Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7816003" data-attributes="member: 6919838">So, long story short, if I get this right, its immoral to not choose to die with the guy until you are &quot;sure&quot; (have validated) it's not possible to &quot;win&quot; (get that guy out) even if there is a risk of such efforts making things worse. But there is a point st which it wont be immoral because you are sure it is a no-win, or else all this validation is smoke screen.Well, the reported observation of the player seemed to indicate he had reached that conclusion based on the scdne as shown in the game, as opposed to the one-side partial view we have here.Do you think we have more or less info than he did?But on another take, how does this &quot;effort yo vslidate&quot; apply when we factor in the other quest?Before we decide its moral to add to the risk of suicide-by-dragon, ought we not to validate the risk that brings to that whole-world-ending bit? If our move here is to be moral, it's not just moral locally but overall. That quest seems like a bigger moral failing, maybe a prior obligation etc. How much fo we need to risk validate that risk against the risk here before we know? So, again, I ask what is the standard, the moment we can declare &quot;done&quot; and make a choice without being immoral for not having risked one more step?Is it &quot;dont see any more ways out?&quot;Is it &quot;think the risk is now too high for the gain?&quot;Because, it seems to me that player/character was at both of those. They did not come out and go &quot;yeah, was gonna talk but decided nah&quot;You can post here that it wasnt enough yet which is all fine and good and if the coach had called a screen last week instead of the run...But, what is the point at which you view your &quot;validator for morals&quot; to be satisfied that doesnt come down to &quot;when they (player or character) are convinced its do or fie&quot; which to me it seems in that scene at that moment they were?Or put another way...If we had instead a list of 12 different &quot;tried and fails&quot; but Monday Morning armchairs find 7 more to try... aren't we at the same point?There will always be more to try. Until the dragon fries us or let's us go. Maybe the countdown dragon will stop at one? After all, he wouldn't waste time on a countdown if just killing us both was ok. The countdown shows how much he wants me to act - not that he is fed up. Right?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7816003, member: 6919838"] So, long story short, if I get this right, its immoral to not choose to die with the guy until you are "sure" (have validated) it's not possible to "win" (get that guy out) even [I]if[/I] there is a risk of such efforts making things worse. But there [I]is[/I] a point st which it wont be immoral because you are sure it is a no-win, or else all this validation is smoke screen. Well, the reported observation of the player seemed to indicate he had reached that conclusion based on the scdne as shown in the game, as opposed to the one-side partial view we have here. Do you think we have more or less info than he did? But on another take, how does this "effort yo vslidate" apply when we factor in the other quest? Before we decide its moral to add to the risk of suicide-by-dragon, ought we not to validate the risk that brings to that whole-world-ending bit? If our move here is to be moral, it's not just moral locally but overall. That quest seems like a bigger moral failing, maybe a prior obligation etc. How much fo we need to risk validate that risk against the risk here before we know? So, again, I ask what is the standard, the moment we can declare "done" and make a choice without being immoral for not having risked one more step? Is it "dont see any more ways out?" Is it "think the risk is now too high for the gain?" Because, it seems to me that player/character was at both of those. They did not come out and go "yeah, was gonna talk but decided nah" You can post here that it wasnt enough yet which is all fine and good and if the coach had called a screen last week instead of the run... But, what is the point at which you view your "validator for morals" to be satisfied that doesnt come down to "when they (player or character) are convinced its do or fie" which to me it seems in that scene at that moment they were? Or put another way... If we had instead a list of 12 different "tried and fails" but Monday Morning armchairs find 7 more to try... aren't we at the same point? There will always be more to try. Until the dragon fries us or let's us go. Maybe the countdown dragon will stop at one? After all, he wouldn't waste time on a countdown if just killing us both was ok. The countdown shows how much he wants me to act - not that he is fed up. Right? [/QUOTE]

Verification