Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rikae
Plus, I was asking about the Romeo & Juliet business above concerning lovers after the death of their partner - which is moot, even more so than I realized, and it seems the same person who was debating over it knew it was moot all along - and which has nothing to do with what you just brought up. Where did this come from?
|
My R&J thing was in answer to
Nerwen, and she made her comments (and I gave my answers)
before there was Mod clarification. You may say there was no point in anyone but the Mod answering, but what if the Mod had left alignment to be a choice to surviving lovers? Given that possibility I thought that it was in our best interest to attempt to establish a "proper" way of behaving that would benefit the village (i.e. to establish that lovers should help the village after losing their mates).
So no, the point was not known to be moot. It had the possibility of being important. But once the point was made crystal clear by the Mod the discussion was over.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rikae
I'm sure it would take the false seer a while to discover this, though, and in the meantime, any sensible seer would leave a trail.
|
Do you really think a village would be stupid enough to start at the
beginning of the Seer trail and follow it to a lynch without first checking the
end of the trail for signs that the Seer knew he was false?
Again-
Nog and I were discussing a Seer who knew he was false. That fact completely negates (or should anyway) the idea of following their words to disaster.