Quote Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus View Post
Just like perfection, predicting a future that didn't happen is impossible.
Of course knowing the future to its specifics is impossible, but all living beings have to make judgment calls and inferences based on existing information. How convenient that its not acceptable to do so here.

Quote Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus View Post
Are you actually suggesting that the state of the world is FINE, then? If not, then this is an attempt at a "gotcha" and not an argument.
Fuck no, but the issue I have with the world isn't that people are making decisions that effect others, its the decisions and the reasons for them. Even in the democratic societies people are making decisions for others, oftentimes ones they don't agree with. Unless you believe in anarchism Crowny, which is fine if you do, thats an inevitability.

Quote Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus View Post
Yes, we know your opinion. Doubling down on it is not conducive to a discussion.
You want a discussion or not Crowny. I'm answering your questions and responding to your points.

D
Quote Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus View Post
o you believe that eliminating all strife and sorrow is possible in reality?
All strife and sorrow? No.

Quote Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus View Post
It's not that I misunderstood it. It's that you refuse to think critically about it.

(Off-note: did that accusation feel good? No? Then KNOCK IT OFF.)
You've treated me like an idiot and denigrated me throughout this discussion, so don't get sanctimonious with me.

Quote Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus View Post
Meteion was talking about Ultima Thule in general, not The Plenty specifically. And no, we cannot apply that statement to ALL of Ultima Thule or the Dead Lands, because the dragons didn't assume they had achieved perfection, nor did the star that died by plague, nor the star ruled by the deity that killed everybody.
We almost certainly can!

Beyond that distant veil... Paradise lost. So glorious. So beautiful...
We were a proud and noble race. Strength embodied. We knew only love. Before they came...
Metal monstrosities of black and silver. No bonds of blood did they share, nor conviction did they have to guide them.
A crushing defeat. Never had we known such shame... Stilled now are the winds, though none could fill these wings burdened by ignominy. We fly no more, only sink into oblivion...
I beg thee leave me to dream. To forget that which we have lost...
Sounds real familiar to me!

Quote Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus View Post
Even the wartorn star never seems to have claimed that their world was perfect. And on top of that, there are tons of worlds (like the Nekropolis) where even Meteion doesn't know what the hell happened. So clearly, Meteion's broad statement there has plenty of exceptions.
Sure, but that perfection was still sought with a single minded zealotry that peace and unity was the way forward. A zealotry that gave rise to the machines that killed them and the war that ripped their planet apart. Each and every world we are shown follows that same pattern. The yearning for a perfect world, the manifestation of that in action, and the consequences that follow. If you wish to hold that Meteion find all these exceptions that were so definitely possible paths forward, and simply decided to torment Hermes for the fun of it, then by all means. I think that's crazy.

Quote Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus View Post
So again, we're left with two possibilities:

1) They did NOT eliminate all sorrow and strife, and were bummed out because they thought they did.
2) They actually eliminated all sorrow and strife, but found they could find no joy without it.

#2 contradicts itself. #1 makes them look like idiots that service no lesson.

The story states that it's #2.
And I am repeatedly going to point out that the story gives several direct quotes where major characters state that it is impossible to do that. How do you hold the story states #2 with those quotes? You've yet to answer that, and instead insisted that the contradiction remains. The premise of the Plenty isn't undermined by pointing out that its denizens were wrong anymore than the premise of the dragons, or the Ea or the Omicron is wrong because of what happened in Ultima Thule. A society that gave up individuality itself in order to eliminate sorrow being ruined by the realization that life is unable to exist with out is not crazy, it makes perfect sense!

Quote Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus View Post
In which case, the Plenty's entire problem never existed and they were just idiots.
Believe as you please then. I think they tried their best.

Quote Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus View Post
To repeat:

Yes, we know your opinion. Doubling down on it is not conducive to a discussion.
Ok, then in the interest of discussion explain your reasoning. You've given a moral reason for why you shouldn't by saying:

It's not a "hard call" at all. No one deserves to make unilateral decisions for an entire planet.
But I don't agree with you there! So were at an impasse. If we would like to discuss that and not just agree to disagree, we then need to find a way around that. What reason do I have to not believe that? What problems exist in my reasoning here? Any of these would give me more to say than just restating my position!

Quote Originally Posted by Lauront View Post
I'll make it obvious in case it isn't: they don't need to show every detailed step of their deliberation processes (or, for that matter, when Lahabrea needed a toilet break), least of all to totally-just-a-familiars, in order to be transparent in communicating their decisions to their people for further discussion. So, from where in the above does it follow that it is in accordance with the way their government or society operated to surreptitiously decide to spring a surprise supreme deity on them and genocide their entire people? When even the Convocation members had sigils binding them from using their powers in ways that abused their position?
Ok, I genuinely don't understand how a statement where it is clearly stated that highly sensitive affairs that are revealed only to select few, which he states includes us, can be interpreted this way. The word include quite literally means "comprise or contain as part of a whole." What exactly do you think the whole being referred to is?

Quote Originally Posted by Brinne View Post
So, how much do you know about the ways in which the parts for the computer or electronic device you are currently using were sourced?
Good one Brinne, I'm sure you know for complete certainty that I've never advocated, agreed with or fought for change in production practices in worldwide supply chains. You mentioned me poisoning the well before but based on statements like this I don't think its a well anymore. Its a container of toxic sludge.