Remove ads

Worm Morality Debate Thread

But your argument is a bunch of what ifs. The issue is that you are assuming they'd all go in the way you want them too, even with the most extreme examples.

Outside of Endbringer fights if someone pulls the shit you said they'd be socked in the jaw halfway through their monologue. Lung was birdcaged in canon, and "I solo'd an Endbringer; let me go" wasn't his defence nor did they let him go.
 
TreeFrogSoup said:
But your argument is a bunch of what ifs. The issue is that you are assuming they'd all go in the way you want them too, even with the most extreme examples.

Outside of Endbringer fights if someone pulls the shit you said they'd be socked in the jaw halfway through their monologue. Lung was birdcaged in canon, and "I solo'd an Endbringer; let me go" wasn't his defence nor did they let him go.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Then the argument of letting villains go for their crimes because of helping against Endbringers is bullshit, which means it's still entirely justified to go after the Undersiders and bring them in regardless of what they contribute to said fights.
 
Polokun said:
I actually was thinking of going into much longer and much greater detail over three points in time, but I figured that'd take too long.


One of the big reasons Taylor hated the heroes in the first place was specifically because they had Sophia on their team, yet directly overlooked the shit she'd do. Even Wildbow himself said that if Taylor had joined and found out, the superiors would have just told her to "Get over it".



What's better, a nation that doesn't trust it's government, or a dead nation?



Cute. Completely ignore what I said just to claim its absurd, when all it is is your exact argument espousing pragmatism and ethics being a social contract to it's logical conclusion. Your own conclusions is based on "What Ifs" as well concerning villains and Endbringer fights. The only difference being that what I suggested was a more serious crime.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ok I see you're upset now, and I apologize if I caused that.

I'm trying to understand your point: are you saying pragmatism has no place in ethics? Should the Undersiders crimes be treated with the same severity as the S9? I want to understand you, but it feels like you aren't putting forth anything other than contradictions to the points others are making. Please help me to grok you better.
 
Polokun said:
One of the big reasons Taylor hated the heroes in the first place was specifically because they had Sophia on their team, yet directly overlooked the shit she'd do. Even Wildbow himself said that if Taylor had joined and found out, the superiors would have just told her to "Get over it".
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

There's a big difference between letting a villain get away with reduced police pressure and lighter sentences, and actually having one on your payroll as a cop. The Protectorate completely dropped the ball there, and lost themselves someone much more useful than Sophia as a result. That's what I mean by people losing faith in the government.

What's better, a nation that doesn't trust it's government, or a dead nation?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Did you even read my goddamned post?

Me in the very same post you just quoted said:
If people like Jack Slash were allowed to go free because he was effective against the Endbringers, people would openly rise against the government. Infrastructure would collapse. Organizations like the Protectorate would completely fall apart without funding. There'd be anarchy and civil war everywhere, and the endbringers would stomp through the chaos unopposed.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The government is NEEDED to fight the Endbringers, far more than any individual cape or group of capes.

There's a delicate balancing act between having enough capes on hand to fight the endbringers, and not arresting enough bad guys to avoid alienating the people. To my mind, the Protectorate/PRT leaned much too far toward the former, which resulted in shit like having a psychotic moron like Sophia onboard while alienating a nigh-invincible tactical genius like Taylor.
 
Last edited:
Thrice.Great said:
I'm trying to understand your point: are you saying pragmatism has no place in ethics? Should the Undersiders crimes be treated with the same severity as the S9? I want to understand you, but it feels like you aren't putting forth anything other than contradictions to the points others are making. Please help me to grok you better.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Your post claimed that pragmatism is more important then a society-created concept like ethics and morality, so crimes should be overlooked if it means a better help for latter. So why is a worse crime seen as somehow different from a smaller one? Or what if a villain escalates/ Where exactly is the "line" before said pragmatism runs out?

Blake Hannon said:
There's a big difference between letting a villain get away with reduced police pressure and lighter sentences, and actually having one on your payroll as a cop. The Protectorate completely dropped the ball there, and lost themselves someone much more useful than Sophia as a result. That's what I mean by people losing faith in the government.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

What difference would that be exactly? Moral basis? Wouldn't work as it's against a greater evil. Justice for their own crimes? Wouldn't it be more of an injustice to toss said help into jail and potentially put future people in danger just because of one persons inconvenience?

Blake Hannon said:
The government is NEEDED to fight the Endbringers, far more than any individual cape or group of capes.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
So? They're capes. They wear masks. What's to stop them from just keeping everything underwraps or heck! Even providing said villain a separate costume to wear during Endbrigner fights to not draw suspicion? If there's one thing Worm-verse isn't short of, it's coverups.
 
Polokun said:
What difference would that be exactly? Moral basis? Wouldn't work as it's against a greater evil. Justice for their own crimes? Wouldn't it be more of an injustice to toss said help into jail and potentially put future people in danger just because of one persons inconvenience?

So? They're capes. They wear masks. What's to stop them from just keeping everything underwraps or heck! Even providing said villain a separate costume to wear during Endbrigner fights to not draw suspicion? If there's one thing Worm-verse isn't short of, it's coverups.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I don't even know what point you're trying to make anymore.
 
Polokun said:
Then the argument of letting villains go for their crimes because of helping against Endbringers is bullshit, which means it's still entirely justified to go after the Undersiders and bring them in regardless of what they contribute to said fights.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Okay, you'll need to go at this step by step because I'm literally not seeing any of the steps to this conclusion at all.

I'll just ask you what you think would happen to the Undersiders if they were caught first.

Can you tell me in some detail what you think would happen? Would they go to Juvie, Jail or the Birdcage? How long if not the Birdcage?
 
TreeFrogSoup said:
Okay, you'll need to go at this step by step because I'm literally not seeing any of the steps to this conclusion at all.

I'll just ask you what you think would happen to the Undersiders if they were caught first.

Can you tell me in some detail what you think would happen? Would they go to Juvie, Jail or the Birdcage? How long if not the Birdcage?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think that would depend on what point in the story.
 
Blake Hannon said:
I don't even know what point you're trying to make anymore.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
My point is, if the public opinion is a problem as you say, then whats to stop them from just covering that up as well?

TreeFrogSoup said:
Okay, you'll need to go at this step by step because I'm literally not seeing any of the steps to this conclusion at all.

I'll just ask you what you think would happen to the Undersiders if they were caught first.

Can you tell me in some detail what you think would happen? Would they go to Juvie, Jail or the Birdcage? How long if not the Birdcage?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Blake Hannon said:
I think that would depend on what point in the story.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Blake has a point, it would depend on where. But the answer, IMO, would be that they should serve exact sentences/punishments for each of their crimes as put forth in whatever procedures they have. Not just sweep everything under the rug just because its convenient for them.
 
Polokun said:
My point is, if the public opinion is a problem as you say, then whats to stop them from just covering that up as well?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Impossible. A bunch of extra heroes who have the exact same powers as known villains magically appear for the Endbringer battles and then disappear again afterward? No one would buy it. Not to mention the sheer number of people you'd need to shut up for it to work.

Look. My position on the subject is as follows:

1. They need as many capes as possible to fight the endbringers.

2. They need to maintain order and keep people at least moderately safe from villains.

3. The solution, then, is to offer amnesty to villains who aren't that bad as long as they help against endbringers, with "that bad" being defined on a case by case level.

Where the authorities went wrong was in letting the line slide too far toward amnesty for certain people (while throwing others under the bus for pretenses. Poor Canary :( ), and in (even more stupidly) applying similar standards to their recruiting program for the Wards and Protectorate. The result was the near-dystopia we see in Worm.
 
Last edited:
Blake Hannon said:
Impossible. A bunch of extra heroes who have the exact same powers as known villains magically appear for the Endbringer battles and then disappear again afterward? No one would buy it. Not to mention the sheer number of people you'd need to shut up for it to work.

Look. My position on the subject is as follows:

1. They need as many capes as possible to fight the endbringers.

2. They need to maintain order and keep people at least moderately safe from villains.

3. The solution, then, is to offer amnesty to villains who aren't that bad as long as they help against endbringers, with "that bad" being defined on a case by case level.

Where the authorities went wrong was in letting the line slide too far toward amnesty for certain people (while throwing others under the bus for pretenses. Poor Canary :( ), and in (even more stupidly) applying similar standards to their recruiting program for the Wards and Protectorate. The result was the near-dystopia we see in Worm.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Even IF you considered all those factors, the sum total of Taylor's crimes would be more then enough to not excuse her. And by accessory laws, the rest of the Undersiders would be just as guilty.
 
Blake Hannon said:
and in (even more stupidly) applying similar standards to their recruiting program for the Wards and Protectorate
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well no one else wants to be heroes. For all her faults at least Sophia wanted to fight crime. Brian didn't, Lisa didn't, Alec didn't. You can either have a totally moral stance, which would mean prosecuting all villains as much as possible, or you can be pragmatic which means using anyone who wants to help no matter what their attitude is.
 
Polokun said:
Even IF you considered all those factors, the sum total of Taylor's crimes would be more then enough to not excuse her. And by accessory laws, the rest of the Undersiders would be just as guilty.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Depends on when in the story we're talking about.

VolantRedX said:
Well no one else wants to be heroes. For all her faults at least Sophia wanted to fight crime. Brian didn't, Lisa didn't, Alec didn't. You can either have a totally moral stance, which would mean prosecuting all villains as much as possible, or you can be pragmatic which means using anyone who wants to help no matter what their attitude is.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Or you could, you know, compromise. Like actual people do.

Sophia wasn't a hero by any sane definition.

SeptimusMagisto said:
No. That was a result of them being set up to fail. The whole "give people superpowers" plan was explicitly designed to create conflict and the fact that they did even that well is extremely admirable.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Surely you agree that they could have done better?
 
Blake Hannon said:
So did the Undersiders. So did Coil. So did Lung.

When one murderous, sadistic psychopath fights other murderous, sadistic psychopaths, that's not law enforcement. That's gang warfare.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Except Sophia was part of the law. She arrested criminals and ensured they went to court. Taylor only ever ran people off and guys like Coil or Lung just killed people.
 
VolantRedX said:
Except Sophia was part of the law. She arrested criminals and ensured they went to court. Taylor only ever ran people off and guys like Coil or Lung just killed people.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Sophia killed people whenever she thought she could get away with it. Not because she thought the system couldn't handle them, not because she thought it was for the greater good, but because she liked it. Sophia being a ward was basically Wildbow telling the reader, in as many words, that the authorities can't be trusted.
 
VolantRedX said:
Except the fact she fought crime.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Technically the guys who beat the shit out of Rodney King we're :turian:fighting crime.:turian:Stop and frisk searches can be said to be fighting crime, Sheriff Joe Arpaio is "fighting crime".

Why should we give kudos to superheroes even if they use extremely violent, civil rights abusing methods when we get pissed off at cops for doing the same thing?
 
Reveen said:
Technically the guys who beat the shit out of Rodney King we're :turian:fighting crime.:turian:Stop and frisk searches can be said to be fighting crime, Sheriff Joe Arpaio is "fighting crime".

Why should we give kudos to superheroes even if they use extremely violent, civil rights abusing methods when we get pissed off at cops for doing the same thing?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Also, trying to murder Grue and Skitter because she personally was annoyed by them.

VolantRedX said:
Wrong. She killed people because she was a 13 year old trying to play Batman. Accidents happen but she's not out there playing Frank Castle.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Have you read Worm? Its an excellent web serial, you might enjoy it.
 
Last edited:
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top