In post 49, Masquerader Purple wrote:
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.
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.
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.
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.
-- it goes against my win condition to not attempt to induce you into as many mistakes as possible.
