MM wrote:
That is very different from saying the decisions have no importance.
And I didn't say the DECISIONS (note the S at the end of the word) have no importance, nor did the mod. I said the FIRST DECISION (notice the LACK of an S at the end of the word) was not important, AS DID THE MOD.
Rhinox wrote:
What makes you so sure the lynching LT would be a mislynch? What evidence is there that LT is town?
Few things.
A. I I were scum the LAST THING I would be trying to do would be steering the town AWAY from a mislynch.
B. I'm not sure it's a mislynch. I just see no evidence that it will be a good lynch.
C. Asking me to PROVE that LT is town is the same as asking someone to PROVE that they aren't scum (then using the fact that they CAN'T as evidence that they ARE scum, or in this case, the fact that I CAN'T prove that he's town as evidence that he's scum):
wiki wrote:A particularly damning method of false argument involves forcing someone to prove that they are not Scum, and then using their lack of proof as evidence that they are. It is similar to the "you can't prove that invisible pink unicorns didn't create the universe" argument.
In short, it's impossible for me to PROVE that LT is town because I have no idea if he even is town. But you can't use the fact that I can't prove LT is town as evidence that he's scum. The only form of case that is valid is a case by person A on person B formed with the intention of demonstrating to the rest of the town why you think someone is scum. Asking someone to construct a case that doesn't fit that formula is committing the "Burden of Proof" fallacy, which you're guilty of.
Slice.
