tu es non caterva, est urbs.In post 473, Ircher wrote:As promised, here are some examples of MUSH's fallacious logic.
According to MUSH, Cephrir is scum for 57 because it isn't likely to have come from a town role pm. Let me point out some of the various ways this argument is fallacious:In post 80, MUSHSHAGANA wrote:The content of your post reads EXACTLY in theme with a specific part of Control, but its a part that wouldn't be very likely to come up in a green role PM. If you hadn't fluffposted without thinking through the consequences of your actions you might have been fine, but instead you fluffposted in a way that gave the game away, precisely because you didn't know what you were talking about. Sorry bud
1: It presupposes that Cephrir is familiar with the source material. This is evidently false because in 57, Cephrir explicitly states he is not familiar with the source material. You may argue that it's scum indicative regardless, but there's nothing preventing someone with a town alignment who is unfamiliar with the source material from making the exact same post. While it may be true perhaps that a scum role pm may make such a post more likely (I wouldn't know as I don't know the source material), it is at best a marginal difference.
2: It also presupposes that Cephrir's role is directly related to the post at hand and that Cephrir pulled material from his role pm to make that post. There is no evidence in favor of this assumption; in fact, later posts highly suggest this is not the case as Cephrir denied MUSH's guess in 123.
The following two go together.In post 106, MUSHSHAGANA wrote:Ircher why do you think I'm making any claims about Cephrir specifically and not a general statement about anyone in the circumstances Cephrir finds himself inMUSH's argument here is that I am scum at least in part because I misinterpreted one of MUSH's earlier posts as being a specific observation about Cephrir rather than a general observation. For reference, the post I misinterpreted was 63:In post 111, MUSHSHAGANA wrote:Ceph and I have never played together, there is no meta being used here
I guess you're still scum. Great job bolstering my early hypothesisI would like to point out that if you are reading chronologically (and thus haven't seen the elaboration in 80, then it is very easy to interpret this post as MUSH scum reading fluffposting in general. My assumption was since that in the general case, that does not equate scum, there must have been something specific between MUSH and Cephrir that led to Cephrir's post being scummy in MUSH's eyes. 70 does not contradict my initial assumption; in fact, it reinforced it. Finally, there was also Lady Lambdadelta's take in 71, and her take is in fact a meta read. These factors combined, my original assumption, while incorrect, was reasonable. The issue here is that MUSH is trying to twist this around and paint it as scum!me protecting scum!Cephrir. MUSH is completely ignoring the "how would town come to this assumption" and instead jumps straight to the conclusion that reinforces MUSH's own preexisting bias. The argument that I am scum for making an incorrect assumption is fallacious because it completely ignores all the other equally plausible scenario and instead picks the one that fits in the most with MUSH's narrative.In post 63, MUSHSHAGANA wrote:Look if you didn't want to get burned down early then you should've used your noggin before you fluffposted, now its too late and that's your problem not mine
i speak some latin
