1342 réponses à ce sujet

[Someone With Mass]

Yeah, Cerberus seems to believe that aliens will kidnap our children, rape our women and conduct experiments on our men if they ever get the chance, when in reality, it's Cerberus themselves that are doing the experiments. For no good reason.

[SennenScale]

Saphra Deden wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

Why? Just because I don't want to alienate humanity from the rest of the galactic community?

What does Cerberus have to do with alienating humanity from anybody? It's a small organization, a non-public one. Not even humanity's representative.

For a small non public organization, everyone in the Terminus systems seems to know about it and even recognize the darned logo.

[008Zulu]

Makes you wonder why they are doing these experiments on unwilling humans. You'd think they'd be doing it on the aliens. Seems to me like they are perfecting methods to kill humans, seems odd for a pro-human group.

[lolwut666]

It has been mentioned numerous times that humans are useful as test subjects.

Plus they probably figure that if they start kidnapping members of other races, they might start a war.

[didymos1120]

008Zulu wrote...

Makes you wonder why they are doing these experiments on unwilling humans. You'd think they'd be doing it on the aliens. Seems to me like they are perfecting methods to kill humans, seems odd for a pro-human group.

Um, well, it's pretty simple: aliens aren't humans.  If you're trying to find ways to improve humans and want to know what something will do them, an alien just plain can't substitute.  That said, they do experiment on aliens/non-humans as well, depending on the goal involved.  See the Shadow Broker dossier, for instance, or their aborted rachni operation.

[Arijharn]

Moiaussi wrote...
Besides the fact that assassinating elected politicians is 'actively working to sabotage democracy', in the prologue of Ascension he escews the Alliance for being 'ineffectual' because it is hampered by 'laws, convention, and the crushing weight of public opinion.'

Think of it this way; he isn't seeking to dismantle the Alliance as a whole, rather those who he feels isn't doing their jobs (aka; safeguarding humanity) You know, perspective. I may conceede whether assassinating the Terra Firma guy may be 'sabotaging' the democratic purpose, but then again I don't think anyone has the feeling that Cerberus are particularly nice guys (I just think labelling them as 'evil' to be nothing short of moronic imo, especially in such a gray universe). Although; on the face of it; he seeks to undermine or strengthen Terra Firma (depending on where you stand) but he isn't say seeking to eliminate the majority parties of the parliament (whatever they may be) which I guess means that he isn't as say 'dedicated' to the idea to which you seem to ascribe him too.

Mousy wrote...
Why wouldn't the volus be able to 'unchoose' their 'fate?' There are no laws barring them from building and manning their own fleets. They have a contract with the Turians, but as the master traders it seems very unlikely that the Volus wouldn't have put an escape clause into the contract.

No there aren't rules, but rules aren't the only methods to influence proceedings to your benefit. A word here, a random sabre rattling incident over there etc, etc. Remember that the Turian's economic might primarily hinges on their Volus 'partners.' 

Mousy wrote...
You completely ignore the context and seem to think that mutually agreed to contracts that either side can walk away from at any time (just as the Batarians did) equates to 'oppression.'

Remember what we're arguing about here, it's whether TIM wants humanity to share this sort of fate (as I see it). He, in a word, doesn't. How exactly is the volus just going to 'walk' away from it? They depend upon the Turian's for the protection of their colony's from pirate attacks for one. No other species apparently took that view with the Volus (for some reason) beforehand, and just to potentially preempt you, don't say: "The Council will step in" because we know from experience that the Council didn't step in for us with Eden Prime or even Terra Nova. You think the Volus are just going to magically summon up a fleet (to protect their interests) in a week?

Mousy wrote...
As for genocide, you also completely ignore the fact that the other side was engaging in and quite capable of genocide in the Rachni war. The Council was losing the war when the Krogan were brought in.

Right, Genophage v1 may have been necessary (may not have been, I'm inclined to think that it was but that doesn't mean that it wasn't a difficult decision) but Genophage 2 was strictly illegal even by the Council's own rulings in accordance to their tiered system of WMD.

So you are arguing that the threat of genocide perpetrated on you is reason enough to commit genocide on them as a pre-emptive strike? With that mode of thinking, maybe you would fit in right at home with 'evil' Cerberus.

Mousy wrote...
The genophage wasn't genocide in that it stabilized the population with no intent to eliminate it.

Genocide doesn't necessarily mean extinction, it just means the mass killing of a particular race or creed. Even so, even a blind man will see and realise 'hey, something's up' when population's start dropping because the salarian's put something a little bit harsher than just flouride in their drinking water.

You are letting off the Council based on technicalities moi. The Krogan population and culture suffered and continues to suffer because of it (and while that makes me sound like a bleeding heart, I really am not). They (salarians) purposely engineered it for this process, it can be nothing else but a genocidal attack.

Mousy wrote...
Are you going to argue in favour of sparing the Reapers too? Should we have offered Sovereign quarter in ME1? Do you consider yourself horribly evil for not having done so?

Don't be absurd, I never argued that Cerberus were saints, I just argued that in comparison, Cerberus has done rather minor things compared to the Council, and yet it's only Cerberus that is 'evil' which while it doesn't necessarily make you hypocritical in and of itself, makes you willfully blind. I also argued that in my eyes at least, some of the 'evil' acts that Cerberus has done aren't necessarily evil due to a) insufficient evidence, rogue actions undertaken by Cells that have strayed too far or even c) personal ambivalence (I don't see morally questionable practices about experimenting on Thorian Creepers or even Husks, because they aren't sapient at best and are basically 'soulless' automatons anyway for example)

Genocide is genocide moiaussi (I can never spell your name right without actually checking the quote section) ) you give a free pass to the Council because it was 'elected' (and not by us, and they are supposed to represent us? And we've got it good, we've got a seat!)

[lolwut666]

Arijharn wrote...

[Don't be absurd, I never argued that Cerberus were saints, I just argued that in comparison, Cerberus has done rather minor things compared to the Council, and yet it's only Cerberus that is 'evil' which while it doesn't necessarily make you hypocritical in and of itself, makes you willfully blind. I also argued that in my eyes at least, some of the 'evil' acts that Cerberus has done aren't necessarily evil due to a) insufficient evidence, rogue actions undertaken by Cells that have strayed too far or even c) personal ambivalence (I don't see morally questionable practices about experimenting on Thorian Creepers or even Husks, because they aren't sapient at best and are basically 'soulless' automatons anyway for example)

Genocide is genocide moiaussi (I can never spell your name right without actually checking the quote section) ) you give a free pass to the Council because it was 'elected' (and not by us, and they are supposed to represent us? And we've got it good, we've got a seat!)

wat

What exactly has the Council done that overshadows the atrocities commited by Cerberus?

[lolwut666]

Saphra Deden wrote...

*eyeroll*

Elaborate.

[008Zulu]

Saphra Deden wrote...
You're right, the best way to advance our understanding of biotics in humans is to study non-humans!

Brilliant.

Human dominace at any cost. Cerberus can't perfect killing aliens by testing on humans.

I hope we get to shut down Cerberus permenantly. EDI's databases must contain a wealth of information, maybe enough to cripple if not destroy. A lot of their supporters will be pulled down too. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

[Someone With Mass]

Could've done so much better with Cerberus' resources, but they insisted on doing experiments that had no useful purpose at all.

Like injecting a traumatized soldier with thresher maw acid.

[Arijharn]

lolwut666 wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

*eyeroll*

Elaborate.

No need, there's some threads out there and one that I wrote several months ago. It's in this forum but you'll have to dig a bit and usually people only focus on Cerberus while giving others (*cough*Council*cough*) the freedom to act as they see fit apparently.

[General User]

Moiaussi wrote...
You are going to hire privateers at gunpoint then? Force them to sign contracts? Good luck with that. Legislating job offerings at insufficient pay doesn't convince people to sign up, and if you legislate that they must sign up, congratulations, you haven't hired privateers, you have re-instated the draft.

Strictly speaking, privateers don’t work on contracts, they work on spec. They only get paid if they capture enemy vessels and someone else buys them or their cargoes.

If the potential reward is good enough people will sign up on spec. The first Freakonomics by S. Levitt and S. Dubner is an excellent book on the matter. Pay special attention to chapter 3.

No, it doesn't. If the nation fielded exactly the same number of ships itself, then it would have exactly the same capacity. Of course no prizes would have to be taken if the nation doesn't engage in said activity itself. You are comparing apples and oranges.

Nations only own the ships in their navies. Privateering mobilizes privately owned ships for commerce raiding activity. Hence the name. Seizing privately owned shipping is like looting a treasury. You get a huge boost, but you can only do it once.

So the US doesn't get any taxes from Texas? If Texas suddenly ceased to be a part of the US, the US tax base would be exactly the same? If for whatever reason, strategic, economic, whatever, it was beneficial for that state to be part of the union, guess what? That benefit wouldn't be there. It would be independant and not providing (or recieving) benefits.

 

What are you talking about? Texas is not an independent state. Let’s try that same example with two independent states, like we were actually talking about. Let’s use The Alliance and Horizon: 

So the [Alliance] doesn't get any taxes from [Horizon]? Since Horizon is independent, no I don’t imagine they do. 

If [Horizon] suddenly ceased to be a part of the [Alliance], the Alliance tax base would be exactly the same? Horizon was never part of the Alliance, so yes it would.

If for whatever reason, strategic, economic, whatever, it was beneficial for that state to be part of the union, guess what? I can't guess, just tell me.

That benefit wouldn't be there. It would be independant and not providing (or recieving) benefits. It was never providing any, it was independent.

It is interesting to note that your choices seem to be 'independant' or 'subjegated.' You figure your home town would rather be a city state than part of what nation it is in?

If my home town was Luxemburg or Monaco, yes. But it’s not, so I don’t. I live in a town, which is part of a county, which is part of a state, which is part of a Union. There is no single type of organization or political system that is right for everybody or every other country or even any other country, that’s why independence is so important.

Oh goody, you are backing a faction based on ideals they don't actually follow, but that you hope they will adopt out of nowhere.

What!?! Hope and change aren’t a rational basis for a philosophy? I have been grossly misinformed!

Seriously though, faith in humanity, and the belief that one person can make a difference are hallmarks of idealism. I am an idealist.

Reality check? Last I checked I don't own any space penetentiaries.

Based on your statement: “The best available system for achieving any given thing IS a virtue in and of itself.” You might want to send them a resume.

[alienatedflea]

SennenScale wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

Why? Just because I don't want to alienate humanity from the rest of the galactic community?

What does Cerberus have to do with alienating humanity from anybody? It's a small organization, a non-public one. Not even humanity's representative.

For a small non public organization, everyone in the Terminus systems seems to know about it and even recognize the darned logo.

Man I see you everywhere , but regardless, Cerberus is small potatoes...why not go after the Blue Suns, Eclipse, or those guys in red instead? Those organization at least seem more organized than Cerberus and they are always impeding progress in the galaxy...but nooo everyone has to be on Cerberus' back...

[alienatedflea]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Yeah, Cerberus seems to believe that aliens will kidnap our children, rape our women and conduct experiments on our men if they ever get the chance, when in reality, it's Cerberus themselves that are doing the experiments. For no good reason.

lol you dont listen much in the game do you? its all in the name of advancing human dominance in the galaxy...and when did they ever rape women?

[lolwut666]

Arijharn wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

*eyeroll*

Elaborate.

No need, there's some threads out there and one that I wrote several months ago. It's in this forum but you'll have to dig a bit and usually people only focus on Cerberus while giving others (*cough*Council*cough*) the freedom to act as they see fit apparently.

Unless you're willing to link a thread or explain it to me yourself, I have no reason to consider your arguments.

[Moiaussi]

Arijharn wrote...

Think of it this way; he isn't seeking to dismantle the Alliance as a whole, rather those who he feels isn't doing their jobs (aka; safeguarding humanity) You know, perspective. I may conceede whether assassinating the Terra Firma guy may be 'sabotaging' the democratic purpose, but then again I don't think anyone has the feeling that Cerberus are particularly nice guys (I just think labelling them as 'evil' to be nothing short of moronic imo, especially in such a gray universe). Although; on the face of it; he seeks to undermine or strengthen Terra Firma (depending on where you stand) but he isn't say seeking to eliminate the majority parties of the parliament (whatever they may be) which I guess means that he isn't as say 'dedicated' to the idea to which you seem to ascribe him too.

And your evidence that is anything other than wishful thinking on your part is what, exactly? If TIM is Cerberus and Cerberus is Humanity, where does that leave the rest of us who normally consider us humanity? And he didn't just assassinate a Terra Firma guy, he assassinated two Earth presidents just to make it easier to get some legislation through. Assassinating those who vote against your policies is not democracy.

No there aren't rules, but rules aren't the only methods to influence proceedings to your benefit. A word here, a random sabre rattling incident over there etc, etc. Remember that the Turian's economic might primarily hinges on their Volus 'partners.'

Pardon? More rampant wishful thinking on your part? If the Volus ever did get their own fleet, they could offer financial guidance to the Council as their specialty, just as the Turians specialize in military, Asari in diplomacy, and Salarians in espionage. The Turians would still benefit economicly. The Volus just haven't been willing to put their own lives on the line in ships so far.

Remember what we're arguing about here, it's whether TIM wants humanity to share this sort of fate (as I see it). He, in a word, doesn't. How exactly is the volus just going to 'walk' away from it? They depend upon the Turian's for the protection of their colony's from pirate attacks for one. No other species apparently took that view with the Volus (for some reason) beforehand, and just to potentially preempt you, don't say: "The Council will step in" because we know from experience that the Council didn't step in for us with Eden Prime or even Terra Nova. You think the Volus are just going to magically summon up a fleet (to protect their interests) in a week?

The Terminus systems get away with a lot simply by playing hardball with the Council. Udina on the other hand has made a career out of licking their boots. And as for the Volus, they would obviously build the fleets first with a clean transition of power. They might even start by buying up surplus Turian vessels and refitting the controls to be more volus-friendly. Of course the council wouldn't step in, but that doesn't mean the Volus would be idiots about it either.

Right, Genophage v1 may have been necessary (may not have been, I'm inclined to think that it was but that doesn't mean that it wasn't a difficult decision) but Genophage 2 was strictly illegal even by the Council's own rulings in accordance to their tiered system of WMD.

So you are arguing that the threat of genocide perpetrated on you is reason enough to commit genocide on them as a pre-emptive strike? With that mode of thinking, maybe you would fit in right at home with 'evil' Cerberus.

v2 wasn't genocide either though, and Krogan society is indeed stabilizing under Wrex (or his stand-in)'s guidance. There was no intent at all to eliminate the race, merely to stabilize population growth.

Genocide doesn't necessarily mean extinction, it just means the mass killing of a particular race or creed. Even so, even a blind man will see and realise 'hey, something's up' when population's start dropping because the salarian's put something a little bit harsher than just flouride in their drinking water.

You are letting off the Council based on technicalities moi. The Krogan population and culture suffered and continues to suffer because of it (and while that makes me sound like a bleeding heart, I really am not). They (salarians) purposely engineered it for this process, it can be nothing else but a genocidal attack.

It isn't genocide because there is neither intent to eliminate the race, nor is that effect in place. If that distinction isn't important, everyone who ever kills anyone regardless of circumstances is committing genocide. And Krogan society is recovering and evolving. Pre-genophage, the Krogan killed themselves and anyone/anything else they could find as a challenge, as a birth control method. That sure sounds like a lot more suffering than this to me.

Don't be absurd, I never argued that Cerberus were saints, I just argued that in comparison, Cerberus has done rather minor things compared to the Council, and yet it's only Cerberus that is 'evil' which while it doesn't necessarily make you hypocritical in and of itself, makes you willfully blind. I also argued that in my eyes at least, some of the 'evil' acts that Cerberus has done aren't necessarily evil due to a) insufficient evidence, rogue actions undertaken by Cells that have strayed too far or even c) personal ambivalence (I don't see morally questionable practices about experimenting on Thorian Creepers or even Husks, because they aren't sapient at best and are basically 'soulless' automatons anyway for example)

You keep ignoring context. You ignore the Krogan situation pre-genophage and the effects of unrestrained rapid population growth. You ignore the fact that the genophage stabilizes populations. You assume the Volus, who are portrayed as managerial geniuses could not handle a simply implementation and transition to their own fleets. Experimenting on creepers and husks wasn't evil in its own right, but the experiments on Toombs as part of a plan to create 'geneticly enhanced super soldiers' implies taking the data from such studies and crossing it with human DNA.

Genocide is genocide moiaussi (I can never spell your name right without actually checking the quote section) ) you give a free pass to the Council because it was 'elected' (and not by us, and they are supposed to represent us? And we've got it good, we've got a seat!)

Psst, we are players sitting outside the world looking in. Of course we didn't vote in a fictional election. And regardless of the culture shock to the Krogan, the Genophage is less harsh than the reproductive rates it stabilizes. It also isn't genocide, but we are going to have to agree to disagree on that. If we start debating the ethics of birth control here, the mods will quite rightly shut us down.

[didymos1120]

Moiaussi wrote...

v2 wasn't genocide either though, and Krogan society is indeed stabilizing under Wrex (or his stand-in)'s guidance.

No, it's different with Wreav leading Urdnot.  He's a very traditional krogan.  Urdnot is prospering to an extent, but it's business as usual on Tuchanka: Wreav doesn't assimilate the remnants of defeated clans.  He has them killed.  Fortack works on munitions instead of improving crop yields and medicine. And so on.

The most succinct summary of the differences comes from the Chief Scout.  With Wrex in power, he'll say:

"Wrex believes we need to unite the krogan people. I don't think we can do that with offworlders interfering. But it's not my call."

With Wreav it is:

"Wreav wants victory for our clan. Offworld interference could screw up that plan. But you're a special case, I guess."

IOW, Wreav is very much his father's son.  Wrex?  Not so much.

[Whereto]

Umm, can someone give a summary of what has been established so far?... I kinda gave up at page 12

[Moiaussi]

General User wrote...

Strictly speaking, privateers don’t work on contracts, they work on spec. They only get paid if they capture enemy vessels and someone else buys them or their cargoes.

If the potential reward is good enough people will sign up on spec. The first Freakonomics by S. Levitt and S. Dubner is an excellent book on the matter. Pay special attention to chapter 3.

'On spec' means they will do the work for free and hope you pay them anyway. That seems an unlikely business model to rely on. Make up your mind. Are the contract terms legislated or are they negotiated? If they are legislated, it isn't on spec. The privateers know the terms in advance. And keep in mind that for an on spec arrangement to work, the offer has to be known publicly, meaning the enemy (and public) can learn of it blowing the whole 'secrecy' plan.

Nations only own the ships in their navies. Privateering mobilizes privately owned ships for commerce raiding activity. Hence the name. Seizing privately owned shipping is like looting a treasury. You get a huge boost, but you can only do it once.

You are hiding behind technical definitions again. If a nation builds more ships than normal and uses some of those for commerce raiding it is the same effect. "Using existing civilian ships" has a couple problems. First, those are civilian ships, so they aren't as well suited to the task. Second, they are presumably used for some other purpose currently. Likely for actual commerce. That means you are pulling them off economic duty and paying them to do something else instead.

Also even though you haven't had to build the ships under a privateering plan, the ship owners will still need to be compensated for the use of their ships, usually at a premium for the risk. You can limit the compensation by legislation, but again if it isn't seen as lucrative enough, you won't have any privateers.

What are you talking about? Texas is not an independent state. Let’s try that same example with two independent states, like we were actually talking about. Let’s use The Alliance and Horizon: 

So the [Alliance] doesn't get any taxes from [Horizon]? Since Horizon is independent, no I don’t imagine they do. 

If [Horizon] suddenly ceased to be a part of the [Alliance], the Alliance tax base would be exactly the same? Horizon was never part of the Alliance, so yes it would.

If for whatever reason, strategic, economic, whatever, it was beneficial for that state to be part of the union, guess what? I can't guess, just tell me.

That benefit wouldn't be there. It would be independant and not providing (or recieving) benefits. It was never providing any, it was independent.

Now you are just deliberately being dense. WHILE it is independant, there is obviously no benefit, but that doesn't mean there isn't a benefit to joining a union. Quit trolling.

If my home town was Luxemburg or Monaco, yes. But it’s not, so I don’t. I live in a town, which is part of a county, which is part of a state, which is part of a Union. There is no single type of organization or political system that is right for everybody or every other country or even any other country, that’s why independence is so important.

Funny, I am pretty sure Luxemburg is part of the EU now. Independance is always desirable for representation and autonomy, but larger unions offer economies of scale and economic efficiencies. The majority of individuals want all the benefits of being part of something larger, without all the costs and compromises. Posters declaring the council evil simply because they don't agree to all trade terms and requests for military assistance exemplify this.

The Alliance feels there is a benefit to independant worlds being part of the union and is actively trying to make that case rather than send in the warships and telling them they are now part of the union. That suggests 'good' on the part of the Alliance rather than evil. Cerberus, on the other hand, is happy to sacrifice any one and anything to advance, regardless of any claims to independance. That suggests something other than 'good.'

What!?! Hope and change aren’t a rational basis for a philosophy? I have been grossly misinformed!

Seriously though, faith in humanity, and the belief that one person can make a difference are hallmarks of idealism. I am an idealist.

You are a troll. I don't seem to recall your shepard sitting down with TIM for any 'perhaps you should rethink your philosophy' heart to hearts.

Based on your statement: “The best available system for achieving any given thing IS a virtue in and of itself.” You might want to send them a resume.

You might want to show where I made any claim to contracted out space penetentiaries being a good plan. But don't let the facts (or lack thereof) stop you....

[Moiaussi]

didymos1120 wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

v2 wasn't genocide either though, and Krogan society is indeed stabilizing under Wrex (or his stand-in)'s guidance.

No, it's different with Wreav leading Urdnot.  He's a very traditional krogan.  Urdnot is prospering to an extent, but it's business as usual on Tuchanka: Wreav doesn't assimilate the remnants of defeated clans.  He has them killed.  Fortack works on munitions instead of improving crop yields and medicine. And so on.

The most succinct summary of the differences comes from the Chief Scout.  With Wrex in power, he'll say:

"Wrex believes we need to unite the krogan people. I don't think we can do that with offworlders interfering. But it's not my call."

With Wreav it is:

"Wreav wants victory for our clan. Offworld interference could screw up that plan. But you're a special case, I guess."

IOW, Wreav is very much his father's son.  Wrex?  Not so much.

Even with Wreav though the fighting is down considerably from traditional levels, isn't it? And without the genophage, wouldn't Wreav be rather a lot worse, and Wrex's plan be a lot less likely to work?

[Moiaussi]

Whereto wrote...

Umm, can someone give a summary of what has been established so far?... I kinda gave up at page 12

The pro Cerberus people are continuing with the "Cerberus? Evil? Hey look at them! They wouldn't give me a new pony, they must be evil! defense."

[didymos1120]

Moiaussi wrote...

Even with Wreav though the fighting is down considerably from traditional levels, isn't it?

I don't think the subject ever comes up, actually, unless it's in one of those TIM summaries at the end of a mission.  All you hear on Tuchanka is stuff about how Urdnot currently has primacy among the clans.

And without the genophage, wouldn't Wreav be rather a lot worse, and Wrex's plan be a lot less likely to work?

I suppose so.  Wasn't really trying to address that.

[Seboist]

didymos1120 wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

v2 wasn't genocide either though, and Krogan society is indeed stabilizing under Wrex (or his stand-in)'s guidance.

No, it's different with Wreav leading Urdnot.  He's a very traditional krogan.  Urdnot is prospering to an extent, but it's business as usual on Tuchanka: Wreav doesn't assimilate the remnants of defeated clans.  He has them killed.  Fortack works on munitions instead of improving crop yields and medicine. And so on.

The most succinct summary of the differences comes from the Chief Scout.  With Wrex in power, he'll say:

"Wrex believes we need to unite the krogan people. I don't think we can do that with offworlders interfering. But it's not my call."

With Wreav it is:

"Wreav wants victory for our clan. Offworld interference could screw up that plan. But you're a special case, I guess."

IOW, Wreav is very much his father's son.  Wrex?  Not so much.

Wreav and Wrex only have the same mother.