EVE Search - Stormcrows: Killers of 2034 Slaves

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Intergalactic Summit

Stormcrows: Killers of 2034 Slaves

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3939	Posted - 2014.08.13 11:31:00 - [1] - Quote Ever heard of a boarding action? I appreciate that they're practically nonexistent in modern space combat, but... An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3951	Posted - 2014.08.15 14:11:00 - [2] - Quote The problem is, the guy genuinely believes in his heart of hearts that the only reason why the Minmatar ethnic group even exists is because God created them specifically to be "vile subhuman sacrifices". He is not a reasonable man, he's a fanatic, and you don't allow fanatics to stall you. If you're going to save any lives in that kind of situation, you have to strike hard and fast and save those you can. If you've got hostages with guns to their head and the hostage-takers are preparing to execute the lot and martyr themselves, then you storm the place and accept that not all of those hostages are getting out of there alive. Their deaths are not on your hands. The same goes for Stormcrows. They didn't kill those people - Nappy did. By putting them in that situation, and by being the man he is, their blood remains on his hands alone. An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3952	Posted - 2014.08.15 14:50:00 - [3] - Quote It wouldn't make a blind bit of difference whether they had or hadn't. If there are no slaves on board then, great: the kill contract can be fulfilled without collateral bloodshed. If there are slaves on board, then they're doomed anyway and their only hope of freedom and a full life is to shoot the ship out around them and rescue the survivors. The blame for there not being a better option rests squarely on Nauplius. Quote: You lose nothing by holding him a bit Sorry Jinari, but you're completely wrong there. You lose a LOT by holding him a bit, while he gains. He gains time to stall, to plan, to act. Hesitation is an opportunity for the target to come up with wiggle room, vent atmo from the hold, call in third party remote-rep, you name it. What happens if he starts fitting guns on his ship and, once webbed and scrambled, ejects the slaves and then blows up the jetcan? What happens if he pays a bystander to shoot his wreck the second his ship pops? Hesitation is a loss all by itself. Pressure and seconds are valuable resources, to be spent as efficiently as possible. You DON'T allow fanatics to stall you. An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3954	Posted - 2014.08.15 14:58:00 - [4] - Quote Okay, well, quit arguing with the people who are insulting you and start engaging with the points then. They're here, in this thread. I've made them, Morwen's made them, Kohiko's made them... even Anslo's made them, in his inimitable jerkass fashion. An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3956	Posted - 2014.08.15 15:07:00 - [5] - Quote Watch SWAT training included unprotected hard vacuum training. That was NOT fun. You can augment human skin and tissues with all the cunning biotechnology you want, but the void still hurts, even if you're twice as able to survive it as an ordinary man. It's not the way I'd choose to go, Jinari's got that right. But certain death is still worse than possible death, however relatively nasty thse deaths might be. We've all got to go sometime, so any opportunity you can claw back to feel Dark Wind blow past you rather than through you is worth taking. An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3956	Posted - 2014.08.15 15:09:00 - [6] - Quote Jinari Otsito wrote: [quote=Stitcher]Really, are you people so removed from your humanity that it's acceptable to trade thousands of lives just to stave off a few minutes of having to watch d-scan or watch out for potentially dangerous neuts? Thousands. Of. Lives. What conceivable risk do you consider so great that you can't make that little extra effort? The loss of thousands more. Look, this is an argument that's been bashed out time and again. Weighing the risk of action versus the risk of inaction is an equation that untold... millions, probably, of field officers have had to make throughout history. The consensus, that I happen to agree with for the reasons I've already given, is that it's better to save the ones you KNOW you can save, than gamble them all on all-or-nothing. In the end, the blood is on the hostage-taker's hands, not on the SWAT team's. An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3956	Posted - 2014.08.15 15:15:00 - [7] - Quote Never, EVER underestimate a cornered fanatic's capacity to out-think you in their desperation. An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3959	Posted - 2014.08.15 15:16:00 - [8] - Quote You could always privately mail it to her? An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3959	Posted - 2014.08.15 15:25:00 - [9] - Quote Jinari Otsito wrote: Verin, I usually would agree but not when there's thousands of lives at stake. You can't guarantee a single rescued slave if you start by opening fire. You can, actually. Those ships are well engineered: you're looking at, statistically speaking, about a fifty percent survival rate. Those internal bulkheads, forcefields and emergency enclosure systems mean that having some survivors is all but a certainty. Quote: The option to open fire remains for however long you hold him but the possibility of getting them all without gunfire disappears the second you open fire. With some people, the possibility of rescuing them all without gunfire simply does not exist in the first place. Nauplius is one such person. An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3961	Posted - 2014.08.15 15:37:00 - [10] - Quote Option 1 - Giving up his goods: NOT going to happen. It never has before and his personality profile renders such a scenario impossibly remote. This option would only be considered by a sane individual, which Nauplius demonstrably is not. Option 2 - Redocking: constitutes mission failure for the rescue party. The hostages remain held and at Nauplius' "mercy" and are removed completely from any possibility of rescue. Their murder has at best only been delayed, not prevented. Option 3 - Self-destruct: effectively the same as being shot up, with the added downside from the rescue party's perspective that it buys time for third-party interference or some last "frak you" contingency. The attempt you're talking about WON'T succeed in rescuing anybody, and COULD result in mission failure. You never underestimate the competence that can be born from desperation or defiance. It's cold, yes. It's sickeningly cold. But cold saves lives. "A bird in the hand", you know? An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738

Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3963	Posted - 2014.08.15 15:59:00 - [11] - Quote Madmen can be extremely predictable in some narrow ways. Back in the hangar could equally mean "okay, let's murder them THIS way instead". Not like CONCORD or the station authorities would stop it, and there's the added bonus of the biomass reprocessing system being right there, handy and available. Heck, maybe the clone companies would be interested in buying those cadavers. So, you've NOT purchased a guaranteed shot at their later freedom. It's equally possible that you've condemned them to die now rather than tomorrow. So, two out of three options are "you screwed up" and the third option is "you didn't succeed". But, we're going in circles, so I'm going to bow out after making this final comment: Jinari, I think you're making a basic failure of empathy here. In fact, if I were a Stormcrow right now, I'd be rather upset at you. You seem to think that it's all about gung-ho violence lust, yeehawing into battle, firing wildly and creaming their pants. Take it from me as somebody who went through similar situations in his first life - that's not how it goes. You don't go in guns blazing because it makes your little soldier stand to attention. you don't do it because it's fun. People's lives are on the line here, and professionals only act in such situations if they are thoroughly and completely convinced that their selected course of action is the best one. You're not only insulting the Stormcrows' professionalism and empathy by accusing them of preferring violence, you're betraying a lack of empathy on your own part. You're failing to see things from their perspective. Put yourself there. You have a life-and-death choice to make with thousands of people in the balance. You know from experience, training, and the received experience from others that the death of ALL those people is one frak-up away, and the frak-up is yours to make. Do you REALLY think that the ethical thing to do in that situation is to let sentiment get in the way and persuade you to "make the attempt"? Or do you think maybe the ethical thing to do is to do the math and save who you KNOW you can save? Whether or not you agree with them, whether or not you accept the logic, I think that you've owed the Stormcrows an apology for this entire thread. An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3964	Posted - 2014.08.15 16:18:00 - [12] - Quote Who cares if the station admin have a problem with it? Those people would still be dead. You seem to be saying that our "Nebulous 'he could do something'" means that we can't think of anything specific and that he therefore wouldn't in fact be able to do anything. What we're saying is the opposite of that: that the range of possible somethings is so huge and the man's mind is so warped as to bring an unacceptably high degree of unpredictability into a scenario in which the good guys want to keep as much certainty on their side as they possibly can. The fact that we're not willing to commit to describing any specific scenario is not evidence that no such scenario exists. An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3966	Posted - 2014.08.15 16:47:00 - [13] - Quote Good grief, are you so addicted to your NEOCOM interface that you've forgotten how to do stuff without it? Do you have to click a button just to sit down on your couch? So long as the paperwork reads "discarded" then the station management doesn't give two craps. And there's a LOT of possible outcomes that can lurk under that oh-so-wide umbrella. An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3974	Posted - 2014.08.21 03:07:00 - [14] - Quote Kim, you're doing that thing again where you veer dangerously close to expressing a vaguely sensible opinion. If you hadn't included that unnecessary lash-out at the Gallenteans I'd almost be worried. An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3974	Posted - 2014.08.21 11:27:00 - [15] - Quote The fact that Amarr defines something as a sin is not usually a factor in the decision-making process of us heathens. An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3974	Posted - 2014.08.22 13:57:00 - [16] - Quote I think Pilot Rundle's expressed opinion reveals more about what he thinks of himself than it does of any objective truth about the human condition. Humanity as a whole, and Capsuleers like any other subfaction of humanity, run the gamut from the too-callous to the too-sensitive, from the morally unimpeachable to the depths of irredeemable turpitude. (And all of that is a gross oversimplification treating morality as a simple linear spectrum of wrong shading to right, rather than the vast and convoluted hyperpoly of possible positions with every person fltting around inside like the atoms of some ideal gas that it really is.) Alexander Draegar wrote: Is it not at least morally wrong to you? Slavery? Yes. Slavery is absolutely morally wrong, in my eyes. "Wasting" slaves - in the sense of their dying during a rescue attempt? That's a little more situational. I accept and acknowledge that a slave's life can be a long, full, happy and fulfilling one in the right circumstances, which is why I wouldn't personally open fire on a slave transport just because it's a slave transport. It would depend, in fact, on who was flying that transport. If the pilot was, for example, a known mass-murdering psychotic who thinks that God is the kind of axe-crazy sadist who created an entire ethnic group for the sole purpose of commanding that their lives be sacrificed to his glory in a variety of inventively cruel ways beginning with a regime of brainwashing, indoctrination and hellish subjugation? I would consider it morally indefensible NOT to open fire and rescue the survivors whenever the opportunity arose. The moral accountability for the deaths of those who were killed in the rescue attempt lies with the slaver, not with the would-be rescuer. Being a nonbeliever, I don't believe in the existence of God, nor Sin, nor Salvation from it, nor that slavery is a means to accomplish said Salvation. Is it surprising that the conclusions I draw in the absence of those four assumptions are going to be wildly different from your own, pilot Draegar? An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3982	Posted - 2014.08.23 12:15:00 - [17] - Quote You're falsely equating "Not automatically terrible and potentially quite pleasant" with "Justified". An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3983	Posted - 2014.08.24 05:29:00 - [18] - Quote You really don't know how to open your mouth without saying something stupid, do you Kim? In case you're not aware, so far as we can tell, the only culture in all of New Eden never to practice any kind of slavery at any time in its history would be the Caldari. The Gallente used to practice it, the Minmatar used to. The Intaki, the Jin-Mei, the Achura... The ethnic Caldari never did. Oh, sure, people pull out this apologist explanation how that's only because we focus on the practical downsides rather than the morality of freedom, but given that greatest-common-good practicality is a Caldari moral principle, it follows that anything impractical is also immoral according to Caldari ethics. After all, we're under no obligation to agree with foreign powers that slavery is immoral for what they define as "the right reasons". All I said was that in my opinion, slavery is immoral. I never explained WHY I think it's immoral. Ollie Rundle wrote: The juxtaposition that's of interest is still there - how do you as an individual process contrasting internal opinion on something which you believe to be 'absolutely morally wrong' (and in some cases 'morally indefensible' not to act against) but which you also recognize can be worthwhile for some of those directly affected by it? Now you're falsely equating "Not automatically terrible and potentially quite pleasant" with "worthwhile". An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3985	Posted - 2014.08.24 15:26:00 - [19] - Quote Ollie Rundle wrote: You've acknowledged that the outcomes from slavery can sometimes be positive. No, I've acknowledged that some proportion of slaves may not find the experience to be a terrible one, and may even come to enjoy their life as a slave. There are people who enjoy being f***ed in the ass, but I don't particularly want it to happen to me. There's a market for snuff pornography and I defy anybody to claim THAT's positive, but the fact that said market exists means that there are people who enjoy it. "Some people enjoy that" is not the same thing as "that thing is positive" and the exact same goes for slavery. Some slaves enjoy being slaves. That fact does NOT endorse or excuse slavery. An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
Stitcher Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 3986	Posted - 2014.08.25 14:10:00 - [20] - Quote Ollie Rundle wrote: You seem to be missing the wider view of the forest for all the trees, Verin. That said, I'll leave the question posed to you unanswered and the option to engage in dialogue open should it interest you in the future. The forest and the trees are one and the same. A logger who cut down the latter thinking no harm could come to the former, would soon run out of both. The question you posed stems from a flawed interpretation of my meaning. Your line of questioning is derived from the mistaken conclusion that just because I readily acknowledge that individual slaves are capable of living full and happy lives in slavery, I then mean that slavery is "justified", "Worthwhile" or has "positive outcomes". If that conclusion is flawed, then it follows that every single question you could possibly ask me based on that conclusion is also flawed. It's like asking me if I've stopped abusing children yet. I can't give an answer which directly addresses that question in either the affirmative or the negative because I have never abused a child in my life. Similarly, I can't directly address the question you're asking me because you're asking me to clarify opinions that I don't hold. An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.