Tyrande's Darkening (8.1 spoilers)

Woah, that was amazingly immature of you. Do you feel like getting that personal every time you meet someone that isn’t agreeing with you?

I mean, you did really start lashing out at The terminology used?..

I’m not expecting an ingame character to tell you the truth, I’m expecting that you, as a player, are able to decipher it with the information the game gives you.
Meta knowledge of you wish to call it.

You want me to speak plainly? I’ll try:

I think you wouldn’t like Sylvanas doing this because you are biased against her character. Not because you consider the actions that would be made as inherently evil.

I think you are trying to rationalise your hatred towards her character hypothetically doing this by calling on some past unrelated action. And trying to tie them with these events by implying that any action Sylvanas does would be considered evil or reprehensible, because you can’t fathom any scenario where any of her actions doesn’t have a negative innuendo or side effect (or whatever you want to call it).

And I think that’s blinding you to the fact that maybe if Sylvanas did stuff like Tyrande did in her scenario, you would argue against it regardless of her motives simply because you don’t like her character. And no amount of meta clarification would dissuade you from it.

In short, you would argue against Sylvanas doing this because you don’t like her character.
And I’m afraid that has to do with some bias and double standard.

For the record, I don’t feel like Tyrande is being evil for doing this. Even if from my preferred game point of view, it’s being marketed that way.

But again that’s my point of view. I asked because I wanted clarification about it.

Edit:…and instead of giving it, you lashed out at me personally.

I need someone to edit this cutscene so when tyrande enters to pool she yells :

1)- Bwonsamdiiiiii!

2)- Moon - Cristalu powa make up! * sailor music kicks up.

2 Likes

Even Scarface wasn’t ready to kill 2 Children. Sylvanas was ready to genocide. That’s evil. I saw no sadness, no regrets… I think no psychopath would behave themselve after this like Sylvanas in Lordaeron. There is a reason why so many people hate her here. The mist who likes to be evil, at least it is what I have readed from them.

1 Like

Sorry mate, when I see babbling, I will call it babbling. Further more, we can not comprehend what you mean for the love of god. And that is not for a lack of will to understand, you simply make no sense.

You drop rhetorical bombs and then, instead of defending them, you need to go into highly specialized scenarios to make them work.

And why am I biased against Sylvanas? Because she is Sylvanas? I am biased against Sylvanas because of her previous actions, they automatically throw a shade on each and every one of her future actions.

A person is defined by their deeds. You want to both eat the cake, and save it for later.

Excuse me, who are you to tell me what I would think and how I would act? Even I don’t know how I would react in such a hypothetical scenario, but you do?

You are entering sophistic waters to defend a character no one is even attacking right now, but you tell me I am biased.

Sylvanas and her deeds are not some sort of separate entity you can vivisect at will, who Sylvanas is is defined directly by her actions.

edit: Hala and me are on discord right now, trying to understand what you want, and we don’t get it.

edit 2: I just saw your edit, I am not lashing at you, I am speaking of your statements in derogatory terms, because it makes no sense.

1 Like

Zarao, I don’t think I get it. The person and their actions are pretty much one and the same. You are allowed to mistrust me if I lied to you, you are allowed to dislike me if I offended you.

It’s the same with Sylvanas. I don’t like her not because she is Sylvanas, she was rather fine during Warcraft III campaign. I dislike her because of everything she did, and misery she caused.

Based on Tyrande’s actions, I can assume that she is going to use these powers for vengeance against invaders. Not to slaughter all races.
Based on Sylvanas’ actions, I can assume that she is going to use these powers to further her goal of securing herself and Forsaken by slaughtering everyone and raising them into undeath.

A person = their actions. Hence, my dislike and mistrust.

3 Likes

Because a person is defined by their actions.

I feel I made myself abundantly clear.

No I don’t. In fact I entered this whole thing with a simple statement: I doubt if any of this had been done by Sylvanas, people would be as lenient as they are right now.

People answered that of course that’d be the case, and I asked why.
And to that, people argued about Sylvanas past actions.

Then, I went ahead and wondered how could someones background influence the nature of some specific action, and if the negative charge came because people felt that when carried out by said person, those actions would necessarily have additional negative innuendos or side effects. Or because people simply don’t like her character and are readily willing to judge it harshly.

And that’s were I left it. How is any of that confusing?

Edit: Also, I asked if given the chance of given the knowledge or meta reasons that clarified someone’s action, would you still feel the same.

And I never tried to defend Sylvanas.

1 Like

They don’t like her character because of her actions.

And basing that “prejudice” on her actions, we can assume she is going to act in a vile (subjectivity) manner. We’ve established that already.

If I remember correctly (we’re debating for quite some time) I also left it at that :smiley:

I judge people and trust them or mistrust based on what they did in the past. Not… because they are … they.

EDIT:
Obviously, from Sylvanas’ or Forsaken’s point of view, her actions of trying to wipe out other people and raise them into undeath are more than tolerable. But, since I am not a Forsaken, I perceive those actions as evil (subjectivity).

3 Likes

Sorry mate, I don’t get it, Hala doesn’t get it, I don’t think anyone gets it reading the posts here.

What you mean to say is that Sylvanas would be judged more harshly even in a more innocent action, because of people’s prejudice?

So you are saying that no matter what Sylvanas does, you won’t like it.
Fine and understandable.

Does that make you right if you argue how any of her actions are wrong or right? I mean, I don’t like Baine, but I’m willing to acknowledge he did something good if he stomps the next enemy that comes threatening his people.

I ask this because from what I recall, it seemed that both personal preferences and past actions, influenced the result of judging the morality or validity of an action.
And I kind of disagree on that…

Given the reasons exposed and if it was done by guys with your apparent stance? Yes. A big yes.

Listen mate, the guy with my apparent stance went to that Interview where Sylvanas was blamed for the Wrathgate by Afrasiabi and said:

“Ok, this makes no sense.”

She is a character in a video-game we play, not my worst nemesis.

Further more, it is not prejudice if defined by meta-knowledge of the game, which we have. Prejudice is judging before knowing, forming an opinion without facts. We have all the facts, we have all the knowledge, the opinion can not be called prejudice.

1 Like

No, but I am more likely to dislike her actions than action of Lor’themar whom I like.
If she saved a bunch of puppies from a burning building, I’d like that.

:heart:

I have already said that moral relativism is a thing. NOTHING is right and NOTHING is good.

Invite Xiao and Thero to this conversation, please :wink:

And I am going to acknowledge that Sylvanas does something good when I believe that she did so! I am not going to automatically hate everything she does just because she is Sylvanas. I liked the fact that she tried to defend Quel’thalas for instance. And that she did not beg for mercy or anything.

They might influence the way I perceive an action. If Sylvanas races into a burning building full of puppies I am likely to assume she wants to raise dead puppies into undeath. If Anduin races into the place, I will assume he wants to save puppies.

If Sylvanas rescues the puppies, I would praise her.

If Anduin kills puppies, I would be (frost) shocked.

1 Like

“I rootet for you! We all rootet for you over here Halasibel! How could you disappoint us like this???”

2 Likes

I fixed that :heart: !

1 Like

But still you seem to be of the opinion that regardless of the nature of any past action, you consider it natural to consider her acts as something reprehensible.

I even asked if given the meta knowledge that clarified everything said acts entailed, would you still feel that way. Although I may have missed the answer on that one.

Given an exact mirrored situation, that has motives, circumstances, and context being mirrored by Sylvanas, are you really of the opinion that these acts would’ve been seen the same way with no prejudice whatsoever involved?

I consider only her reprehensible acts morally reprehensible. I judge by the act, not by the person. My anti-Sylvanas stance would influence me only when judging actions which are unclear or debatable.

I need to know motive, circumstance and context before answering.

I am sorry, but I am completely lost.

Now I only want Erevien to see the change I have made and to still like me :sob:

2 Likes

Moral relativism is one possible position, but most definitely not the only one.

Apart from that… of course prior actions are taken into account when making a judgement on a new action. If someone is a known liar, I won’t take his solemn promise the same way I take that of a man who never broke any promise. That seems quite trivial to me.

The observed actions give us information from which we try to deduce motivations and character traits. The same act, done with a different motivation, is quite often treated differently. If a politician stands for his ideals, because he believes in them, we find that lauable. If he advocates the same actions, with the same words, but only does it to get votes, we find that dubious.

But Zarao seems to want to talk about a hypothetical… where Sylvanas acts on laudable motives, even if they don’t fit her actions… and I think he is quite right to think that judging the same act with the same motivation differently is strange, and possibly wrong.

But I think no one went with this hypothetical… because there is no way we would buy it. It doesn’t fit the character, so we would never believe that her motives are noble, even if she claims so - heck, even if she thinks so in a point of viev chapter. And if this were to happen… most people here would just call it a character inconsitency, which makes it worse.
No one wants to play that game.

1 Like

Same ones as the ones Tyrande currently has. Nothing more and nothing less.

Ps: And don’t you think I didn’t read your posts Wimbert, but I need to be at home to answer them fully.