Pixelmage wrote:If he wants to persuade me, he'll have to show proof that his presence here is not dangerous to reality, at the very least.
Chief Wakamakamu wrote:Wait, why do we need to be warned about Sicon coming here? Does he know something we don't or is it another one of those things he does sometimes?
RotavatoR wrote:Neither have any proof of their statement.
narrativedilettante wrote:I'm concerned about the apparent mistrust he has for Mr. A. Perhaps it's just understandable fear, but I feel like maybe he has an idea of Mr. A's motives beyond the suspicions we keep raising and then putting aside until we know more.
Pixelmage wrote:As for my opinion:
Mind play. Not necesarily evil play. But he's trying to persuade us to sympathise with him. He's attacking our center of balance by pointing out Mr. A's behavior. His intent is to split our forces and make us lack the necessary manpower to send them back.
As to why he says he can't accept our proposal to custom craft a world in the way he desires, it's foolishness. A fear as based in conjecture as our fear for our reality is according to his point of view.
I say we stay open to have their input on the worlds we send them to, but not way that talk about Narrative Fate will get me to side with me. If he wants to persuade me, he'll have to show proof that his presence here is not dangerous to reality, at the very least. And also start making amends for the damage already caused by his behavior so far. He and his team did get Joe on the run after all.
RotavatoR wrote:Is it not impossible to prove that something is not happening? It would be kind of weird if you were stopped by a cop, and he told you to prove that you were not driving too hard.
What I'm saying is that the Cabal don't trust Mr A for the exact same reason that we're not trusting him. He's not showing evidence, no proof. If he would, then the Cabal might change their minds.
Pixelmage wrote:If he can't prove it, then we hand the four to the police! At the very least, they'll have to taste the consequence of their freedom: They commited at the very least the crime of threatening someone. They must answer for that. If they oh so love this world then they better play by it's rules.
Scarab wrote:RotavatoR wrote:Is it not impossible to prove that something is not happening? It would be kind of weird if you were stopped by a cop, and he told you to prove that you were not driving too hard.
What I'm saying is that the Cabal don't trust Mr A for the exact same reason that we're not trusting him. He's not showing evidence, no proof. If he would, then the Cabal might change their minds.
Yes, but it'd also be quite a clever cop.
We would also need proof for them that any world we sent them to would NOT be a prison as they assume -can we prove that? Do we know ourselves?Pixelmage wrote:If he can't prove it, then we hand the four to the police! At the very least, they'll have to taste the consequence of their freedom: They commited at the very least the crime of threatening someone. They must answer for that. If they oh so love this world then they better play by it's rules.
Another good point, right there. Will they accept responsibility for their crimes?
Scarab wrote:RotavatoR wrote:Is it not impossible to prove that something is not happening? It would be kind of weird if you were stopped by a cop, and he told you to prove that you were not driving too hard.
What I'm saying is that the Cabal don't trust Mr A for the exact same reason that we're not trusting him. He's not showing evidence, no proof. If he would, then the Cabal might change their minds.
Yes, but it'd also be quite a clever cop.
We would also need proof for them that any world we sent them to would NOT be a prison as they assume -can we prove that? Do we know ourselves?
are you truly willing to condemn so many on so uncertain a prospect?
Sicon112 wrote:I will state this here and now. This is my position, and I will stand and hold it until a better one is shown to me by logic.
The Phantom's argument is, in short, this: That it is morally wrong to send the fictional beings back to their side of the wall merely because we suspect that there might be an apocalypse due to their presence, and that even sending them back with their fates tailored to their whims is still nothing more than a prison, since they are controlled by us.
I shall speak on the second point before the first. To an extent, his claim is true. He will indeed be 'forced' to abide by the fiction we create to send him back, and will follow it until the ending we give him. However, accepting this as the whole truth, we must still consider that a fictional universe is more than what it's original creator portrays. It extends beyond, into the realm of epilogues and backstories. Therefor, an open ended refic would, while it controlled him for a while, merely do so to place him at the beginning of a new tale, one all his own. Finally, such a fiction would have to be very well done and in character, meaning that the actions he would take on his journey would be, essentially, those that he would take regardless, simply because that is who he is.
However, I find fault with his "prison" analogy for a good reason. He is no more free in this world than in any other. In his world, while he possessed a character and was guided by it the entire world around him was controlled by the author's whims. I disagree entirely with his argument that his situation in completely at fault. It is the same, invalid argument that people try to use everyday to excuse others for their misdeeds, and it is nothing but foolishness. However, the mechanics of the world were controlled by a higher power, one he could not change. Now he has come to our world, and he claims he is free of such things. This is silly. Can he control the way the world works NOW? Of course not. This world could be fictional itself, just on a higher level than his, or it could be that there is a God above it who stands higher still. Even should you not believe in a deity, you must admit that the world runs on it's own set of laws that we cannot ever hope to change. There are only two basic differences between our world and his, in the end. The first is that in our world, the social climate is such that he can have an easier life. This will be negated by our current refic plans. The second is that he believes that this world allows him more freedom because he knows for sure that we can control his world through fiction, but does not know of or see the laws that control us and him even now.
On to his first claim, that of the wrongness of sending back the fictionals. He asks a question in his post that fills me with outrage. Here it is:are you truly willing to condemn so many on so uncertain a prospect?
This is the exact question I now pose to the Cabal! No, we do not have proof that the presence of fictionals has a negative and catastrophic effect on reality, but we DO have proof that there IS an effect! This proof comes in the form of the echoes their actions leave behind! Now, the person who has so far given us reasonably reliable, though vague, information has stated that the presence of fictionals may cause the erasure of all of reality. There are three main possibilities.1. He is wrong.
2. He is lying.
3. He is right.
Assuming each in turn, these are the things that could happen, should we send back the fictionals, and then the things that could happen if we do not.
Send them back:1. Mr. A is mistaken, but we sent back the fictionals anyway. This is unfortunate, but they do have a good life in their new worlds.
2. The same thing occurs.
3. He is right, but the total destruction of reality is averted. The fictionals have a good life in their new worlds.
Do not send back:1. The fictionals remain and have a happy life. We apologize or the trouble.
2. The fictionals remain and have a happy life. We slap Mr. A for being a douchebag.
3. All of reality is erased and we and the fictionals all die.
These are the main possibilities. We currently do not know the chances of Mr. A being wrong/lying and the chances of him being right, and I do say we should figure out as soon as possible. However, should we discover that there IS a chance of the apocalypse, no matter how small, I say send them back.
This situation is one requiring a cost benefit analysis. If we send back the fictionals, it is at the certain cost of their lives here in this world. If we do not, it is at the POSSIBLE cost of the entirety of this world, including the fictionals involved. Now, some cost-benefit analyses end up calling for some level of risk. However, in this case, I say ANY level of risk is too high. When the possible cost is all of existence, there is no price too high.
You may find this blunt. You may think I'm being a Knight Templar. I do not care. To paraphrase Martin Luther standing before the Diet of Wurms, here I stand, I can do nothing else.
RotavatoR wrote:We need to ask for proof from Mr A. Right now.
(And I don't want to hear something like "My Admin-sense is tingling")
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest