RE: The Wander Island Incident - Day Two: Cold Dawn [18/21]
08-30-2018, 02:05 AM
(08-30-2018, 01:05 AM)Granolaman Wrote: »Acio's argument boils down to "on-death = town" and posits that seedy is scum because while she doesn't believe AC has an on-death power, she's still contesting the axiom in the hopes of heading off future townfirms.
Is this an accurate summation Acio?
No, her response indicates no disagreement with the line of thinking that AC has an on death role but contests that on death is a reason to believe them town
I asked several times for Seedy to offer an example of what exactly you could give scum that would make an on death role worthwhile and she did not answer that question, falling back to reasons as to why they could possibly exist.
Not having anything in mind initially or when prompted indicates she doesn't have a good reason to actually believe in it.
That it's the initial response is the telling thing; if "i don't think that necessarily explains his behavior" is an actual concern I don't think it gets left out when responding to the mechanical argument
Which is a pretty big thing when my earlier discussion of AC was in regards to behavioral options. I don't really like seedy's response to those either since they're in the same domain of "BUT MAYBE" but it's almost impossible to get town to stop doing that sort of thing.
But fighting assumptions that lead to mechanical confirms is absolutely in scum's wheelhouse since it's considerably harder to go ~but maybe~ if it reaches even a small consensus.