1939 réponses à ce sujet

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion, just shut the **** up with your petty insults already. If you can't have a discussion without resorting to insults in every damn comment, don't post comments at all.

Trust me. This thread will survive without it.

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]alperez wrote...

Again your reverting to type, its illogical to destroy the base because you believe it to be illogical not because there could be a logical reason to do so. Your as usual allowing your own opinion cloud any logical reasoning as to why this could be the case, you've taken a position and any contrary position to your own must be illogical is your entire argument.

I've never once suggested that my choice is the best or the right one or that its even the most logical one , what i've said consistently is that i have reasons why i make the choice, your the person who keeps reverting to any other choice is illogical, so in your own analogy it must be because of the fragility of your own ego.

Your saying  cold calculated logic backs you up and it doesn't in my case only proves that the fragility of your own ego won't allow any argument other than your own to be logical, so every argument that disagrees with you isn't based on cold calculated logic.[/quote]

So exactly why should I be concerene that you havn't been argoung that your choice is the most logical one?

Everyone has reasons. You are again (not surprisingly) missing the point. You claim my reasoning is cloused, yet you avoid logic like a plauge, and have not mady any worthy contruibution to this debate other than constantly attack me.

Again - choices can be judges coldly and logicly. This is not to be contested.
You had your reason to make a choice - but the reasons can be flawed, based on flawed logic. Hence why they turn out to be sub-optimal.

If your Shep hates Cerberus with a passion and belives them to be the essence of all evil, there is a certain kind of logic behind the decision to blow the base - but again, ti's flawed logic; it's based on emotion and flawed vision of reality.

The only logic that should be used for this kind of decision is what gives the greatest gainss and the least risk. const/benefit analyis. with hte face of hte galaxy at stake, nothing less will do.


What you are trying to do is make some sort of deal/compromise with me.
"I'll say I'm not right if you say it also"




[quote][quote]
Considering I'm trying to save the universe? nope. Besides, theere's planty of decent people in Cerberus too.
[/quote]

There;s no point in saving the universe if your dooming it also, thats the basic premise in why handing a base to people who may not use what they find for only beneficial purposes could be immoral.[/quote]

Dooming it? HOW. A million times HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW???????????????

I'm sick and tired of you kepe talking abotu a great immorality and doom, wihout even having an idea how it would come about or if its even possible.


[quote]
As for the decent people of Cerbeurs, we've seen some yes, we've also seen many more that aren't. Considering TIM calls most if not all of the shots its him more than anyone else we really need to know about.

But i'll give you another scenario, if you were TIM and you wanted to show Shepard Cereberus in the best light, wouldn't it make sense you try to portray your organisation as made up of decent people?

I mean filling the normandy with the most racist zealots of your organisation may not be the best way to convince someone that your organisation is actually altruistic.
[quote]

"Many more that aren't"? Source or it didn't happen.

And while that second argument actually has merit (surprise, surprise), you can't really tell that's NOT the true face of Cerberus. Human domination DOES NOT equal hatered of aliens



[quote][quote]
SMARTEST way. Not only way. Don't put words in my mouth.
[/quote]

Your original argument was destroying the base dooms the galaxy and was the only logical choice, your now trying to amend it to possibly dooms the galaxy and its the smartest choice, i'm not putting words into your mouth, i'm using your own in response.[/quote]

Overdramatization on my part.
And IIRC, I said "most probably dooms the galaxy"

And the smartest choice is the "only truly logical" choice (since other choices would by default be less logical)
Perhaps I worded that poorly.
Actually, not perhaps..I did word that poorly.

Point to you!




[quote]
An argument is illogical if your position is so entrenched that any logical reason why your position is wrong, is immediately dismissed as illogical.

You pick the parts of game lore, the parts of logic and the common sense arguments that agree with your posiition, ignore anything that disagrees with it as being against these and then claim your right because you say so.

Where have you been proven right?

Everything you say has a counter argument against it, yet because you disagree with the counter argument you dismiss it and claim this in some ways proves your right.

Nothing will prove any of us right until me3 comes along, when no doubt all of us will be proved wrong.
[/quote]

I've ignored nothing. You're the one doing it all the time.

I proven my position and shown  the counter-argumnets as being weak. Yes, I proven to be in the right..pretty muhc constantly.


And that last sentance truly proves you have no idea what this debate is all about , if you think ME3 will change anything. AGAIN (for the nth time) - the logic of a choice depends ONLY on information avialabe at the time of decision making.
Knowing how ME3 turns out changes NOTHING.

Let me try to explain this in a way you (and some others I won't mention) may understand.

You find a small box with some engraved inscription.
Two men instantly approch you, both claiming it's theirs.

Person A immediately tells you what is engraved. Person B claims that he knew that too, but A beaten him to the punch.
Person A tells you to check below where you'll finx a X scrached on the bottom. B claims there is no X. You find an X.

Since everything point to A being the owner, you give the box to A. It was a logical decision and A seemed most probable to be the owner.

If you later found out that B was the owner, and A stole it and carves a X later (which B didn't know), that doesn't change the fact aht your decision WAS logical and sound, with the greatest chance of sucess.

In other words, actual outcome doens't affect the logical validity of the decision.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion, just shut the **** up with your petty insults already. If you can't have a discussion without resorting to insults in every damn comment, don't post comments at all.

Trust me. This thread will survive without it.

It will also survive without YOUR trolling and YOUR insults.

[Inquisitor Recon]

I may be slightly biased, but I think the reason was so paragons could pat themselves on the back and feel good about themselves.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Again - choices can be judges coldly and logicly. This is not to be contested.
You had your reason to make a choice - but the reasons can be flawed, based on flawed logic. Hence why they turn out to be sub-optimal.

And again.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

No one is trying to get you to except the paragon choice as the right one,we are saying that you cannot say which is the right one,because there is enough data to make a smart logical decision either way.You keep arguing logic,but you flat out refuse to use it if it doesn't work in your favor.

Agian with the "right one".

I'm not telling you which is the RIGHT one, I'm telling which is the LOGICAL one. You cannot seem to grasp the difference.

And yes, you can make the most logical decision BASED ON DATA AVILABLE:
It doesn't have ot be all the data. But from that data you can come to several decision and not all are equally logical or "good".


CONGRATS! You have spent the ENTIRE THREAD arguing something that you misunderstaood from day 1.

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

It will also survive without YOUR trolling and YOUR insults.

I'm trolling just because my opinion isn't the same as yours? That's rich.

Take a good look at your own comments before you start accusing other people.

[nicksmi56]

Is this thread still going? Jeez i think the best policy would be "don't feed the troll"......or the illusive man in this case

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Agian with the "right one".

I'm not telling you which is the RIGHT one, I'm telling which is the LOGICAL one. You cannot seem to grasp the difference.

And yes, you can make the most logical decision BASED ON DATA AVILABLE:
It doesn't have ot be all the data. But from that data you can come to several decision and not all are equally logical or "good".


CONGRATS! You have spent the ENTIRE THREAD arguing something that you misunderstaood from day 1.

And you refuse to acknowledge different options or opinions, because if we're just going on logic and info available, then this thread would've been a lot shorter than it is. 

[CuseGirl]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

No one is trying to get you to except the paragon choice as the right one,we are saying that you cannot say which is the right one,because there is enough data to make a smart logical decision either way.You keep arguing logic,but you flat out refuse to use it if it doesn't work in your favor.

Agian with the "right one".

I'm not telling you which is the RIGHT one, I'm telling which is the LOGICAL one. You cannot seem to grasp the difference.

And yes, you can make the most logical decision BASED ON DATA AVILABLE:
It doesn't have ot be all the data. But from that data you can come to several decision and not all are equally logical or "good".


CONGRATS! You have spent the ENTIRE THREAD arguing something that you misunderstaood from day 1.

the issue most us have is that u've already decided only one of the 2 choices is logical. And considering the information we have about Cerberus, the Reapers, TiM himself and Shep, it's wrong to say "only keeping the base is logical". In the opinion of most players, it's illogical to give a fully complete reaper factory to TiM.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

This thread needs to be locked,lotion is too far gone.

[alperez]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...



Your explanation was that Cerberus aren't a threat no matter what benefit they may get from the tech/info on the base and even if they were, the threat was so insignificant that this threat could be snuffed out easily.

Correct.

Only if your right in your appraisal of that threat something you refuse to accept even the possibility that you could be wrong

It does actually. By acknowledging the threat exists, you prepare for it. And that doesn't chance the fact ath the threat IS minor...compared to the Reapers..or let's say..Rachni

Actually your not preparing for it, your preparing for a threat you believe to be minor in a situation where you don't know if your resources could handle any potential threat.

What do you mean by "now" I've been mentioning that scenario and plan for ages. READ THE DAMN THREAD.
And what do you mena by the last bit?

 Again you haven't your orignal stance has been there is no threat that's signifcant, it was only when the threat was brought up that you amended it to that scenario and since we've been discussing it of course you've mentioned it for ages now.

I meant you know irregardless of whatever action you think could be taken, none of these in fact are leading to events my scenario suggested all along.

At what point did hte game tell you you won't be able to do that? How do you know you dont' get that option in DLC or ME3?
And really, what does it even matter? I'm talking about the logical stance from WITHIN THE UNIVERSE.
Your'e still thinking as a player.[/b]

The mere fact its not presented to me as an option at the time i'm forced to make the choice shows that its not an option i have when making that choice.

Your instead bringing up that something later you may get that option which is not something you can know when making the choice, the simple fact is that we're not giving the option at time instead we're forced into making a black and white choice with the options we're given, no other options exist.

If 1 cruiser is too much to cover a potentialy vital research station, and a possibel minor threat, then the Alliance/council is doing something wrong.
This shouldn't be hard really.. Keep tabs on the station - as soon as the reapers come (or even before) make a quick evalution of the situation and act accordingly - blow it up and have the ship re-join the fleet or do something else.

 
So in the midst of the reaper invasion we're supposed to hope the alliance may have resources available to cover the base and keep tabs on it, irrespective of anything else that's going on?

We're also supposed to trust that the alliance/counci,l people who thus far have been reluctant to act on Shepard's information will actually do something that so far they've shown an unwillingness or reluctance to do?

[

Unless you have a clear example of how Cerberus could be such a massive danger to the galaxy that researching the base simply isn't worth it?

You are downplaying the consquences simply because in your logic the potential and again i use the word potential consequences all fit nicely into a box you can handle, you never take into account anything outside of this nice little box of yours, therefore your downplaying the consequences.

You've given NO plausibe examples or how Cerberus can be a massive danger to the galaxy - especialy not compared to other potential dangers that paragon players just glady accept.

You are taking into account fantasy scenarios, not plausibe consequences. You might as well start considering a scenario where TIM farts and the galaxy is set on fire. Your ideas are laughable. Me with rosy glasses? Yours arne' even see-trough. You can't see nuttin'.

Half of the quesitons I've been askign you've been continously avoiding - because you had no satisfactory answers.

Normally, I don't take any pleasure in tearing poeples arguments apart - but for you I'm more than willing to make an exception.

 
I've given potential scenarios in relation to cerberus, you deem them not plausible because these scenarios go against your view of what could potentially happen, not because they are implausible but because they are contrary to your own perception of just how big a threat cerberus could be with the right tech.

Yes i'm using extreme examples of what could happen but the key phrase is could, not will.

As for me seeing nothing, that's really a pot calling kettle black situation, you refuse to accept anything that doesn't conform to your view and i'm apparently the one not seeing things.

What questions, write them down in a seperate post and i'll answer any i've missed.

Normally i don't take any pleasure in arguing with someone who's view is so entrenched that they believe every response they make in some way tears peoples arguments down, in your case its fun so i make an exception also.

Every line of yours proves what I've been saying about you.
And that your own words just mirror your own behavior. Your ego is so fragile that you cannot accept that the decision you made was simply not sound. Go fight the windmills son! Go on....

Your redicolous accustations are as hollow as your arguments. No substance, just hot air.

Some of my argumetns are correct? SHOCKING!

You're basicly asking me to accept that you are right. Since our views are oppisite, both of us can't be right at the same time.

Why should I accept something that is totaly wrong and I've proven it to be wrong?
I won't.
And I don't have to.
You have a problem with that? Deal with it.

My accusations on your behaviour and how you respond to anyone who takes a different view to yours are proved valid by how you respond every single time.

My arguments are hollow in your opinion only because you refuse to accept any view contrary to yours.

You as usual missed the point i was making when i quoted your statments, its not that some are right or wrong but that your position is irrespective of contrary views your right on some things, therefore the contrary view must be wrong.

Its called an entrenched position, where no matter what you will not allow certain things you believe to be questoned, so by default these things must be correct and is the basis for the argument you continually use.

I've never asked you to accept that i'm right just as i don't accept that you are wrong, what i've asked all along is for you to accept the validity of both sides of the coin, something you continually refust to accept.

Keeping the base is wrong for me.

Keeping the base is right for you.

Which one of these statements in any way invalidates the choices that were made.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

This one believes lotion should google what a fallacy is:police:.

Modifié par Humanoid_Typhoon, 29 juillet 2011 - 09:25 .

[alperez]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


So exactly why should I be concerene that you havn't been argoung that your choice is the most logical one?

Everyone has reasons. You are again (not surprisingly) missing the point. You claim my reasoning is cloused, yet you avoid logic like a plauge, and have not mady any worthy contruibution to this debate other than constantly attack me.

Again - choices can be judges coldly and logicly. This is not to be contested.
You had your reason to make a choice - but the reasons can be flawed, based on flawed logic. Hence why they turn out to be sub-optimal.

If your Shep hates Cerberus with a passion and belives them to be the essence of all evil, there is a certain kind of logic behind the decision to blow the base - but again, ti's flawed logic; it's based on emotion and flawed vision of reality.

The only logic that should be used for this kind of decision is what gives the greatest gainss and the least risk. const/benefit analyis. with hte face of hte galaxy at stake, nothing less will do.


What you are trying to do is make some sort of deal/compromise with me.
"I'll say I'm not right if you say it also"

I've never said that my choice is the most logical one, your confusing me with you, your argument all along was that any other choice is illogical, all i've tried to do was show that this is only the case because you believe the choice you make is the only logical one.

What you say here regarding choices is exactly the point you refuse to accept, if my reasoning can be based on flawed logic, then so can yours.

Everthing else you say after that though is just the same thing you've been saying all along, that despite whatever reasons behind my choice the logic itself is flawed because in your opinion the reasoning doesn't fit into your perception of the situation.

I'm not trying to make a deal compromise, all i've ever wanted from this exchange with you was for you to accept that both sides of the argument can have logical reasoning why they make the choice, its not a question for me of which choice is right.

Dooming it? HOW. A million times HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW???????????????

I'm sick and tired of you kepe talking abotu a great immorality and doom, wihout even having an idea how it would come about or if its even possible.

By handing something potentially incredibly dangerous over to people you already know would be willing to use it irrespective of the cost. People you know have no qualms about what damage they may cause in order to acheive the results they desire.

Your argument has consistently being in destroying the base we're destroying any potential benefit, be it tech or info that could help defeat the reapers. By the same token we're also destroying any potential negative that could lead to the reapers beating us, its a two way street.

"Many more that aren't"? Source or it didn't happen.

And while that second argument actually has merit (surprise, surprise), you can't really tell that's NOT the true face of Cerberus. Human domination DOES NOT equal hatered of aliens

 
Sources are in both games, the different cells you encounter from me1, through me2 and overlord.

Wow, you for the first time actually find merit in an argument against you, isn't that one of the first signs of the apocalypse (just kidding).

But your right neither sets of the people we meet can actually be proved to be the true face of Cerberus, but your perception is all you have to go on.

Again true, human dominance doesn't neccessarily  mean hatred of aliens, however it also doesn't preclude that also.

Overdramatization on my part.
And IIRC, I said "most probably dooms the galaxy"

And the smartest choice is the "only truly logical" choice (since other choices would by default be less logical)
Perhaps I worded that poorly.
Actually, not perhaps..I did word that poorly.

Point to you!

No problem we're all overdramitizing.

I've ignored nothing. You're the one doing it all the time.

I proven my position and shown  the counter-argumnets as being weak. Yes, I proven to be in the right..pretty muhc constantly.


And that last sentance truly proves you have no idea what this debate is all about , if you think ME3 will change anything. AGAIN (for the nth time) - the logic of a choice depends ONLY on information avialabe at the time of decision making.
Knowing how ME3 turns out changes NOTHING.

Let me try to explain this in a way you (and some others I won't mention) may understand.

You find a small box with some engraved inscription.
Two men instantly approch you, both claiming it's theirs.

Person A immediately tells you what is engraved. Person B claims that he knew that too, but A beaten him to the punch.
Person A tells you to check below where you'll finx a X scrached on the bottom. B claims there is no X. You find an X.

Since everything point to A being the owner, you give the box to A. It was a logical decision and A seemed most probable to be the owner.

If you later found out that B was the owner, and A stole it and carves a X later (which B didn't know), that doesn't change the fact aht your decision WAS logical and sound, with the greatest chance of sucess.

In other words, actual outcome doens't affect the logical validity of the decision.

Again you claim you've proven  your position and that the counter arguments have been shown to be weak, but this isn't actually the case, for the simple reason that most of the time you respond and claim it rather than actually prove it, its a different thing altogether.

What i meant re: ME:3 being what proves or disproves everything we've argued about is the only way to know the repurcussions of the choice we've made will be in me3, anything else is just hypothetical.

In terms of your analogy, what you fail to mention is that there is an equally valid logical case to give it to person B also, which again really is the point.

You decide that logically the person to give it to was person A based on what your appraisal of the situation is, but that doesn't dismiss that logically your appraisal of the situation can be different for a variety of reasons.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

:bandit:Yeah what he said.

[joriandrake]

the last 5 or so pages were full with trolling/baiting, just agree that you disagree and move on, I have a headache from all this ****, I wouldn't be surprised if the thread gets locked soon

[alperez]

joriandrake wrote...

the last 5 or so pages were full with trolling/baiting, just agree that you disagree and move on, I have a headache from all this ****, I wouldn't be surprised if the thread gets locked soon

There's been as much trolling/baiting in this thread as any other, and if people just agreed that they disagreed then the vast majority of the forum would be filled with one page threads or one line responses.

You don't like it then you can freely express your opinion and decide not to read it anymore, but to come onto a thread and post that all of this **** is giving you a headache is a worse case of trolling than anything that's been written here.

[joriandrake]

alperez wrote...

joriandrake wrote...

the last 5 or so pages were full with trolling/baiting, just agree that you disagree and move on, I have a headache from all this ****, I wouldn't be surprised if the thread gets locked soon

There's been as much trolling/baiting in this thread as any other, and if people just agreed that they disagreed then the vast majority of the forum would be filled with one page threads or one line responses.

You don't like it then you can freely express your opinion and decide not to read it anymore, but to come onto a thread and post that all of this **** is giving you a headache is a worse case of trolling than anything that's been written here.

and so you decided that the best course of action would be to flame bait me after my comment? nice

[alperez]

joriandrake wrote...


and so you decided that the best course of action would be to flame bait me after my comment? nice

Pointing out your doing the very same thing your complaining about in your post = flame baiting you how?

[joriandrake]

alperez wrote...

joriandrake wrote...


and so you decided that the best course of action would be to flame bait me after my comment? nice

Pointing out your doing the very same thing your complaining about in your post = flame baiting you how?

I didn't do "the very same", I posted a personal opinion on the current situation and a warning that the thread may be closed for it

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

:police:Now now,we don't need another conflict.Lets get back on topic.
What's your take  on what the point of destroying the CB is jorian?

Modifié par Humanoid_Typhoon, 29 juillet 2011 - 10:32 .

[joriandrake]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

:police:Now now,we don't need another conflict.Lets get back on topic.

yes, that would be nice, and if it were not an argument between two people with more and more insults thrown in, as it mostly was on the last few pages

[Kaiser Shepard]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion, just shut the **** up with your petty insults already. If you can't have a discussion without resorting to insults in every damn comment, don't post comments at all.

I don't believe you're one to speak, considering your little outburst against Zulu not too long ago.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Ugh...zulu

[joriandrake]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

What's your take  on what the point of destroying the CB is jorian?

taken from other thread:

joriandrake wrote...

i think it was obvious using reaper
tech is a bad idea, there were hints for that, think indoctrination,
cybernetic skeleton zombie, geth cultists, revealed reaper involvement
in tech advantage and the Citadel, history of the "Ancients"

the
only reaper tech I was willing to use and keep was tech-related hand
weapons, and EDI, despite the risks and Cerberus connection


also,
the cerberus team going crazy in various events in ME1, and on the
reaper "corpse" in ME2 made it 120% clear to me that Cerberus can't be
helped, they either side with the reapers on their own or get
indoctrinated, so it was a no-no for me to ever send them any optional
tech info or allow them to keep the collector base

When making decisions one cannot ignore chances and possible outcomes, the reason to make decisions is that after all.

I kept any tech I got to myself (doesn't mean I would use it due to indoctrination risks), I didn't give them Grunt or Legion either. I believe the same what  Legion said, tech advancement should be made on our own, we may CAREFULLY study reaper tech, but we should avoid building on it as much as possible.

If my argument for my decision is not enough I also toss in the fact that I disagree with the ideology/methods Cerberus represents.

This is just a personal opinion ofc, just as everything else is until ME3 comes out and proves some of us right/wrong.