Guest_StreetMagic_*
iakus wrote...
It's as good an idea as the person you make a Spectre is
Modifié par StreetMagic, 17 février 2014 - 04:49 .
DeinonSlayer wrote...
@Br3ad Ever seen the movie "Serenity?"
@MrFob re: Interpol, as much as I hate to Godwin my own thread, it's notable that Reinhard Heydrich of all people (chairman of the Wannsee Conference, Hangman of Prague) was president of that organization.
CrutchCricket wrote...
Yes they are necessary, and no they will not go away. If the current form no longer works, they'll simply adopt a new one.
The idiocy in their implementation was as you say, making them public.
StreetMagic wrote...
iakus wrote...
It's as good an idea as the person you make a Spectre is
Nobody is that good. It'd take a Saint to make that kind of power look acceptable.
But then, a Saint wouldn't own a Cain or an Avenger in the first place, and wouldn't take the job.
Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 17 février 2014 - 04:55 .
Ever heard the phrase, "You filthy browncoats sicken me?"DeinonSlayer wrote...
@Br3ad Ever seen the movie "Serenity?"
Modifié par Br3ad, 17 février 2014 - 05:07 .
Guest_StreetMagic_*
Modifié par StreetMagic, 17 février 2014 - 04:54 .
How is it any less dangerous to give unlimited power to someone like that?MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
CrutchCricket wrote...
Yes they are necessary, and no they will not go away. If the current form no longer works, they'll simply adopt a new one.
The idiocy in their implementation was as you say, making them public.
Pretty much this, along with it depending on who is made a Spectre.
IMO, it takes a certain kind of sociopath to do the job.
For starters, you really shouldn't make anyone with any kind of emotional-morality or ethics a Spectre. Only people who are goal-oriented (as opposed to principle or morality oriented) should be made Spectre's IMO.
DeinonSlayer wrote...
How is it any less dangerous to give unlimited power to someone like that?MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
CrutchCricket wrote...
Yes they are necessary, and no they will not go away. If the current form no longer works, they'll simply adopt a new one.
The idiocy in their implementation was as you say, making them public.
Pretty much this, along with it depending on who is made a Spectre.
IMO, it takes a certain kind of sociopath to do the job.
For starters, you really shouldn't make anyone with any kind of emotional-morality or ethics a Spectre. Only people who are goal-oriented (as opposed to principle or morality oriented) should be made Spectre's IMO.
Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 17 février 2014 - 04:57 .
Imma be wearing my "Bring Back Firefly" shirt for a week nowBr3ad wrote...
Ever heard the phrase, "You filthy browncloaks sicken me?"DeinonSlayer wrote...
@Br3ad Ever seen the movie "Serenity?"
Anyway, like it or not, groups like the Spectres keep the galaxy spinning.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
DeinonSlayer wrote...
How is it any less dangerous to give unlimited power to someone like that?MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
CrutchCricket wrote...
Yes they are necessary, and no they will not go away. If the current form no longer works, they'll simply adopt a new one.
The idiocy in their implementation was as you say, making them public.
Pretty much this, along with it depending on who is made a Spectre.
IMO, it takes a certain kind of sociopath to do the job.
For starters, you really shouldn't make anyone with any kind of emotional-morality or ethics a Spectre. Only people who are goal-oriented (as opposed to principle or morality oriented) should be made Spectre's IMO.
Who said anything about danger?
I'd have figured you'd know that I'm quite Machiavellian when it comes to leadership.
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
DeinonSlayer wrote...
How is it any less dangerous to give unlimited power to someone like that?MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
CrutchCricket wrote...
Yes they are necessary, and no they will not go away. If the current form no longer works, they'll simply adopt a new one.
The idiocy in their implementation was as you say, making them public.
Pretty much this, along with it depending on who is made a Spectre.
IMO, it takes a certain kind of sociopath to do the job.
For starters, you really shouldn't make anyone with any kind of emotional-morality or ethics a Spectre. Only people who are goal-oriented (as opposed to principle or morality oriented) should be made Spectre's IMO.
Who said anything about danger?
Modifié par Darks1d3, 17 février 2014 - 05:03 .
StreetMagic wrote...
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
DeinonSlayer wrote...
How is it any less dangerous to give unlimited power to someone like that?MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
CrutchCricket wrote...
Yes they are necessary, and no they will not go away. If the current form no longer works, they'll simply adopt a new one.
The idiocy in their implementation was as you say, making them public.
Pretty much this, along with it depending on who is made a Spectre.
IMO, it takes a certain kind of sociopath to do the job.
For starters, you really shouldn't make anyone with any kind of emotional-morality or ethics a Spectre. Only people who are goal-oriented (as opposed to principle or morality oriented) should be made Spectre's IMO.
Who said anything about danger?
I'd have figured you'd know that I'm quite Machiavellian when it comes to leadership.
No, you're aren't. You can't be. That's the ****ing point: You don't live in a fantasy world. But a real one, with laws.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
StreetMagic wrote...
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
DeinonSlayer wrote...
How is it any less dangerous to give unlimited power to someone like that?MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
CrutchCricket wrote...
Yes they are necessary, and no they will not go away. If the current form no longer works, they'll simply adopt a new one.
The idiocy in their implementation was as you say, making them public.
Pretty much this, along with it depending on who is made a Spectre.
IMO, it takes a certain kind of sociopath to do the job.
For starters, you really shouldn't make anyone with any kind of emotional-morality or ethics a Spectre. Only people who are goal-oriented (as opposed to principle or morality oriented) should be made Spectre's IMO.
Who said anything about danger?
I'd have figured you'd know that I'm quite Machiavellian when it comes to leadership.
No, you're aren't. You can't be. That's the ****ing point: You don't live in a fantasy world. But a real one, with laws.
Except this is a fantasy world where which is real in this context, and with laws.
And I, as a leader, am above those laws when I need to be. I'm a goal oriented person, not a philosophical or principle based person. Power doesn't interest me insofar beyond achieving what my goals happen to be. I happen to want to make things pretty fair and benevolent in the galaxy. When it comes to achieving those goals, nothings off the table. And if anything threatens that goal, its dealt with accordingly. I'd want the people who are like me, and do believe in order over chaos along with the stated traits in charge and doing the wetwork.
DeinonSlayer wrote...
@Massive
Believe me, I'm well aware of that. I think such people are far less objective than they claim, though.
StreetMagic wrote...
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
StreetMagic wrote...
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
DeinonSlayer wrote...
How is it any less dangerous to give unlimited power to someone like that?MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
CrutchCricket wrote...
Yes they are necessary, and no they will not go away. If the current form no longer works, they'll simply adopt a new one.
The idiocy in their implementation was as you say, making them public.
Pretty much this, along with it depending on who is made a Spectre.
IMO, it takes a certain kind of sociopath to do the job.
For starters, you really shouldn't make anyone with any kind of emotional-morality or ethics a Spectre. Only people who are goal-oriented (as opposed to principle or morality oriented) should be made Spectre's IMO.
Who said anything about danger?
I'd have figured you'd know that I'm quite Machiavellian when it comes to leadership.
No, you're aren't. You can't be. That's the ****ing point: You don't live in a fantasy world. But a real one, with laws.
Except this is a fantasy world where which is real in this context, and with laws.
And I, as a leader, am above those laws when I need to be. I'm a goal oriented person, not a philosophical or principle based person. Power doesn't interest me insofar beyond achieving what my goals happen to be. I happen to want to make things pretty fair and benevolent in the galaxy. When it comes to achieving those goals, nothings off the table. And if anything threatens that goal, its dealt with accordingly. I'd want the people who are like me, and do believe in order over chaos along with the stated traits in charge and doing the wetwork.
If you're speaking in character, I get you.. I just can't tell with you sometimes. lol
Guest_StreetMagic_*
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
DeinonSlayer wrote...
@Massive
Believe me, I'm well aware of that. I think such people are far less objective than they claim, though.
Most of them, yeah. I like to think I'm not one of them. People who are practical and logical to a point where its what is the driving factor of their philosophy.
My philosophy isn't based on morality, its based on economics (which I suppose my morality is based off of as well). I'd like to think people who are the true neutrals (or the neutral good/evils) will be in charge.
StreetMagic wrote...
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
DeinonSlayer wrote...
@Massive
Believe me, I'm well aware of that. I think such people are far less objective than they claim, though.
Most of them, yeah. I like to think I'm not one of them. People who are practical and logical to a point where its what is the driving factor of their philosophy.
My philosophy isn't based on morality, its based on economics (which I suppose my morality is based off of as well). I'd like to think people who are the true neutrals (or the neutral good/evils) will be in charge.
Neutral Goods are highly moral. They're the outsiders, but idealists. Luke Skywalker is the poster boy for Neutral Good. They're almost always Jesus like.. Optimus Prime is another.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
Oh believe me, I hold these same views in real life as well.
I'm also self-aware enough and cognizant of the world around me that it wouldn't be beneficial to actually apply this philosophy in practice being in the lowly state that I'm in.
I'm a believer in tyrants. I'm a believer in the ruler being not just stronger than anyone else, but everyone else. It's a ruler's duty to be stronger than all opposition combined. It's a ruler's duty to make the rules.
Modifié par StreetMagic, 17 février 2014 - 05:17 .
You talk about being objective, neutral, balanced, etc. but didn't you come on here a couple times ranting about how you wanted to smash Tali's faceplate and watch her die? Plus the fanfic about her getting dismembered by banshees? Or was that just Necanor bait? I really don't want this to degrade into a Waifu wars thread, just an observation.MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
DeinonSlayer wrote...
@Massive
Believe me, I'm well aware of that. I think such people are far less objective than they claim, though.
Most of them, yeah. I like to think I'm not one of them. People who are practical and logical to a point where its what is the driving factor of their philosophy.
My philosophy isn't based on morality, its based on economics (which I suppose my morality is based off of as well). I'd like to think people who are the true neutrals (or the neutral good/evils) will be in charge.
Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 17 février 2014 - 05:22 .
StreetMagic wrote...
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
Oh believe me, I hold these same views in real life as well.
I'm also self-aware enough and cognizant of the world around me that it wouldn't be beneficial to actually apply this philosophy in practice being in the lowly state that I'm in.
I'm a believer in tyrants. I'm a believer in the ruler being not just stronger than anyone else, but everyone else. It's a ruler's duty to be stronger than all opposition combined. It's a ruler's duty to make the rules.
Believing in rulers doesn't mean anything. Rule only means something as long as you can kick everyone else's ass. But if you kick ass too much, people will just band together to strengthen themselves. Learning to play along is always a lesson that gets reinforced, sooner or later. Even when there are no laws to protect, people make their own to balance it out.
It turns out looking a little like this:
Guest_StreetMagic_*
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
StreetMagic wrote...
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
DeinonSlayer wrote...
@Massive
Believe me, I'm well aware of that. I think such people are far less objective than they claim, though.
Most of them, yeah. I like to think I'm not one of them. People who are practical and logical to a point where its what is the driving factor of their philosophy.
My philosophy isn't based on morality, its based on economics (which I suppose my morality is based off of as well). I'd like to think people who are the true neutrals (or the neutral good/evils) will be in charge.
Neutral Goods are highly moral. They're the outsiders, but idealists. Luke Skywalker is the poster boy for Neutral Good. They're almost always Jesus like.. Optimus Prime is another.
Not really. They're willing to get their hands dirty if it works towards the goal at hand. You're thinking of the lawful goods.
DeinonSlayer wrote...
Didn't you come on here a couple times ranting about how you wanted to smash Tali's faceplate and watch her die? Or was that just Necanor bait? I really don't want this to degrade into a Waifu wars thread, just an observation.MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
DeinonSlayer wrote...
@Massive
Believe me, I'm well aware of that. I think such people are far less objective than they claim, though.
Most of them, yeah. I like to think I'm not one of them. People who are practical and logical to a point where its what is the driving factor of their philosophy.
My philosophy isn't based on morality, its based on economics (which I suppose my morality is based off of as well). I'd like to think people who are the true neutrals (or the neutral good/evils) will be in charge.
I believe nobody is truly unbiased, sociopath or no. I freely admit I have my own biases.
Regarding your other post, tyrants are precisely what I want us to avoid. Who, exactly, would you point to as a role model?
Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 17 février 2014 - 05:22 .
Retour en haut