2008 réponses à ce sujet

[Plaintiff]

Lazy Jer wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...


Anders doesn't claim that his actions were morally right. He claims that they are necessary.

Be that as it may, his actions were, in my opinion, still highly immoral.  Him acknowledging that doesn't really help, especially when the necessity of his actions is pretty questionable as well, again my opinion.  The Circle is F'ed up, sure, but that doesn't justify mass murder of hundreds of innocent people to create strife.  Especially when in the end all he's really doing is disrupting things in Kirkwall.

Where are these "hundreds of people"? The chantry holds less than ten at any given moment and only has like, two beds. Maybe four.

I think what you meant to say was "The Circle is F'ed up, sure, but that doesn't justify mass mudrering hundreds of feet of golden statue", because that's the only thing in the Chantry. Unless you found a nest of Borrowers in the walls?

Stop assuming that the chantry harbours orphans and sick people and the homeless. There is no proof that it does any of these things. In fact, all evidence suggests the exact opposite.

[Plaintiff]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

bleetman wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Slight problem: innocent deaths are more or less inevitable in war.

So I suppose no steps should be taken to avoid them, then.

Ideally, I would have no one die at all. But I also don't know if a better way to accomplish things could have been found.

It would have taken a lot of patience, of which Anders had none, and a lot of time, which Anders didn't want to spend. Social change takes time, and generally, rights are earned, not freely given. Mages, with their cavalier attitude toward blood magic, had not earned their right to free movement. That's not to say the Templars' abuses were justified, but simply saying "revolution now, ethics later" fixes nothing.

"Black people, with their cavalier attitude towards thievery and escaping from cotton farms, have not earned their right to free movement."

"Women, with their cavalier attitude to provocative dress and forgetting to fix me a sammich, have not earned their right to free movement."

"Homosexuals, with their cavalier attitude towards the buttsex and wearing flamboyant colours, have not earned their right to free movement."

If rights "have to be earned", how come the majority never has to "earn" them? What makes minorities inherently less deserving?

Modifié par Plaintiff, 18 janvier 2012 - 04:26 .

[CrimsonZephyr]

Plaintiff wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

bleetman wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Slight problem: innocent deaths are more or less inevitable in war.

So I suppose no steps should be taken to avoid them, then.

Ideally, I would have no one die at all. But I also don't know if a better way to accomplish things could have been found.

It would have taken a lot of patience, of which Anders had none, and a lot of time, which Anders didn't want to spend. Social change takes time, and generally, rights are earned, not freely given. Mages, with their cavalier attitude toward blood magic, had not earned their right to free movement. That's not to say the Templars' abuses were justified, but simply saying "revolution now, ethics later" fixes nothing.

"Black people, with their cavalier attitude towards thievery and escaping from cotton farms, have not earned their right to free movement."

"Women, with their cavalier attitude to provocative dress and forgetting to fix me a sammich, have not earned their right to free movement."

"Homosexuals, with their cavalier attitude towards the buttsex and wearing flamboyant colours, have not earned their right to free movement."

If rights "have to be earned", how come the majority never has to "earn" them? What makes minorities inherently less deserving?

If women bombed churches and murdered people in cold blood to get their rights, then perhaps they wouldn't have been deserving of them. As it is, most suffrage movements became successful after major wars, where thir invaluable contributions towards each of their societies' war efforts meant their place in society could no longer be ignored. They did not bludgeon the majority - which was just as obstinate as any majority is - with fear of terrorism to get their way. The same goes for gays and blacks, who made positive contributions to society, and are therefore fully deserving of rights.

Compare this to mages, who commune with demons, blow up churches, commit mass murders, and cause widespread societal panic. You consider these people worthy of free movement and autonomy? Freedom is a privilege, not a right. If a group proves themselves to be almost completely incapable of the discipline needed in order to live among others, perhaps they should not. Mages need to shape up, too, if they want to be a part of society in general. That's bitter medicine for whiners like Anders who take little responsibility for their own behavior, while crying out against the behavior of others. But it's the right medicine.

Modifié par CrimsonZephyr, 18 janvier 2012 - 05:11 .

[GavrielKay]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

Freedom is a privilege, not a right.

On this point i must disagree most strongly. 

Freedom is a right.  A person can be stripped of that right if they do something bad enough and there is enough proof of guilt.  To say that all of any given class of people should be rounded up at puberty and kept under lock and key until they prove themselves worth of freedom is so backwards to me.

Exactly how are they suppsoed to prove themselves innocent of being mages anyway?  That was the crime they were locked away for.

[GavrielKay]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

bleetman wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Slight problem: innocent deaths are more or less inevitable in war.

So I suppose no steps should be taken to avoid them, then.

Ideally, I would have no one die at all. But I also don't know if a better way to accomplish things could have been found.

It would have taken a lot of patience, of which Anders had none, and a lot of time, which Anders didn't want to spend. Social change takes time, and generally, rights are earned, not freely given. Mages, with their cavalier attitude toward blood magic, had not earned their right to free movement. That's not to say the Templars' abuses were justified, but simply saying "revolution now, ethics later" fixes nothing.

After 900 years of the circle system, what was supposed to make Anders believe that patience would solve anything?  It's not as if he was privy to Justinia's thinking.

[Morroian]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...
Freedom is a privilege, not a right.

I take it you aren't in the US where it is enshrined as a right.

[CrimsonZephyr]

Morroian wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...
Freedom is a privilege, not a right.

I take it you aren't in the US where it is enshrined as a right.

And let's you blow up a building. Let's say everyone starts killing people. Do you think restrictions and imprisonments will not be imposed?

[Morroian]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...
 Mages, with their cavalier attitude towardblood magic,

Some have a cavailer attitude but the majority appear to turn to it when they have no other option. The templars can't abuse mages then cry foul when they turn to blood magic and use it as proof that mages will inevitably falter.

[GavrielKay]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

Morroian wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...
Freedom is a privilege, not a right.

I take it you aren't in the US where it is enshrined as a right.

And let's you blow up a building. Let's say everyone starts killing people. Do you think restrictions and imprisonments will not be imposed?

Putting the person who blows up a building in jail is fine.  Putting everyone like that person in jail for the next 900 years just in case they might blow up a building too, is not fine.

It is not right for a majority to let their fear make them into oppressors.

[Morroian]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

Morroian wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...
Freedom is a privilege, not a right.

I take it you aren't in the US where it is enshrined as a right.

And let's you blow up a building. Let's say everyone starts killing people. Do you think restrictions and imprisonments will not be imposed?

That doesn't mean its not a right it just means if you abuse that right you will have your rights removed.

[CrimsonZephyr]

Morroian wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

Morroian wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...
Freedom is a privilege, not a right.

I take it you aren't in the US where it is enshrined as a right.

And let's you blow up a building. Let's say everyone starts killing people. Do you think restrictions and imprisonments will not be imposed?

That doesn't mean its not a right it just means if you abuse that right you will have your rights removed.

And if a vast majority prove to be so irresponsible, their autonomy and freedom would mean widespread social panic and the destruction of any sort of order?

When a minority makes it clear they would use their freedom to engage in criminality and enslave members of the majority, perhaps they don't deserve rights. If mages want rights, they have to prove they can use them responsibly. Bombing churches does not demonstrate this.

Modifié par CrimsonZephyr, 18 janvier 2012 - 05:59 .

[Plaintiff]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...
If women bombed churches and murdered people in cold blood to get their rights, then perhaps they wouldn't have been deserving of them. As it is, most suffrage movements became successful after major wars, where thir invaluable contributions towards each of their societies' war efforts meant their place in society could no longer be ignored. They did not bludgeon the majority - which was just as obstinate as any majority is - with fear of terrorism to get their way. The same goes for gays and blacks, who made positive contributions to society, and are therefore fully deserving of rights.

Compare this to mages, who commune with demons, blow up churches, commit mass murders, and cause widespread societal panic. You consider these people worthy of free movement and autonomy? Freedom is a privilege, not a right. If a group proves themselves to be almost completely incapable of the discipline needed in order to live among others, perhaps they should not. Mages need to shape up, too, if they want to be a part of society in general. That's bitter medicine for whiners like Anders who take little responsibility for their own behavior, while crying out against the behavior of others. But it's the right medicine.

Bullcrap.

Civil rights are inherent by their very nature. To suggest that minorities are obligated to prove their worth to the majority is incredibly insulting .They should not have ever been made to work for them, they should've been freely given from the outset and there is no excuse whatsoever for failing to do so.

"Social change takes time" is an argument for bigoted douchebags. "You have to wait while my privileged majority mulls over how much longer we want to oppress you!" It's grossly audacious to suggest that the minority should "just be patient" as if their subjectification is inferior in importance to the majority finding a convenient, comfortable point to change actions that are clearly wrong.

Your position is retarded. Oppression by the majority group is not a "deserved right" that the minority have to abide. There is no reason the minority should just sit and take it for the sake of the majority. If they have the opportunity to turn they tables, ****ing DO IT. Expecting them not to take an opportunity to shift the balance of power is absurd.

Minority groups in real life have to struggle because as individuals they possess none of the abilities that mages do. Obviously mages have options that other minorities don't. Expecting them not to make use their one single advantage is equally absurd. Why should they play by the rules of a society that abuses them? Have the majority earned the privilege of not having fireballs called down upon them? Why does the majority deserve to be safe from the suffering they've inflicted on others? They openly invited it by taking that stance to begin with. Other civil rights movements have been violent in the past, a fact you conveneintly ignore for the purpose of disguising your prejudice. The LGBT rights movement started with violence. Ever heard of The Stonewall Riots?

Homosexuals, blacks and women have, and always had inherent worth to society. They were already making positive contributions by living their lives and being law-abiding citizens. White, heterosexual males never had to go that extra mile to prove themselves. How dare they require that of others? What gives them that right?

Likewise, the worth of the mages to society was obvious to society at large from the very beginning. The Chantry and nobility are extremely aware of a mage's worth. They call on the mages when it's convenient, like during war, expecting them to fight and die for a country that oppresses them. Time and time and time again, mages made the "positive contribution" required to "earn their rights" and the Chantry promptly locked them up again and forgot all about it once their purpose was served. Mages waited for nine-hundred years for the Chantry to change its attitude. Anders waited the better part of a decade while he healed the sick people living in the sewers, and only received harassment for his efforts.

Minorities have to prove themselves? You make me sick.

[Plaintiff]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

Morroian wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

Morroian wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...
Freedom is a privilege, not a right.

I take it you aren't in the US where it is enshrined as a right.

And let's you blow up a building. Let's say everyone starts killing people. Do you think restrictions and imprisonments will not be imposed?

That doesn't mean its not a right it just means if you abuse that right you will have your rights removed.

And if a vast majority prove to be so irresponsible, their autonomy and freedom would mean widespread social panic and the destruction of any sort of order?

When a minority makes it clear they would use their freedom to engage in criminality and enslave members of the majority, perhaps they don't deserve rights. If mages want rights, they have to prove they can use them responsibly. Bombing churches does not demonstrate this.

The actions of individuals within a minority are indicative of nothing, you pretentious bigot.

[HiroVoid]

Well, regardless of how it turns out, mages are going to have to be able to interact with the common folk unless they go the isolationist route and found their own country(or they continue some type of reformed circle system). Ultimately, it'll be interesting to see where the majority of the common people stand on the issue. I can honestly imagine countries siding with the mages simply to use them to further their own power while other countries side with the chantry due to tradition and a fear of mages.

[CrimsonZephyr]

Plaintiff wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...
If women bombed churches and murdered people in cold blood to get their rights, then perhaps they wouldn't have been deserving of them. As it is, most suffrage movements became successful after major wars, where thir invaluable contributions towards each of their societies' war efforts meant their place in society could no longer be ignored. They did not bludgeon the majority - which was just as obstinate as any majority is - with fear of terrorism to get their way. The same goes for gays and blacks, who made positive contributions to society, and are therefore fully deserving of rights.

Compare this to mages, who commune with demons, blow up churches, commit mass murders, and cause widespread societal panic. You consider these people worthy of free movement and autonomy? Freedom is a privilege, not a right. If a group proves themselves to be almost completely incapable of the discipline needed in order to live among others, perhaps they should not. Mages need to shape up, too, if they want to be a part of society in general. That's bitter medicine for whiners like Anders who take little responsibility for their own behavior, while crying out against the behavior of others. But it's the right medicine.

Bullcrap.

Civil rights are inherent by their very nature. To suggest that minorities are obligated to prove their worth to the majority is incredibly insulting .They should not have ever been made to work for them, they should've been freely given from the outset and there is no excuse whatsoever for failing to do so.

"Social change takes time" is an argument for bigoted douchebags. "You have to wait while my privileged majority mulls over how much longer we want to oppress you!" It's grossly audacious to suggest that the minority should "just be patient" as if their subjectification is inferior in importance to the majority finding a convenient, comfortable point to change actions that are clearly wrong.

Your position is retarded. Oppression by the majority group is not a "deserved right" that the minority have to abide. There is no reason the minority should just sit and take it for the sake of the majority. If they have the opportunity to turn they tables, ****ing DO IT. Expecting them not to take an opportunity to shift the balance of power is absurd.

Minority groups in real life have to struggle because as individuals they possess none of the abilities that mages do. Obviously mages have options that other minorities don't. Expecting them not to make use their one single advantage is equally absurd. Why should they play by the rules of a society that abuses them? Have the majority earned the privilege of not having fireballs called down upon them? Why does the majority deserve to be safe from the suffering they've inflicted on others? They openly invited it by taking that stance to begin with. Other civil rights movements have been violent in the past, a fact you conveneintly ignore for the purpose of disguising your prejudice. The LGBT rights movement started with violence. Ever heard of The Stonewall Riots?

Homosexuals, blacks and women have, and always had inherent worth to society. They were already making positive contributions by living their lives and being law-abiding citizens. White, heterosexual males never had to go that extra mile to prove themselves. How dare they require that of others? What gives them that right?

Likewise, the worth of the mages to society was obvious to society at large from the very beginning. The Chantry and nobility are extremely aware of a mage's worth. They call on the mages when it's convenient, like during war, expecting them to fight and die for a country that oppresses them. Time and time and time again, mages made the "positive contribution" required to "earn their rights" and the Chantry promptly locked them up again and forgot all about it once their purpose was served. Mages waited for nine-hundred years for the Chantry to change its attitude. Anders waited the better part of a decade while he healed the sick people living in the sewers, and only received harassment for his efforts.

Minorities have to prove themselves? You make me sick.

Well tough ****, you self-entitled puke, that's the way the world works. If you do nothing to appease the majority, you get nothing. Gays, women, black people, brown people, or any minority anywhere in the world, would have nothing if their first instinct was to start blowing up innocent people. In some cases, that happened, but not all. Do you think even half the stuff cooked up by the French Revolution survived Napoleon? No. Because revolutionary government started up by bloodthirsty militants rarely have even that kind of longevity, and people turn against them. You might think everything is as simple as your "line in the sand" rhetoric, but intelligent people have a more nuanced view, so put your dunce cap back on and go sit in the corner.

[TEWR]

Wow this thread degenerated into insults being thrown around in the blink of an eye.

[HiroVoid]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Wow this thread degenerated into insults being thrown around in the blink of an eye.

I'm the type of poster that honestly doesn't mind insults as long as good arguments and debates are still thrown in with them.....but yeah.  Before a mod has to come in and warn everyone, that needs to stop.

[Plaintiff]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...
If women bombed churches and murdered people in cold blood to get their rights, then perhaps they wouldn't have been deserving of them. As it is, most suffrage movements became successful after major wars, where thir invaluable contributions towards each of their societies' war efforts meant their place in society could no longer be ignored. They did not bludgeon the majority - which was just as obstinate as any majority is - with fear of terrorism to get their way. The same goes for gays and blacks, who made positive contributions to society, and are therefore fully deserving of rights.

Compare this to mages, who commune with demons, blow up churches, commit mass murders, and cause widespread societal panic. You consider these people worthy of free movement and autonomy? Freedom is a privilege, not a right. If a group proves themselves to be almost completely incapable of the discipline needed in order to live among others, perhaps they should not. Mages need to shape up, too, if they want to be a part of society in general. That's bitter medicine for whiners like Anders who take little responsibility for their own behavior, while crying out against the behavior of others. But it's the right medicine.

Bullcrap.

Civil rights are inherent by their very nature. To suggest that minorities are obligated to prove their worth to the majority is incredibly insulting .They should not have ever been made to work for them, they should've been freely given from the outset and there is no excuse whatsoever for failing to do so.

"Social change takes time" is an argument for bigoted douchebags. "You have to wait while my privileged majority mulls over how much longer we want to oppress you!" It's grossly audacious to suggest that the minority should "just be patient" as if their subjectification is inferior in importance to the majority finding a convenient, comfortable point to change actions that are clearly wrong.

Your position is retarded. Oppression by the majority group is not a "deserved right" that the minority have to abide. There is no reason the minority should just sit and take it for the sake of the majority. If they have the opportunity to turn they tables, ****ing DO IT. Expecting them not to take an opportunity to shift the balance of power is absurd.

Minority groups in real life have to struggle because as individuals they possess none of the abilities that mages do. Obviously mages have options that other minorities don't. Expecting them not to make use their one single advantage is equally absurd. Why should they play by the rules of a society that abuses them? Have the majority earned the privilege of not having fireballs called down upon them? Why does the majority deserve to be safe from the suffering they've inflicted on others? They openly invited it by taking that stance to begin with. Other civil rights movements have been violent in the past, a fact you conveneintly ignore for the purpose of disguising your prejudice. The LGBT rights movement started with violence. Ever heard of The Stonewall Riots?

Homosexuals, blacks and women have, and always had inherent worth to society. They were already making positive contributions by living their lives and being law-abiding citizens. White, heterosexual males never had to go that extra mile to prove themselves. How dare they require that of others? What gives them that right?

Likewise, the worth of the mages to society was obvious to society at large from the very beginning. The Chantry and nobility are extremely aware of a mage's worth. They call on the mages when it's convenient, like during war, expecting them to fight and die for a country that oppresses them. Time and time and time again, mages made the "positive contribution" required to "earn their rights" and the Chantry promptly locked them up again and forgot all about it once their purpose was served. Mages waited for nine-hundred years for the Chantry to change its attitude. Anders waited the better part of a decade while he healed the sick people living in the sewers, and only received harassment for his efforts.

Minorities have to prove themselves? You make me sick.

Well tough ****, you self-entitled puke, that's the way the world works. If you do nothing to appease the majority, you get nothing. Gays, women, black people, brown people, or any minority anywhere in the world, would have nothing if their first instinct was to start blowing up innocent people. In some cases, that happened, but not all. Do you think even half the stuff cooked up by the French Revolution survived Napoleon? No. Because revolutionary government started up by bloodthirsty militants rarely have even that kind of longevity, and people turn against them. You might think everything is as simple as your "line in the sand" rhetoric, but intelligent people have a more nuanced view, so put your dunce cap back on and go sit in the corner.

It is that simple, the only problem is people like you. Go back to Stormfront.

[CrimsonZephyr]

Plaintiff wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...
If women bombed churches and murdered people in cold blood to get their rights, then perhaps they wouldn't have been deserving of them. As it is, most suffrage movements became successful after major wars, where thir invaluable contributions towards each of their societies' war efforts meant their place in society could no longer be ignored. They did not bludgeon the majority - which was just as obstinate as any majority is - with fear of terrorism to get their way. The same goes for gays and blacks, who made positive contributions to society, and are therefore fully deserving of rights.

Compare this to mages, who commune with demons, blow up churches, commit mass murders, and cause widespread societal panic. You consider these people worthy of free movement and autonomy? Freedom is a privilege, not a right. If a group proves themselves to be almost completely incapable of the discipline needed in order to live among others, perhaps they should not. Mages need to shape up, too, if they want to be a part of society in general. That's bitter medicine for whiners like Anders who take little responsibility for their own behavior, while crying out against the behavior of others. But it's the right medicine.

Bullcrap.

Civil rights are inherent by their very nature. To suggest that minorities are obligated to prove their worth to the majority is incredibly insulting .They should not have ever been made to work for them, they should've been freely given from the outset and there is no excuse whatsoever for failing to do so.

"Social change takes time" is an argument for bigoted douchebags. "You have to wait while my privileged majority mulls over how much longer we want to oppress you!" It's grossly audacious to suggest that the minority should "just be patient" as if their subjectification is inferior in importance to the majority finding a convenient, comfortable point to change actions that are clearly wrong.

Your position is retarded. Oppression by the majority group is not a "deserved right" that the minority have to abide. There is no reason the minority should just sit and take it for the sake of the majority. If they have the opportunity to turn they tables, ****ing DO IT. Expecting them not to take an opportunity to shift the balance of power is absurd.

Minority groups in real life have to struggle because as individuals they possess none of the abilities that mages do. Obviously mages have options that other minorities don't. Expecting them not to make use their one single advantage is equally absurd. Why should they play by the rules of a society that abuses them? Have the majority earned the privilege of not having fireballs called down upon them? Why does the majority deserve to be safe from the suffering they've inflicted on others? They openly invited it by taking that stance to begin with. Other civil rights movements have been violent in the past, a fact you conveneintly ignore for the purpose of disguising your prejudice. The LGBT rights movement started with violence. Ever heard of The Stonewall Riots?

Homosexuals, blacks and women have, and always had inherent worth to society. They were already making positive contributions by living their lives and being law-abiding citizens. White, heterosexual males never had to go that extra mile to prove themselves. How dare they require that of others? What gives them that right?

Likewise, the worth of the mages to society was obvious to society at large from the very beginning. The Chantry and nobility are extremely aware of a mage's worth. They call on the mages when it's convenient, like during war, expecting them to fight and die for a country that oppresses them. Time and time and time again, mages made the "positive contribution" required to "earn their rights" and the Chantry promptly locked them up again and forgot all about it once their purpose was served. Mages waited for nine-hundred years for the Chantry to change its attitude. Anders waited the better part of a decade while he healed the sick people living in the sewers, and only received harassment for his efforts.

Minorities have to prove themselves? You make me sick.

Well tough ****, you self-entitled puke, that's the way the world works. If you do nothing to appease the majority, you get nothing. Gays, women, black people, brown people, or any minority anywhere in the world, would have nothing if their first instinct was to start blowing up innocent people. In some cases, that happened, but not all. Do you think even half the stuff cooked up by the French Revolution survived Napoleon? No. Because revolutionary government started up by bloodthirsty militants rarely have even that kind of longevity, and people turn against them. You might think everything is as simple as your "line in the sand" rhetoric, but intelligent people have a more nuanced view, so put your dunce cap back on and go sit in the corner.

It is that simple, the only problem is people like you. Go back to Stormfront.

Lovely, Godwin's Law in effect. Wipe the drool off your chin, little one.

Rights are not natural at all. Do you think the laws of nature, for example, grant me the right to vote? Or the right to own property? Or to marry whoever I wish? Those are all government constructs, and therefore, the government provides rights. The government, whether it is autocratic, theocratic, aristocratic, or democratic may have some protections for the minority (as in, minority of the body politic), but its policies are formed by majority factions. Ergo, unless you want a cycle of violence in which oppression is simply traded from faction to faction, a minority is going to have to realistically appease the majority, because the majority calls the shots.

Modifié par CrimsonZephyr, 18 janvier 2012 - 06:42 .

[Plaintiff]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

Lovely, Godwin's Law in effect. Wipe the drool off your chin, little one.

It's not Godwin's Law to call someone a racist when they are one.

That you have the audacity to call me self-entitled, while demanding in the same breath that minorities dance for your amusement, is simply mind-boggling.

I couldn't care less if one oppressive majority is traded for another.

On what basis do you presume that mages will abuse their power? Because one blew up a building full of people that actively oppressed him? How is that abuse?

Modifié par Plaintiff, 18 janvier 2012 - 06:53 .

[HiroVoid]

Just out of curiosity Plaintiff, what plan do you ultimately think would ultimately work for mages the best?

[TEWR]

HiroVoid wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Wow this thread degenerated into insults being thrown around in the blink of an eye.

I'm the type of poster that honestly doesn't mind insults as long as good arguments and debates are still thrown in with them.....but yeah.  Before a mod has to come in and warn everyone, that needs to stop.

Wish I could say the same about not minding being insulted. 

And sadly I've found that threads tend to stop any good debating a while after insults crop up and just resort to only having insults.

[HiroVoid]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

HiroVoid wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Wow this thread degenerated into insults being thrown around in the blink of an eye.

I'm the type of poster that honestly doesn't mind insults as long as good arguments and debates are still thrown in with them.....but yeah.  Before a mod has to come in and warn everyone, that needs to stop.

Wish I could say the same about not minding being insulted. 

And sadly I've found that threads tend to stop any good debating a while after insults crop up and just resort to only having insults.

For insults, I usually just find them laughable since I figure I know myself better than some guy I'm debating with.  At most, I'll usually just go over what a person insulted me for and see if I feel that any of my actions were like that.

True.  The forum I frequently go on basically has a policy of 'Toughen up.'  Of course, once the posts just go to insults and are no longer contributing anything, then a mod steps in.  And in most cases, once insults start flying, they do have a tendency to just deride the thread.  I guess more of the threads are probably just more a long the lines of 'Only people with no train of thought would think this is quality writing' is more what I'm thinking about.

[Plaintiff]

HiroVoid wrote...

Just out of curiosity Plaintiff, what plan do you ultimately think would ultimately work for mages the best?

To keep it short:

1.  Break free of Chantry. (This has been done)

2. Find nobles receptive to the mage cause, or at least those looking to get out from under the Chantry's thumb. They do exist. Mages have plenty to offer in a variety of fields. Any nobleman would be stupid to turn them down.

3. Simultaneously, send emmissaries to dwarves, break Chantry monopoly on lyrium.

4. Attempt negotiations with Chantry.

5. If Chantry unresponsive, blow chunks off it. Back to 4.

6. When negotiations succeed, or Chantry reduced to rubble, begin reformation of Circle system and long-term plan of integration with wider society.

I do not approve of violence as a general rule, but there are times when it is necessary. The Chantry has never hesitated to respond to dissenters with unnecessary force, so the Circle must respond in kind. Only when the Chantry has been substantially weakened, can there be any chance of a real compromise.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 18 janvier 2012 - 07:08 .

[CrimsonZephyr]

And your position on blood magic?