Was V's act evil? (Probable spoilers!)

[Zimri]

No politics. ~ Piratecat

 

[catsclaw227]

Well it sounds like you are manipulating the forum rules about discussing politics to be able to skirt the discussion.

You cannot in anyway connect what V did with any recent events involving the US and a middle eastern country.

If this is your stance, and you COULD give your full "real world example", it would be shot full of holes big enough to drive a tractor through.

EDIT: Sorry to the mods and others for the hint of politics. I am just tired of this "example" he talks about being used as rationale for some ridiculous statistical analogy.

 

[Krensky]

According to some people in key positions, holding degrees from very respected universities, yes a small subset is a valid sample.

And they would be wrong, stupid, irrational, scared or some combination of the four. Their actions would quite likely have been immoral and potentially illegal as well, depending on the specific individual and which of their actions you wish to discuss.

We were shown through the actions of 50% of the black dragons who's actions we could measure that there would be revenge coming and it would be the escalating kind not the proportional kind.

It sounds meaningful when you use a percentage, rather then saying one of the two black dragons shown. If that was the entire population of black dragons, it might mean something. Nothing statistically meaningful, but something.

I put to you .. would you take that chance with YOUR family?

Wow.

If you want to play that game, fine.

No. I would not commit premeditated mass murder of people merely related by blood to someone who did or threatened to do bad things to my family because the might do something in retaliation. It would be illegal, unethical and more importantly, immoral. That sort of thinking has lead to massive amounts of suffering and horror throughout history, and never solved anything. Also, frankly, in my case it would take too long and my family would never speak to me again. Probably turn me in too. Respect for the rule of law and morality and all that.

The evil way of solving this .. Kill your own family so no one else can ever use them as leverage against you.

That would be evil too.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Professor I regret that I can not give you the real world example that I am falling back on of a few people in key positions, with doctorates deciding that 6 to 10 people of an origin reflected enough about said origin to do something orders of magnitude worse than varsuvius has done.

And I'm telling you that you're "making crap up."

Give me concrete evidence or stop pulling numbers out of thin air. because you aren't just slightly off, you're completely wrong in every single way imaginable. This isn't meant as an insult to you, though I'm certainly feeling it as an insult to myself and to everyone else that has ever even thought about working with statistics. I'm simply stating that you are absolutely factually incorrect for any given value of anything. Your words do not just lack meaning, they actually find other words that do have meaning and then murder them in a back alley with a rusty pipe over the head. Your "example"...is the death of numbers.

See, I don't care what your real world "OH MAN I CAN'T SAY IT BUT I SURE WILL HINT AT IT WITH EVERY SINGLE POST" example is. But when you claim that two creatures are a good sample for an entire species? I cannot - and I mean this literally, I cannot - imagine how anyone could come to that logical conclusion. My brain shuts down. It refuses to comprehend it.

What I'm trying to say is, stop talking about statistics if you seriously have no understanding as to what you're talking about. You're making me and many others look bad.

 

[Mort]

According to some people in key positions, holding degrees from very respected universities, yes a small subset is a valid sample.

small yes; that small, not even close.

We were shown through the actions of 50% of the black dragons who's actions we could measure that there would be revenge coming and it would be the escalating kind not the proportional kind.

I put to you .. would you take that chance with YOUR family ?

Responding to evil with evil - is still evil.

 

[Fenes]

Actually, when its "you must die so I can live" an awful lot of the time, its Evil. If you go by BoVD:

"Sacrificing others to save yourself is an evil act."

Example:
Ship is sinking, last lifeboat is full, if you don't get on, you will die. You shoot 1 person, spring aboard, and shove the body overboard.

You and another person are shipwrecked on desert island. You have contacted civilization by radio- rescue will be here. Only- theres only enough water to keep 1 person alive over the time it will take (no other sources)
You bash the other person when he's not looking, kill him, and wait for rescuers to arrive.

Both are "its him or me" but also, both are textbook Evil, not Neutral.

Those examples were used when I studied law. They are not textbook Evil, unless you consider our (western) set of laws to be evil.

 

[Hussar]

And I'm telling you that you're "making crap up."

Give me concrete evidence or stop pulling numbers out of thin air. because you aren't just slightly off, you're completely wrong in every single way imaginable. This isn't meant as an insult to you, though I'm certainly feeling it as an insult to myself and to everyone else that has ever even thought about working with statistics. I'm simply stating that you are absolutely factually incorrect for any given value of anything. Your words do not just lack meaning, they actually find other words that do have meaning and then murder them in a back alley with a rusty pipe over the head. Your "example"...is the death of numbers.

See, I don't care what your real world "OH MAN I CAN'T SAY IT BUT I SURE WILL HINT AT IT WITH EVERY SINGLE POST" example is. But when you claim that two creatures are a good sample for an entire species? I cannot - and I mean this literally, I cannot - imagine how anyone could come to that logical conclusion. My brain shuts down. It refuses to comprehend it.

What I'm trying to say is, stop talking about statistics if you seriously have no understanding as to what you're talking about. You're making me and many others look bad.

*wipes tear from eye*

Dude, that was a beautiful rant. Nice. I'd posrep, but I gotta spread the love around a bit more. :thumbup:

 

[resistor]

And I'm telling you that you're "making crap up."

Give me concrete evidence or stop pulling numbers out of thin air. because you aren't just slightly off, you're completely wrong in every single way imaginable. This isn't meant as an insult to you, though I'm certainly feeling it as an insult to myself and to everyone else that has ever even thought about working with statistics. I'm simply stating that you are absolutely factually incorrect for any given value of anything. Your words do not just lack meaning, they actually find other words that do have meaning and then murder them in a back alley with a rusty pipe over the head. Your "example"...is the death of numbers.

See, I don't care what your real world "OH MAN I CAN'T SAY IT BUT I SURE WILL HINT AT IT WITH EVERY SINGLE POST" example is. But when you claim that two creatures are a good sample for an entire species? I cannot - and I mean this literally, I cannot - imagine how anyone could come to that logical conclusion. My brain shuts down. It refuses to comprehend it.

What I'm trying to say is, stop talking about statistics if you seriously have no understanding as to what you're talking about. You're making me and many others look bad.

*applauds*

 

[Nymrohd]

Zimri your debating practices blow my mind away. Forcefully invoking a supposedly infallible yet unidentifiable source that perfectly supports your own position . . . maybe you should try strarting a religion next.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Those examples were used when I studied law. They are not textbook Evil, unless you consider our (western) set of laws to be evil.

I think for our purposes here, our western set of laws' morality is pretty irrelevant. They don't tell you what would or wouldn't be evil in D&D, just what is or is not legal in the real world (and as everyone knows, being legal and being moral are two entirely separate things). You can't use them as a way to judge whether or not D&D-verse (or the OotS-verse) would consider an act of Evil alignment or not. It's entirely possible -- and likely -- that certain evil actions are legal, and that certain good actions are illegal. The matrix doesn't mesh well enough for an accurate comparison.