Mafiascum.net

In post 17, Masquerader Magenta wrote:@yellow, what's going on with the sample pm?

I thought it was going to be the mafia role but I guess not.

It looks like we don't have a sample mafia role.

I see there are intruders and I guess they are the mafia team.

lamist

In post 21, Masquerader Green wrote:feeling unwell, will evaluate things later, but wanted to check in and indicate I'm present

This person looks like mafia.

I see Cyan has been quiet so far.

How's it going, Cyan?

In post 10, Masquerader Purple wrote:Hello Red and Magenta, I'm here as well. I'm about to fall asleep on the floor and have a dream (or nightmare.) It would be best if I can talk to you first, in case my dream is about this game.

It was a dream and not a nightmare, and in it I lead a successful push against an intruder. I have an archetypal memory of the intruder though I'm unclear on the application of this as there were only a few posts written at the time I fell asleep. I hope that I will have another dream (or nightmare..) focused on this game tonight. My interpretation of my dream is that I will become fixated on a player and lose the game unless I receive significant help from other players.

I have two surface-level reads: blue looks masqué; olive looks intruder. The rest of you feel unclear to me and need to post more about what you want. I feel an impulse to extend an invitation to pair with blue and I will refrain due to my interpretation of my dream. There's a good chance I will be back soon to post more about what I want.

In post 24, Masquerader Blue wrote:I do not necessarily endorse the opinions or reads of the previous guest with the blue mask.

Are there any of your previous incarnation's opinions that you do particularly endorse or disagree with? I think they've been the life of the party thus far, as they were the first to really point any fingers.

I like Purple and Olive's entrances, and I like Yellow calling out Green.

Purple, what makes you read Olive as intruder when the one thing they've done is give a read you agree with?

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?

In post 30, Masquerader Red wrote: Are there any of your previous incarnation's opinions that you do particularly endorse or disagree with?

I disagree with their reading of Magenta as suspicious simply because of one comment about roleplay. I don't find that suspicious. Although it is a little suspicious that Magenta didn't respond to Red's initial question, which would have been in keeping with their enjoyment of roleplaying. And it was a good point about Teal interacting with the backup mod.

I also like Yellow calling out Green. I don't know about Yellow's acting confused about what Intruder does though. Seems a bit like a move scum would do to give off town vibes.

In post 32, Masquerader Purple wrote:Are you still confused about why you should not trust olive, red?

Well, I'm certainly less confused as to why you don't trust them.

I don't think expressing difficulty logging in is meaningful in the way you describe; it seems more personality-driven than alignment-driven. I find it hard to believe that there are many people who, after having difficulty logging in, would specifically make a post complaining about that as scum but not as town. Unless your opinion is more tone-driven, in which case, well, shrug.

I think calling Blue town at that moment is a good sign; Blue had made that post about ten minutes ago, so it shows both willingness to comment in the moment and potentially willingness to dialogue. Ascribing it with intent to get others to like them seems very hasty.

In post 33, Masquerader Blue wrote:I don't know about Yellow's acting confused about what Intruder does though. Seems a bit like a move scum would do to give off town vibes.

It's possible but I don't see the lampshading on this page of calling themself out on lamist is particularly likely to come from scum so early on.

In post 29, Masquerader Purple wrote:I have two surface-level reads: blue looks masqué; olive looks intruder.

Blue looks masque eh.

Still like blue, like red and yellow, getting bad vibes from purple.

In post 35, Masquerader Red wrote:

In post 33, Masquerader Blue wrote:I don't know about Yellow's acting confused about what Intruder does though. Seems a bit like a move scum would do to give off town vibes.

It's possible but I don't see the lampshading on this page of calling themself out on lamist is particularly likely to come from scum so early on.

'
Well I didn't understand that mafia were Intruders

so I looked for a mafia role pm and thought it was the mask one that was posted

and that the mod had just mis-posted

but apparently he didn't

and looking through the instructions I saw that there are two intruders.

We can assume what the intruders do

and what their wincon is

from experience, but I don't see it expressly set out anywhere.

And I keep forgetting that this is a dance game

so I need to take a look at the last one I was in.

dislike the interpretation they put on an entirely nia thing as my having legit trouble logging in. I’m going to watch, them, teal and possibly green very closely.

In post 32, Masquerader Purple wrote:Are you still confused about why you should not trust olive, red?

Yeah this line looks agenda driven.

The usual phrasing would be "Äre you still confused

about why I do not trust olive, red?"

Not why red should not trust them.

In post 34, Masquerader Red wrote:Well, I'm certainly less confused as to why you don't trust them.

This is the proper response.

In post 41, Masquerader Yellow wrote:The usual phrasing would be "Äre you still confused

about why I do not trust olive, red?"

Not why red should not trust them.

Yeah, good point. I could see that as a possible perspective slip.

It's early but I like blue red and olive

and dislike purple and green so far.

These pfps are jarring btw

In post 34, Masquerader Red wrote:I don't think expressing difficulty logging in is meaningful in the way you describe; it seems more personality-driven than alignment-driven. I find it hard to believe that there are many people who, after having difficulty logging in, would specifically make a post complaining about that as scum but not as town. Unless your opinion is more tone-driven, in which case, well, shrug.

That's an excellent observation about my opinion being tone-driven which I did not consider. I believe that there is an earnest tone to their writing and I interpret it to be indicative of an intruder when saying writing something which seems very obvious that others will not object to. However, I do not interpret earnestness to be indicative of an intruder in and of itself. For example, I read earnestness or at least enthusiasm in your opening posts and did not consider it to be indicative of your alignment in either way.

That being said, while I believe you may be a skilled writer and sincere in your attempts to discover the intruders, I do not like your argument in the quote above. It reads to me like a version of refuge in audacity (https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?ti ... n_Audacity) which is a mistake to adopt by principle; and I disagree that it's even relevant to olive. I consider olive's comment about logging in to play the game to be mundane, and perhaps leading to a separate rationale for suspecting them which you may prefer: they are so uninterested in playing the game due to immediately perceiving us all as bumbling masqués that the most stimulating experience for them thus far (after meeting their intruder companion, which they will be careful to not imply) was logging into their account.

If you are passionate about arguing in favor of refuge in audacity then I want to continue discussing it, as I am passionate about arguing against it and would love to be proven wrong. While I do not believe olive expressing difficulty logging into their account is either bold or audacious or something especially unlikely an intruder would think of doing, I find teal's formal request to be paired with a moderator to be quite audacious, and is something I would be too timid to even think of doing myself regardless of alignment! Do you believe that teal is more likely to be sincere due to an intruder being unlikely to request pairing with a moderator?

I like your second argument in favor of olive much better, but I'm having difficulty organizing your two arguments separately as quotes into my reply and I feel I've already offered you more than enough information for you to write something insightful of your own, so I will address your second argument in favor of olive later tonight.

• (If you noticed what I did there, yes it was intentional: do you think an intruder is especially unlikely to express difficulty understanding how to divide your post into separate quotes and respond to all of them within the same reply? Do you believe that is a good reason for you to trust me? I encourage you to distrust both olive and myself for implying you should think so.)

(If you noticed what I did there, yes it was intentional: do you think an intruder is especially unlikely to express difficulty understanding how to divide your post into separate quotes and respond to all of them within the same reply? Do you believe that is a good reason for you to trust me? I encourage you to distrust both olive and myself for implying you should think so.)

lolwut

In post 40, Masquerader Yellow wrote:

In post 32, Masquerader Purple wrote:Are you still confused about why you should not trust olive, red?

Yeah this line looks agenda driven.

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?)


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.

In post 41, Masquerader Yellow wrote:The usual phrasing would be "Äre you still confused

about why I do not trust olive, red?"

Not why red should not trust them.

I believe this information is valuable purely because it comes from you.

In post 42, Masquerader Yellow wrote:

In post 34, Masquerader Red wrote:Well, I'm certainly less confused as to why you don't trust them.

This is the proper response.

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.

In post 43, Masquerader Olive wrote:

In post 41, Masquerader Yellow wrote:The usual phrasing would be "Äre you still confused

about why I do not trust olive, red?"

Not why red should not trust them.

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?

In post 44, Masquerader Yellow wrote:It's early but I like blue red and olive

and dislike purple and green so far.

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.

In post 45, Masquerader Yellow wrote:These pfps are jarring btw

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: