Seeing

[seer_wayne]

A club. Interesting. I have strange premonitions about this. My tea leaves say. . . Never mind my tea, just be careful, I guess. I may join, though. Danger is one of my middle names, of course.

Anyway, my readings are. . . depressing. . . It's going to get worse before it gets any better.

Comments

[sneaky_marietta]

That is very true. Nor would it have occurred had the other person been looking where they were going. But yes, an instigating act should definitely be acknowledged.

Remember, Wayne, the best advice often comes from experience and those who have found out the hard way. I know I personally would rather take advice on, say, how to raise my daughter from someone else who had also had a daughter than one who didn't have any children at all and had merely read a book on child rearing or something.

Isn't it funny how some people will claim how some people claim their actions protected everyone involved, when it didn't really protect anyone from anything. Some people have a skewed opinion of what protection means. But to me, Wayne, protecting means preventing an unwanted act from occurring, not merely ferreting out the person responsible after the unwanted act was committed.

And Wayne? While this is mere speculation on my part, I would suggest asking your Quidditch captain about what he thinks of a group being lied to. Some people just may choose not to be vocal about their displeasure lest they be threatened to keep quiet like they have been in the past.

And even if I'm wrong on that account, I still must admit to find it rather hypocritical that some people that being dishonest is so very wrong, unless it's them that's being dishonest. Then it's more than okay, of course, regardless of what anyone thinks.

[mugglecharm]

But Wayne, would you take advice on child-rearing from a mother who completely hated the experience, or from someone who never had a bad experience with her children in her life, or from someone with a more fair and balanced approach?

What's hilarious, really, is that by ferreting out the person responsible, it further protected those who were honest by knowing that their faith was rewarded by the betrayal and total lack of honesty by a single little trollop. I think there are different types of protection. Knowledge, for instance.

While your asking your Quidditch Captain, Wayne, why don't you ask him why he didn't choose dishonesty on that front when he, as well as everyone else, had that option. Why was it only that single little malcontent?

I find it ironic that some people can even use the word hypocritical with a straight bloody face.

[seer_wayne]

Stop addressing me when you aren't talking to me.

And give it a rest.

[mugglecharm]

Oh whatever.

[sneaky_marietta]

I'll stop addressing Hopkins because he requested it.

You're picking at threads, really, because you refuse to admit that your jinx did little more than identify and punish. It did not protect you.

I've explained my reasoning for doing what I did, from the part where it was not my intent in the beginning to betray the group to the final actions that pushed me over the edge. I was misinformed, I 'stopped my broom when I shouldn't have', if you will, and I'm not denying that. This isn't about that. What it's about is the fact that you flat out lied to your peers. Would it have really hurt your cause to say 'there is a jinx on this parchment, so please bear that in mind when you're signing'? But apparently, forthrightness is too good for you.

Better a hypocrite that can at least admit she'd been one that one who persistently insists on denying any wrongdoing on her part.

[mugglecharm]

Oh for...

Hopkins also told us to give it a rest, you wheezy little parrot, and that's what I'm doing. Good day, Edgecombe.

[sneaky_marietta]

Fine, I've said my piece.

Good day to you as well, Granger.