Is a hammer moral? Is a car moral? Is a computer moral?
There is no inherent morality in the existence of a tool. The morality comes from how the operator chooses to wield it.
1 Like
We are not trying to assert that players never do what you would consider abuse. We are trying to assert that it only happens in a minority of cases. Those are different things.
1 Like
Yes. A hammer controlled by a human being is moral. A car controlled by a human being is moral. A computer (just like the one I’m using right now and so are you) is moral.
Master Loot is immoral. It is a loot dictator. Absolute control.
Personal loot is moral. It is consensual. 100% of the time. Not “most of the time” not “almost always” It is always consensual and always moral.
2 Likes
But it is also controlled by a human. What makes this tool different from any other when controlled by a human?
PL is the only thing mentioned that is not directly controlled by a human.
I like how you tried to gotcha me with that quote but honestly. It doesn’t work like that.
Please stop trying to gotcha people and get a job in retail or hospitality.
Do you want to just be this forever?
1 Like
I didn’t think pointing out a logical inconsistency was going for a gotcha.
I just find it odd that you’re so against this tool compared to the other 3 mentioned, when the other 3 have the potential to do objectively more damage.
Did that for 2 years. not going back.
1 Like
Don’t play dumb please. Gotcha. Is exactly. What you do. You thrive on gotchas. Admit yourself, and try to love yourself.
1 Like
Well, if you don’t like people pointing out where your own presented position is internally inconsistent, I suggest checking for internal consistency before hitting post.
The post you made opens with 3 examples of thing x is moral because of property y, in what seems to be an attempt to prove that having property y implies morality.
This is then immediately followed by a flat thing z is immoral, while ignoring that it also has property y.
If you disagree with my assessment of this post, feel free to explain how I’m misrepresenting it.
1 Like
Which will be used as evidence for pro-ML to push the system back on the rest of the player base.
Literally your entire history here. Has been gotchas. That is your life, your bread and butter. Is just gotchas.
So a “gotcha” is any post you disagree with? Because that is the definition that makes this statement true.
1 Like
No you are literally a gotcha account that has done nothing but focus on gotcha moments.
Then I’m glad you don’t work for Blizzard.
I know the people in this scenario would’ve kept the loot off the player they’re resenting if they had access to ML or RC if they’re that easy to upset.
For the consideration of other players, yes.
They’re just not here to argue on the forums because they’re wiser than I. Plus the threat of ML returning isn’t quite real yet.
It happened to me so…
I can be humble at times. You’ll never see it in Snozh since he’s a troll.
Subjective. Other players have blocked him for simply being unreasonably combative in the forums.
There will be more outrage if ML was announced to be returning, they’re just not here to speak in numbers to protest since it isn’t assured.
1 Like
If you want to stop people pointing out internal inconsistency in your arguments, maybe you should stop making internally inconsistent arguments. I suspect that you’re just arguing in bad faith at this point, or we are dealing with a case of Dunning-Kruger for argument skills.
2 Likes
I make consistent arguments with consistent rhetoric.
I say that master loot is not what this game needs at all and I explain that and defend that argument.
You just try and make up nonsense but again, I am ready to defend my arguments and my opinions. You are prepared to just report anyone who doesn’t agree with you.
1 Like
you’re position is consistent, correct. What’s inconsistent is your argument that x implies y, then stating that in this one case you have a case of x and not y.
Either the example is false, or the premise is false.
1 Like
First of all, that makes no sense.
Second of all. I can tell you love reporting people after that.
I suspect it doesn’t make sense to you because whatever path of education you have either taken or are currently on, neither a class on logic nor probability has been included. Or if one has, I suspect that it was inadequate in either curriculum content, instructional quality, or amount of attention paid by you as the student.
Definitely not breaking any forum rules with that one…
And what rule do you think it breaks?
1 Like