Mume.net - LOG: Samesiders How To

### Ok, story goes that Kraq samesided quite a bunch ###
### of orcs in caves thuz being killed several times ###
### on several occassions. (happened some time ago)  ###

oO CW>whois kraq
Kraq the drooling beast is a level twenty-three Tarkhnarb Murderer.
Is playing.
I prot Loremaster!


- Tell Kraq why all this people killing you?

Kraq tells you 'i killed some'

- Tell Kraq why is that so?

Kraq tells you 'im drink'

Kraq tells you 'im drunk'
		
		### Wrong answer #1. ###

Kraq tells you '=)'

- Tell Kraq well you shouldnt do that

Kraq tells you 'why?'

- Tell Kraq cause it suxxx to suxxx

Kraq tells you 'i have fun'

		### Wrong answer #2. ###

*+ CW>Small Path
Exits: *north*, *south*.

*< CW>north
Bend in the Path
Kraq is standing here (hidden).
Exits: *south*, *west*.


*< CW>sa fakin mvs
Ok.
		### Double crossing a bit. ###

*< CW>rest
You sit down and rest your tired bones.

		### Let's us be convincing. ###
*< CW>look
Bend in the Path
Kraq is standing here (hidden).

*< CW>st
You stop resting, and stand up.

*< CW>tar kraq

 >>> TARGET: kraq <<<
 		
 		### Let's just take it slowly. ###

*< CW>sa fakin mvs fakin mana
Ok.
		### Double crossing a bit more. ###

*< CW>cast 'harm' ${target}
Struggling against the Yellow Face, you try to concentrate...

The cruel light of the sun made you lose your concentration!
		
		### Lalala, we have all the time in the world. ###

*< CW Mana:Burning>sa eh
Ok.
		### Hmmm. ###

*< CW Mana:Burning>tho
[cha spell tho]
 --==+ SPELL SPEED: THOROUGHLY +==--
Ok.
		### We need maximum pawaa! ###

*< CW Mana:Burning>cast 'harm' ${target}
Struggling against the Yellow Face, you try to concentrate...

The cruel light of the sun made you lose your concentration!

		### Tralalala, no hurry indeed. ###

*< CW Mana:Hot>sa hehe
Ok.
		### Well .. bob backfired :P ###
		
*< CW Mana:Hot>cast 'harm' ${target}
Struggling against the Yellow Face, you try to concentrate...

Ok.
You feel yourself exposed.
Kraq leaves his hiding place.
As you call on ancient powers, Kraq twists in great pain.
You smite Kraq's head extremely hard and shatter it.
Kraq is >> =D=Y=I=N=G= <<   - Another one bites the dust! -

*< CW Mana:Warm Kraq:Dying>
You smite Kraq's right arm extremely hard and shatter it.
You feel more experienced.
Congratulations! This is the first time you've killed it!
Your blood freezes as you hear Kraq's death cry.
Kraq has drawn his last breath! R.I.P.

		### I could see this one coming. ###

Unknown

2005-05-06 18:48:45

Wow...way to go there. You're worse than him, I hope you know, because when you acted, you expressed that you knew it was wrong, but justified it to yourself anyway. You also took advantage of him when he was intoxicated.

Here's a lesson for you: Two wrongs don't make a right.

I fail to see the amusement in what you did, and it was a cowardly act on many levels. Why not openly challenge him if you have a problem with his actions? Instead you want to snake him like this? Your cowardly act only validated his previous actions.

Unknown

2005-05-07 08:00:10

First off...I don't even play MUME. I used to...I quit because it became a culture of bad faith instead of a culture of skill and fellowship. Posting my name here would mean nothing as noone would recognize it. If you want to put a label on me, just call me The Protagonist.

I find it brutally predictable that the main theme of your response to my post had nothing to do with the content of my post itself, but instead attacked the fact that I posted anon. That tells me that there is no excuse for your actions even in your own mind that you could come up with.

You simply saw a chance to same-side someone while still taking the moral high-ground and you took advantage of it. I only posted to let you know that you aren't fooling me for one, and hopefullu many others, and to point out that your act was every bit as dispicable as his.

However, that concept seems be to FAR beyond your moral comprehension.

Unknown

2005-05-10 17:10:24

Again, this isn't and never was about me or who I am. That's what people try to turn it into when they lose on the real issue.

Delirium used consequential reasoning to justify same-siding the person; i.e. he realized there was no consequence, therefore he thought it was okay. What you want to try to do is to use deontological reasoning, which looks at the act itself and whether it is right or wrong, whether or not there was a consequence. What Delirium here (on a smaller scale, granted) was show me what he was capable of when he percieves that there would be no consequence to his actions. For example, you wouldn't want to leave him alone in your room with money lying around, because if nobody is there to witness him stealing, you never know if his little brain would calculate that there would be no consequence for stealing from you.

Capice? Or do I need to dissect this little maggot's actions further?

Once again, who I am is irrelevant and always was in the context of this conversation. You people worry far too much about "who" is saying something rather than the merit of the statements themselves.