How, exactly, were you demonstrating that it's incorrect? Show me. Your conditional for proving that 'zilla is sure' is that zilla kills herself. It demonstrates nothing, because either:gieff wrote:You wouldn't have to repeat yourself if you realized that I was not telling Zilla to kill herself. I was demonstrating to her (and to everyone else) that her statement "I am sure I have caught 2 or 3 scum" is incorrect.
Do you really think it is plausible that I am scum and was hoping I could convince town-Zilla to self-vote? Really?
1. zilla doesn't kill herself.
2. zilla kills herself, which still proves nothing.
It doesn't demonstrate anything because your clause for her statement to be true is absurd, and unlikely to happen.
I think it's plausible you're scum making a pointless case that was meant to sound like it conclusively proved that zilla was unsure about her cases, when in fact, it doesn't demonstrate anything.gieff wrote:Do you really think it is plausible that I am scum and was hoping I could convince town-Zilla to self-vote? Really?
Funny I was about to post an analogy. Here's mine:gieff wrote:If you love chocolate so much, then why don't you marry it?
It's pointless, because either:analogy wrote:John and Joe, are from religion A and religion B. They've been arguing over who's religion is right for a while now. John says to Joe, "Alright, kill yourself. If your religion is right, you go to heaven. If it's wrong, you go to hell."
1. Joe doesn't kill himself. John (that's you), goes, "Aha! You didn't kill yourself. You're obviously not sure about your religion."
2. Joe does kill himself. It still doesn't prove religion B is right.
Also, sure, let's use your analogy too:
Can you really not see the fallacy? Let's try it in a conversation:gieff wrote:If you love chocolate so much, then why don't you marry it?
ting: I love chocolate.
gieff: No, you don't love chocolate.
ting: I
gieff:
ting: That's a stupid argument. Your conditional for me to prove that I really
1. I marry chocolate - you accept that I really, honestly love chocolate.
2. I don't marry chocolate, even though it's
Yes, I'm obviously going to marry chocolate. It's not at all absurd to expect me to marry chocolate to prove I was telling the truth.
Basically,
I would conclude that the child who asked the above question just made a fallacy. Which is especially bad since said child used that fallacy to convince the other children in the playground that they should hang one of their number by a noose from the monkey bars.gieff wrote:Would you conclude that a child who asked the above question was really advocating for the chocolate-lover to marry chocolate?
---
I'm behind on several games ever since I've had more work in RL. Also, this particular game moves really fast. Still, I'll set time up in the weekend to finish this off.gieff wrote:ting and sensfan, how close are you to finishing your re-read? It would be ideal to decide on a lynch candidate today, so we can work out the claims and the actual lynch in the next three days.
---
I honestly doubt that.gieff wrote:And ting, THIS is why I wanted you to unvote. Dourgrim would have just accidentally hammered Panzer if your vote was still on.
---
I gave my tentative top 3 already. Go ahead and put them in your top 3 listing; if my top 3 changes after I'm done reading, just change them.gieff wrote:Dourgrim, Sensfan, and ting; we still need your top 3.