El Squid Company

[GeneralTacticus]

No, no, no. There is no need to try your children too. Nor do you we intend to set you on fire; we are simply going to hold a burning stick against you, and see if you are burnt. If not, THEN we will have to set you on fire, just to be sure. And, of course, if you don't burn, you are obviously possessed.

[mrmitchell]

That relieves me a little bit. However, if I do get burnt, then will this mob cover the cost of my recovery? And what is to prevent you from slipping the stick too far?

And how would a trial by water go?

[GeneralTacticus]

That relieves me a little bit. However, if I do get burnt, then will this mob cover the cost of my recovery?

No, of course not.

And what is to prevent you from slipping the stick too far?

The fact that it's unnecessary.

And how would a trial by water go?

We throw you in the water and see if you float without swimming. If you do, you're posessed; if you don't, you're innocent, and we pull you out and let you go.

[mrmitchell]

So...

You throw me in the water. If I have to swim, then I'm okay and I can go on my duties. Is that right?

And why would you not pay for damages you incurred?

[GeneralTacticus]

You throw me in the water. If I have to swim, then I'm okay and I can go on my duties. Is that right?

Correct.

And why would you not pay for damages you incurred?

Because we haven't done anything wrong in trying to ascertain whether you are possessed or not. You have yourself admitted to showing signs of posession.

[mrmitchell]

Who has defined these 'signs'? I saw a floating Squid, and I will not say otherwise, for that would be a lie. I am not possessed by evil spirits! The Squid was not evil!

This is not a sign of being possessed! There is no hard, provable evidence that possession is even possible!

[mrmitchell]

Ask, I believe I have his name correct, Thud Quixote I! (Thud)

He will tell you, if he is a man of science, that possession is not possible!

OOC: This might seem a little ahead of our time, but if you do submit me to these tests and I fail (or pass) then it will scare the populace into saying, and eventually thinking and believing, that possession is a real and close thing. /OOC

[Nuclear Winter]

[ooc]But I think THAT is the idea! Imagine! Scared peasants working to save their souls, always acting strictly in law, fearing evil may struck! [ooc]

[GeneralTacticus]

Who has defined these 'signs'? I saw a floating Squid, and I will not say otherwise, for that would be a lie. I am not possessed by evil spirits! The Squid was not evil!

You claim to have seen spirits. As good spirits do not act through those who are not priests, it could only have been an evil spirits, or a drink-induced hallucination. We are attempting to figure out which one it is.

Ask, I believe I have his name correct, Thud Quixote I! (Thud)

He will tell you, if he is a man of science, that possession is not possible!

Science? Science? What has that to do with anything? I know what the spirits have told me, and they are omniscient! Your futile attempts at arguing against these trials only serve to further prove your guilt.

OOC: This might seem a little ahead of our time, but if you do submit me to these tests and I fail (or pass) then it will scare the populace into saying, and eventually thinking and believing, that possession is a real and close thing. /OOC

But it is real. I wouldn't be saying it was if it wasn't.

[ooc]But I think THAT is the idea! Imagine! Scared peasants working to save their souls, always acting strictly in law, fearing evil may struck! [ooc]

No, the idea is to determine if Spamish Mitchell is in fact possessed. If he is, he must die, to deprive evil of it's agent; if he isn't, then we willl have found that out.

[mrmitchell]

Who defines the rules by which spirits go? Who says they can only act through Priests? Or maybe this proves that I am the real priest, for the Squid spirit was not evil! Even Senor Calamari told me that La Ropa, one of the Squid's suggestions, was a good idea!

I'll say again, who defines the spirits' laws? They are supernatural; they have to follow no rules!!!

[GeneralTacticus]

Who defines the rules by which spirits go? Who says they can only act through Priests?

The spirits themselves set their rules, and pass them on to me.

Or maybe this proves that I am the real priest, for the Squid spirit was not evil!

How can you tell? Evil does not easily reveal itself. It good not have been a good spirit, hence it must have been an evil one.

Even Senor Calamari told me that La Ropa, one of the Squid's suggestions, was a good idea!

What? Where? What difference does that make?

I'll say again, who defines the spirits' laws? They are supernatural; they have to follow no rules!!!

They follow their own rules, which they set themselves.

[mrmitchell]

How can we be sure, Senor Tacticus, that you are not making up the spirits' rules as you go? The spirits would not reveal their deepest secrets to a mere mortal, and they can, indeed change at any time without notice. And they are supernatural, they need not follow their own nor anyone else's rules.

Originally posted by History Guy
However, we can't, nor can anyone else, sell clothing as good as the stuff from La Ropa.

See? He just said he himself couldn't sell any clothing as good as "the stuff from La Ropa." This says that he thinks the idea of the Floating Squid is a good idea, thus lending me a slight bit of support...

And notice how everyone else is agreeing with you...it's like they are trying to suck up to prevent their own trials, bogus as these trials are, in the future.

[GeneralTacticus]

How can we be sure, Senor Tacticus, that you are not making up the spirits' rules as you go?

How can we be sure, Spamish Mitchell, that anything exists at all? The spirits have told me what I have told you.

The spirits would not reveal their deepest secrets to a mere mortal, and they can, indeed change at any time without notice.

And how is it tha you, a mortal who has no knowledge of thes pirits, can make such a claim? I am High Priest, it is my job to know such things, and I can tell you that you are wrong.

And they are supernatural, they need not follow their own nor anyone else's rules

They need not follow the rules of others, but they do follow their own, for if they didn't follow them, they would not have those rules at all.

See? He just said he himself couldn't sell any clothing as good as "the stuff from La Ropa." This says that he thinks the idea of the Floating Squid is a good idea, thus lending me a slight bit of support...

I'll ask again: what does this matter? The fact that you, a possibly possessed man, make good clothes upon the suggestion of either a delusion or a demon, does nothing to help your case.

And notice how everyone else is agreeing with you...it's

Yes, telling, isn't it?

And notice how everyone else is agreeing with you...it's like they are trying to suck up to prevent their own trials, bogus as these trials are, in the future.

This trial is hardly 'bogus' - you have admitted to being visited by a spirit, which, as it could not have been a good one, must have been an evil one. We are simply attempting to verify whether it was a spirit or a delusion, but your actions are only lending more weight to my suspicions that you are possessed.

Tell me, if you are innocent, why do you fear this trial so? A small amount of pain and discomfort is a small price to pay for the assurance that you are not possessed, is it not?

[mrmitchell]

I fear it because it is WRONG.

The trial is wrong because it is based purely on intangible evidence-my saying that I have seen a floating Squid, you saying that the spirits have talked to you--there is no way that one can verify the other's claim. If these kind of trials continue, worse accusations will be made, and worse punishments will be dealt, falling down to the punishment of death. Thousands of innocents could be hanged if you do not think:

Trials are based on facts, not conjecture. Conjecture is the forming of judgements based on incomplete data, and the data here is most incorrect if it cannot be proved. Who is not to start faking a spasm, and saying that they see spirits telling them the names of people to burn? Anyone, if these trials are ruled upon on the basis of guesses. However, facts are things that can be proven, and thus can be used as accurate evidence in a trial, evidence that can be used to determine innocence or guilt. (Not that seeing evil spirits was ever declared a crime anyways.)

If you say that seeing evil spirits is a crime, then I ask of you: Is not religious freedom one of the spirit-given rights to the people? These rights that seperate us from the animals? And does not religious freedom include my right to see whatever spirit that is there? These philosophies of rights may seem absurd, my friend, but they are wise and true: they can be suppressed no longer.

Spamish Mitchell
For the current moment, Philosopher

[GeneralTacticus]

my saying that I have seen a floating Squid,

So, do you wish to withdraw your confession of having seen a floating squid? Or your claim that it was a spirit?

you saying that the spirits have talked to you

So it is your intent to question my authority, now is it? You do realize that in so doing you are also questioning the authority of our Great Despot Togas, who in his wisdom, appointed me High Priest?

If these kind of trials continue, worse accusations will be made, and worse punishments will be dealt, falling down to the punishment of death.

What do you mean, these kind of trials? The purpose of them is to determine if there is any supernatural influence acting upon you. No-one could naturally float without swimming in water, or ot be burned by fire, so something supernatural must be going on if that happens.

Trials are based on facts, not conjecture.

And so is this one. You are disputing the initiation a trial, which is a different matter entirely. The purpose of a trial is to determine guilt or innocence, which is what we intend to do here.

Who is not to start faking a spasm, and saying that they see spirits telling them the names of people to burn?

No-one, because I am the only one who can speak to spirits, and I would not lie.

However, facts are things that can be proven, and thus can be used as accurate evidence in a trial, evidence that can be used to determine innocence or guilt.

Yes, indeed, such as obvious supernatural influences.

[quote](Not that seeing evil spirits was ever declared a crime anyways.)[/qupte]

No, it's not a crime, but being possessed is. Seeing evil spirits is only a small step from possession.

If you say that seeing evil spirits is a crime, then I ask of you: Is not religious freedom one of the spirit-given rights to the people?

No. No-one has the right to believe in false or evil religions.

These rights that seperate us from the animals?

We are seperated from animals by our souls, not our rights.

And does not religious freedom include my right to see whatever spirit that is there?

See above.

These philosophies of rights may seem absurd, my friend, but they are wise and true: they can be suppressed no longer.

These 'philosophies of rights' are false and are merely a cover employed by those who wish to avoid paying proper respect to the spirits and to their leaders, nothing more.