Quote:
Originally Posted by Pitchwife
See, and this is again the same kind of distorting abbreviation I called you out on before, and it's starting to make me uneasy, whether it's about me or Boro or whosoever. [If it's nothing she did yesterDay, then it's probably something she did toDay, right?] It may be just hasty reading on your part, or it may be a method. *ping*
|
Distorting, or revealing?
Boro's post (this is #363) does indeed lay out his reasons for suspecting Brinn on the basis of toDay, and if that's all it did, then 'it's not what you did yesterDay' would stand up perfectly fine. But then,
after making that explanation, and after a digression onto his own behaviour, he discusses Rikae's trap. I elided the parts in between to highlight the contradiction they seemed like they could be trying to disguise.
It really feels like he's trying to have his cake and eat it too: he wants to argue that his suspicions of
Brinn are based solely on her actions toDay, but he also wants the legitimacy of 'look, our confirmed innocent caught her!'.
When pressed about it, he said:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Boro
“In the light of yesterday”...yesterday did not know Rikae’s role. Did not know their guilt or innocent, so could have been a nefarious trap set by a wolf. Now I know it was an innocent trap set for a wolf. Possible it snagged an innocent Brinn?
|
Which makes perfect sense - but isn't what his original post
actually said. There's a big difference between 'I didn't suspect you yesterday' and 'I don't suspect you on the basis of what you did yesterday'.
Boro is claiming the former while stating the latter.
... or at least,
I think there's a big difference. If other people read
Boro's 'not based on yesterday' to mean more the former, then perhaps I'm just misreading.
Looking at the crossposts: do we really want to be pressing
Kitanna for more information? Fine if she's a wolf, but otherwise isn't it better to keep the wolves guessing?
hS