calling out two specific players as scum.
In post 104, Masquerader Cyan wrote:Why do you consider these three to be likely Invitees? Specifically Blue.
I think Blue's first incarnation had +town posts. 16 immediately giving five reads is simply very pro-town in this game for the reasons I gave; I don't overly care what the reasons they gave are on page one. I liked the new Blue's response to my inquiry in 33 at the time for continuing to give a lot of reads, though looking at it again now it is somewhat waffly. On Magenta, Blue says something isn't scummy but something else is, and on Yellow they give both a positive and a negative without describing the overall affect, which can be from scum wanting to look like they're being ponderous. I think the main issue with the slot at this point is just falling off, but I do think their posting on the whole so far is pretty likely town (I weigh post 16 fairly significantly in a hidden alt game).
Yellow, I described a bit in one of the last paragraphs in 91 and I also liked their quick willingness to give many stances and the way they handled their "lamist" debacle.
Olive, I liked their opening and I like their response to Purple; it feels righteously indignant. I also like their general vibe in the thread, though that's less tangible.
I have added the Sample Intruder PM to the setup post.
Nevermind. Please ignore my previous inquiry.
It appears best to arrange pairs by matching their chances of being invitee (which I previously called masqué, by mistake) and mismatching pairs based on the length they have gone to conceal their identity. I am used to constructing characters that match the account I am writing in (in fact I have experience and training for doing this) so I will be best paired with a masqué who is of higher-than-average chance to be an invitee and did not heed this warning:
In post 3, RH wrote:Known only to their possessors!
Alas, those Intruders, they'll be the guessers!
How they wish to unmask you all!
How they want to use them to cause your downfall!
Beware, friends, and confide to none!
Heed this advice or you're done!
In post 70, Masquerader Purple wrote:I've only skimmed but I "like" magenta's and teal's posting. I will have to think about what this means with regards to their alignment.
FYI Magenta, I'm playing a character based on the idea of purple prose and the color purple being associated with moodiness and royalty, if that helps you parse my posts at all.
Hello green, why do you find teal suspect?
I'm not explicitly trying to connect a face to a name but they seem to be imitating two people at once almost and that bothers me, as the first word I would describe it as would be "obfuscating".
This is an acceptable description though I intend to insult the play rather than the player. However, you missed that I also want to dream, and I assure you I am less narcissistic in real life than I appear to be in-game.
In post 86, Masquerader Purple wrote:This game is won on the first elimination if we force yellow and green to pair with each other.
Can you give me your case for both of them? And thank you for making your posts actually readable.
It's easy for me to adapt though it's a double edged sword as I can never stay exactly the same for too long. I am phantasmagorical, and I will write my cases for you soon.
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2022 9:29 am
by Masquerader Purple
In post 116, Masquerader Purple wrote:I am used to constructing characters that match the account I am writing in (in fact I have experience and training for doing this)
Honestly, I got ahead of myself here, this is not a reference to my main at all, this is metaphorical meaning I have professional experience with this kind of work (play ) in real life. I apologize for being unclear and will not write anything which could be misconstrued as a reference like this can be
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2022 12:31 pm
by Masquerader Yellow
In post 116, Masquerader Purple wrote:It appears best to arrange pairs by matching their chances of being invitee (which I previously called masqué, by mistake)
To this point Purple called the town faction masque.
I pointed it out on page 2 or 3
that they had called Blue masque and a few posts
Before this one I asked what they thought masque meant.
Interesting catch Yellow, because both alignments have “mask” in their role pms.
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2022 6:05 pm
by Masquerader Olive
Purple, why are you so eager to pair with me? Why do you think I specifically should accept your invitation? I don’t get it. You’ve gone from having me as your top intruder pick to to having me as your preferred partner? Why exactly?
One slot I’m kind of wondering about is magenta. They consider red negative but have most of the playerlist as likely intruders? If I misunderstood you magenta, I apologize but I don’t understand your takes. Perhaps yoican explain them better?
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2022 6:16 pm
by Masquerader Purple
In post 121, Masquerader Olive wrote:Purple, why are you so eager to pair with me? Why do you think I specifically should accept your invitation? I don’t get it. You’ve gone from having me as your top intruder pick to to having me as your preferred partner? Why exactly?
The automaton mechanic indicates that the intruders must guess the identity of both players simultaneously in order to kill them. This implies it's helpful to pair invitees so that at least one player is difficult to guess. I believe your dislike of fps play has caused you to take less precautions in protecting your identity than I have, so we will be safe in that regard, and I am eager because I believe that I extended an invitation to at least one intruder if not two. In other words, I'm hoping that you will protect me by not giving time for an intruder to pair with me, so I can protect you by making my identity difficult to spot, so we will not die if an automaton is used upon us.
As for the changing read, I misjudged you initially, and now I think I understand you better and I believe you are unlikely to be an intruder.
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2022 6:20 pm
by Masquerader Purple
I'm fine with being paired with either red or blue as I believe them both to invitees, though I prefer they pair with each other due to the automaton mechanic.
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2022 6:36 pm
by Masquerader Purple
In post 121, Masquerader Olive wrote:One slot I’m kind of wondering about is magenta. They consider red negative but have most of the playerlist as likely intruders? If I misunderstood you magenta, I apologize but I don’t understand your takes. Perhaps yoican explain them better?
I have similar reservations with magenta. I also want them to answer red's question in 114. Better explanations from magenta would help a lot in my assessment of them.
) in real life. I apologize for being unclear and will not write anything which could be misconstrued as a reference like this can be 