985 réponses à ce sujet

[KENNY4753]

dreman9999 wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

No, it's not the op made it clear on this in the topic itself. The topic is not for or ageinst any of the choice. He is just saying the obvious.

jtav wrote...

Right. The minds within the Reapers are subverted by the Catalyst directive. Not guilty by reason of insanity. I won't kill them unless there is no other option. And I won't "end their torment" because of how easily that could be turned back on me.

Orly?

That's not ageinst destroy.

That underlined point right there says that the OP is against destroy because the Reapers are innocent. Since destroy is the only option that kills the Reapers and the OP says he/she won't kill them, that proves they are against destroy

[BatmanTurian]

dreman9999 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Point--------->Totaly lost.

We are not saying not to kill the reapers when we say they are not at fault. This just a case of empathy and understand.. We, or more of the case I, are just saying they are not evil. 

That does not mean not to kill them. Personally I see it as putting down a mad dog. The mad dog is not evil nor is happy to attack people. It  has no control over itself and I can't stop it from being a mad dog. I'm putting it out of it's misery.
We can at lease learn why I happen so it's not repeated agein.

I just disagree that you can call something innocent that joyfully kills others regardless of whether it's doing it of its own free will or not. What it's doing is harmful. I don't want to enslave it, I don't want to understand it or give it self-realization of the crimes it has committed, I just want to put it out of its misery. Something that is essentially undead, it seems the moral thing to do and to protect yourself and others is to make sure it stops moving by ending its unlife.

The reaper had no joy in killing anything. They were just doing what they are programed to do. The reapers are just the remanace of races converted into a reaper by force who are forced to harvest others. They have no free will. They are just doing what they were made to  and programemed to do.

Look at Saren. He in ME1 is the same way. He had an ego and persona but no free will.

Yeah, Sovereign and Harbinger were CLEARLY not enjoying themselves.

Did we even play the same games?

What in ME1 and 2 showed they were enjoying them selves?

Sovergin told use, in  a monatone voice, there is no point to fight back.
And Harbinger kept telling us they were helping us assend.

Dreman *facepalm*

[dreman9999]

Wayning_Star wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Point--------->Totaly lost.

We are not saying not to kill the reapers when we say they are not at fault. This just a case of empathy and understand.. We, or more of the case I, are just saying they are not evil. 

That does not mean not to kill them. Personally I see it as putting down a mad dog. The mad dog is not evil nor is happy to attack people. It  has no control over itself and I can't stop it from being a mad dog. I'm putting it out of it's misery.
We can at lease learn why I happen so it's not repeated agein.

I just disagree that you can call something innocent that joyfully kills others regardless of whether it's doing it of its own free will or not. What it's doing is harmful. I don't want to enslave it, I don't want to understand it or give it self-realization of the crimes it has committed, I just want to put it out of its misery. Something that is essentially undead, it seems the moral thing to do and to protect yourself and others is to make sure it stops moving by ending its unlife.

The reaper had no joy in killing anything. They were just doing what they are programed to do. The reapers are just the remanace of races converted into a reaper by force who are forced to harvest others. They have no free will. They are just doing what they were made to  and programemed to do.

Look at Saren. He in ME1 is the same way. He had an ego and persona but no free will.

Yeah, Sovereign and Harbinger were CLEARLY not enjoying themselves.

Did we even play the same games?

It's probably why the writers cop'd onto the 'beyond you're understanding' ethos. Easier to describe any villian as overbearing. But then, we know who's race harby was torn from, we don't know who sovy's innards contained? Maybe it was Javiks group, they were kind of 'usurper' mentality. I wonder which reaper contains the Prothean race? Should be interesting to meet that one.. at a distance.. maybe via radio or some such?

What in ME1 and 2 showed they were enjoying them selves?

[clennon8]

jtav wrote...

Except it's not indoc, clen. It's a badly written exposition dump.

That's the indoctrination talking.  You're so indoctrinated that if you looked up the word "indoctrination" in the dictionary, you would find "Something that only happens to other people" as the definition.

Modifié par clennon8, 26 octobre 2012 - 12:24 .

[dreman9999]

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Point--------->Totaly lost.

We are not saying not to kill the reapers when we say they are not at fault. This just a case of empathy and understand.. We, or more of the case I, are just saying they are not evil. 

That does not mean not to kill them. Personally I see it as putting down a mad dog. The mad dog is not evil nor is happy to attack people. It  has no control over itself and I can't stop it from being a mad dog. I'm putting it out of it's misery.
We can at lease learn why I happen so it's not repeated agein.

I just disagree that you can call something innocent that joyfully kills others regardless of whether it's doing it of its own free will or not. What it's doing is harmful. I don't want to enslave it, I don't want to understand it or give it self-realization of the crimes it has committed, I just want to put it out of its misery. Something that is essentially undead, it seems the moral thing to do and to protect yourself and others is to make sure it stops moving by ending its unlife.

The reaper had no joy in killing anything. They were just doing what they are programed to do. The reapers are just the remanace of races converted into a reaper by force who are forced to harvest others. They have no free will. They are just doing what they were made to  and programemed to do.

Look at Saren. He in ME1 is the same way. He had an ego and persona but no free will.

Yeah, Sovereign and Harbinger were CLEARLY not enjoying themselves.

Did we even play the same games?

What in ME1 and 2 showed they were enjoying them selves?

Sovergin told use, in  a monatone voice, there is no point to fight back.
And Harbinger kept telling us they were helping us assend.

Dreman *facepalm*

You yet to answer the question.

[Kabooooom]

Wow this discussion is still going on.

[Wayning_Star]

clennon8 wrote...

Here's what I'm hearing: "I'd rather give into indoctrination than kill the Reapers."

you cannot 'kill' reapers, only destroy them, for a time, but their cargo is destroyed as well. Say, the Protheans, or Javiks race.. all gone, down to their basic DNA and their collective intellect.

[dreman9999]

KENNY4753 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

No, it's not the op made it clear on this in the topic itself. The topic is not for or ageinst any of the choice. He is just saying the obvious.

jtav wrote...

Right. The minds within the Reapers are subverted by the Catalyst directive. Not guilty by reason of insanity. I won't kill them unless there is no other option. And I won't "end their torment" because of how easily that could be turned back on me.

Orly?

That's not ageinst destroy.

That underlined point right there says that the OP is against destroy because the Reapers are innocent. Since destroy is the only option that kills the Reapers and the OP says he/she won't kill them, that proves they are against destroy

That does not mean he is ageints destory. That means he would do it as a last means.

[BatmanTurian]

Wayning_Star wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Point--------->Totaly lost.

We are not saying not to kill the reapers when we say they are not at fault. This just a case of empathy and understand.. We, or more of the case I, are just saying they are not evil. 

That does not mean not to kill them. Personally I see it as putting down a mad dog. The mad dog is not evil nor is happy to attack people. It  has no control over itself and I can't stop it from being a mad dog. I'm putting it out of it's misery.
We can at lease learn why I happen so it's not repeated agein.

I just disagree that you can call something innocent that joyfully kills others regardless of whether it's doing it of its own free will or not. What it's doing is harmful. I don't want to enslave it, I don't want to understand it or give it self-realization of the crimes it has committed, I just want to put it out of its misery. Something that is essentially undead, it seems the moral thing to do and to protect yourself and others is to make sure it stops moving by ending its unlife.

The reaper had no joy in killing anything. They were just doing what they are programed to do. The reapers are just the remanace of races converted into a reaper by force who are forced to harvest others. They have no free will. They are just doing what they were made to  and programemed to do.

Look at Saren. He in ME1 is the same way. He had an ego and persona but no free will.

Yeah, Sovereign and Harbinger were CLEARLY not enjoying themselves.

Did we even play the same games?

It's probably why the writers cop'd onto the 'beyond you're understanding' ethos. Easier to describe any villian as overbearing. But then, we know who's race harby was torn from, we don't know who sovy's innards contained? Maybe it was Javiks group, they were kind of 'usurper' mentality. I wonder which reaper contains the Prothean race? Should be interesting to meet that one.. at a distance.. maybe via radio or some such?

I think, if I remember correctly, Javik's specific race was not deemed worthy to make into a reaper. That said, every race called itself prothean since it was a galactic empire, so it could be some other "prothean" race.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

jtav wrote...

Right. The minds within the Reapers are subverted by the Catalyst directive. Not guilty by reason of insanity. I won't kill them unless there is no other option. And I won't "end their torment" because of how easily that could be turned back on me.

So what are we supposed to use against them? Harsh language?

[KENNY4753]

dreman9999 wrote...

KENNY4753 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

No, it's not the op made it clear on this in the topic itself. The topic is not for or ageinst any of the choice. He is just saying the obvious.

jtav wrote...

Right. The minds within the Reapers are subverted by the Catalyst directive. Not guilty by reason of insanity. I won't kill them unless there is no other option. And I won't "end their torment" because of how easily that could be turned back on me.

Orly?

That's not ageinst destroy.

That underlined point right there says that the OP is against destroy because the Reapers are innocent. Since destroy is the only option that kills the Reapers and the OP says he/she won't kill them, that proves they are against destroy

That does not mean he is ageints destory. That means he would do it as a last means.

yes which means they are against the choice of destroy. If it is the only option left (last resort) then it isn't a choice, it's a must.

Modifié par KENNY4753, 26 octobre 2012 - 12:27 .

[Wayning_Star]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

jtav wrote...

Right. The minds within the Reapers are subverted by the Catalyst directive. Not guilty by reason of insanity. I won't kill them unless there is no other option. And I won't "end their torment" because of how easily that could be turned back on me.

So what are we supposed to use against them? Harsh language?

I think the OP promoted synthesis.

[Jadebaby]

AresKeith wrote...

It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan

"Well Hello Mr. Reapers"

"You should have left our worlds alone"

"This Galaxy's life is in strife, Mr. Reaper man."

[BatmanTurian]

dreman9999 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Point--------->Totaly lost.

We are not saying not to kill the reapers when we say they are not at fault. This just a case of empathy and understand.. We, or more of the case I, are just saying they are not evil. 

That does not mean not to kill them. Personally I see it as putting down a mad dog. The mad dog is not evil nor is happy to attack people. It  has no control over itself and I can't stop it from being a mad dog. I'm putting it out of it's misery.
We can at lease learn why I happen so it's not repeated agein.

I just disagree that you can call something innocent that joyfully kills others regardless of whether it's doing it of its own free will or not. What it's doing is harmful. I don't want to enslave it, I don't want to understand it or give it self-realization of the crimes it has committed, I just want to put it out of its misery. Something that is essentially undead, it seems the moral thing to do and to protect yourself and others is to make sure it stops moving by ending its unlife.

The reaper had no joy in killing anything. They were just doing what they are programed to do. The reapers are just the remanace of races converted into a reaper by force who are forced to harvest others. They have no free will. They are just doing what they were made to  and programemed to do.

Look at Saren. He in ME1 is the same way. He had an ego and persona but no free will.

Yeah, Sovereign and Harbinger were CLEARLY not enjoying themselves.

Did we even play the same games?

What in ME1 and 2 showed they were enjoying them selves?

Sovergin told use, in  a monatone voice, there is no point to fight back.
And Harbinger kept telling us they were helping us assend.

Dreman *facepalm*

You yet to answer the question.

Go and read their quotes, I'm not going to go do your research for you.

[dreman9999]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

jtav wrote...

Right. The minds within the Reapers are subverted by the Catalyst directive. Not guilty by reason of insanity. I won't kill them unless there is no other option. And I won't "end their torment" because of how easily that could be turned back on me.

So what are we supposed to use against them? Harsh language?

There is the control option.

[Paranoidal nemesis]

During a cut conversation at the end of ME2, edi says that creating a reaper involves processing the species to the atomic level, and then storing that information in a machine.

Shepard tells the reaper at the end of Rannoch via paragon interrupt, that whatever species it was is dead. They died thousands of years ago.

The most you can say about a reaper being innocent is that they lack the capacity to be either guilty or innocent.

[BatmanTurian]

Kabooooom wrote...

Wow this discussion is still going on.

I tried to make peace and kill it but.. well.... bleh.

[dreman9999]

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Point--------->Totaly lost.

We are not saying not to kill the reapers when we say they are not at fault. This just a case of empathy and understand.. We, or more of the case I, are just saying they are not evil. 

That does not mean not to kill them. Personally I see it as putting down a mad dog. The mad dog is not evil nor is happy to attack people. It  has no control over itself and I can't stop it from being a mad dog. I'm putting it out of it's misery.
We can at lease learn why I happen so it's not repeated agein.

I just disagree that you can call something innocent that joyfully kills others regardless of whether it's doing it of its own free will or not. What it's doing is harmful. I don't want to enslave it, I don't want to understand it or give it self-realization of the crimes it has committed, I just want to put it out of its misery. Something that is essentially undead, it seems the moral thing to do and to protect yourself and others is to make sure it stops moving by ending its unlife.

The reaper had no joy in killing anything. They were just doing what they are programed to do. The reapers are just the remanace of races converted into a reaper by force who are forced to harvest others. They have no free will. They are just doing what they were made to  and programemed to do.

Look at Saren. He in ME1 is the same way. He had an ego and persona but no free will.

Yeah, Sovereign and Harbinger were CLEARLY not enjoying themselves.

Did we even play the same games?

What in ME1 and 2 showed they were enjoying them selves?

Sovergin told use, in  a monatone voice, there is no point to fight back.
And Harbinger kept telling us they were helping us assend.

Dreman *facepalm*

You yet to answer the question.

Go and read their quotes, I'm not going to go do your research for you.

I have. That's  why I know your wrong.  I can even link you to their recorded comments.

[dreman9999]

Paranoidal nemesis wrote...

During a cut conversation at the end of ME2, edi says that creating a reaper involves processing the species to the atomic level, and then storing that information in a machine.

Shepard tells the reaper at the end of Rannoch via paragon interrupt, that whatever species it was is dead. They died thousands of years ago.

The most you can say about a reaper being innocent is that they lack the capacity to be either guilty or innocent.

Aka, no morals.

[BatmanTurian]

Paranoidal nemesis wrote...

During a cut conversation at the end of ME2, edi says that creating a reaper involves processing the species to the atomic level, and then storing that information in a machine.

Shepard tells the reaper at the end of Rannoch via paragon interrupt, that whatever species it was is dead. They died thousands of years ago.

The most you can say about a reaper being innocent is that they lack the capacity to be either guilty or innocent.

They seem to lack empathy, sympathy, or a sense of morality as well.

[jtav]

Or Synthesis. I bounce between it and Control. Right now I lean toward Synthesis because it frees the miserable wretches and causes no harm to others. The alterations are radical but not harmful.

[dreman9999]

KENNY4753 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

KENNY4753 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

No, it's not the op made it clear on this in the topic itself. The topic is not for or ageinst any of the choice. He is just saying the obvious.

jtav wrote...

Right. The minds within the Reapers are subverted by the Catalyst directive. Not guilty by reason of insanity. I won't kill them unless there is no other option. And I won't "end their torment" because of how easily that could be turned back on me.

Orly?

That's not ageinst destroy.

That underlined point right there says that the OP is against destroy because the Reapers are innocent. Since destroy is the only option that kills the Reapers and the OP says he/she won't kill them, that proves they are against destroy

That does not mean he is ageints destory. That means he would do it as a last means.

yes which means they are against the choice of destroy. If it is the only option left (last resort) then it isn't a choice, it's a must.

That not want that means. If he was ageinst it, He would say he would not pick it no matter what.

[Kabooooom]

you cannot 'kill' reapers, only destroy them, for a time, but their cargo is destroyed as well. Say, the Protheans, or Javiks race.. all gone, down to their basic DNA and their collective intellect.

Are the Reapers sentient? Yes. Then you can kill them. Don't split hairs. Kill them, wipe them out, bury them six tentacles under, and yes - destroy them.

But I'm not following how you can only "destroy them for a time". If you destroy a human Reaper, and humans are extinct - then no more human Reapers can be made. Can Reapers be made? Sure. That's why you have to destroy every last one of them.

And for good measure probably drop a few asteroids on the Leviathans too. Just to be safe.

[BatmanTurian]

dreman9999 wrote...
Go and read their quotes, I'm not going to go do your research for you.
I have. That's  why I know your wrong.  I can even link you to their recorded comments.

They never complain about their job and seem to relish it. They gain power over others and the ability to experiment and play around with organics. I don't get how you think that's not enjoyment.

[clennon8]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

jtav wrote...

Right. The minds within the Reapers are subverted by the Catalyst directive. Not guilty by reason of insanity. I won't kill them unless there is no other option. And I won't "end their torment" because of how easily that could be turned back on me.

So what are we supposed to use against them? Harsh language?

Just surrender!  "Yes, Reaper Overlord who has taken on a sympathetic image stolen from my mind, I shall willingly kill myself in the name of the same idea that you planted in TIM/Saren's mind, so that you may live. It would be a darn shame for your army of ancient murder machines to die."