Posts: 46
Threads: 3
Joined: Sep 2012
Katznelson Wrote:Causing harm? You as a borg abandoned him in mid-rescue whereby causing him even more greater harm through extending the amount of time spent in deadly space.
That's not true, if I hadn't started dragging him he would have sat in space until he died.
Katznelson Wrote:To paraphrase: By even acting to save him effectively obligates you as the cyborg to ensure his safety. Your obligation and duty as a cyborg effectively binds you into seeking his rescue to hospitable areas.
I think you're still applying the inaction clause; that doesn't exist anymore, the only thing I could conceivably been obligated to do would be to drag him into a pressurised area.
Posts: 43
Threads: 6
Joined: Feb 2013
Katznelson Wrote:To paraphrase: By even acting to save him effectively obligates you as the cyborg to ensure his safety. Your obligation and duty as a cyborg effectively binds you into seeking his rescue to hospitable areas.
I think you're still applying the inaction clause; that doesn't exist anymore, the only thing I could conceivably been obligated to do would be to drag him into a pressurised area.[/quote]
Since you started saving him, stopping was an action leading to his harm. Also hospitable just mean survivable. So yes a pressurized area.
Posts: 200
Threads: 7
Joined: Jan 2013
Winterous Wrote:not true, if I hadn't started dragging him he would have sat in space until he died
That is the problem. By attempting to save him, he was no longer doomed to suffocate in space. You changed that one you decided to stop saving him. You can't reduce the problem to "Human dying due to lack of air" because you already decided to try and save him. By deciding to stop saving him, you are actively changing his circumstances.
Also, you can't say for sure that his chances of survival are better or worse before you interceded.
Posts: 46
Threads: 3
Joined: Sep 2012
Wydamn Wrote:Winterous Wrote:not true, if I hadn't started dragging him he would have sat in space until he died
That is the problem. By attempting to save him, he was no longer doomed to suffocate in space. You changed that one you decided to stop saving him. You can't reduce the problem to "Human dying due to lack of air" because you already decided to try and save him. By deciding to stop saving him, you are actively changing his circumstances.
Also, you can't say for sure that his chances of survival are better or worse before you interceded.
He said that my abandoning him resulted in MORE harm, when the amount of harm was almost the same; I was correcting him on that.
Posts: 200
Threads: 7
Joined: Jan 2013
Winterous Wrote:Wydamn Wrote:Winterous Wrote:not true, if I hadn't started dragging him he would have sat in space until he died
That is the problem. By attempting to save him, he was no longer doomed to suffocate in space. You changed that one you decided to stop saving him. You can't reduce the problem to "Human dying due to lack of air" because you already decided to try and save him. By deciding to stop saving him, you are actively changing his circumstances.
Also, you can't say for sure that his chances of survival are better or worse before you interceded.
He said that my abandoning him resulted in MORE harm, when the amount of harm was almost the same; I was correcting him on that.
The problem is you can't be sure. For all you know, he could have had a wormhole spawn next to him which he could regain consciousness just long enough to save himself with. Or he could have had a friend or mindslave go to try and save him and then look in the wrong spot after you moved him. By affecting even just his location, you change his situation in unpredictable ways.
Posts: 46
Threads: 3
Joined: Sep 2012
Wydamn Wrote:By affecting even just his location, you change his situation in unpredictable ways.
I think we should call this the butte-erfly effect
Posts: 707
Threads: 51
Joined: Sep 2012
If you want to discuss whether or not the admin reacted poorly, please continue to do so. If you wish to discuss the finer points of law one, please do so in a thread in Discussion. Admin Complaints is not an appropriate venue for arguing for four pages about what law one really means.
Posts: 46
Threads: 3
Joined: Sep 2012
popecrunch Wrote:If you want to discuss whether or not the admin reacted poorly, please continue to do so. If you wish to discuss the finer points of law one, please do so in a thread in Discussion. Admin Complaints is not an appropriate venue for arguing for four pages about what law one really means.
I believe that the nature of the law is important to whether or not Huk's judgement was valid.
But you're right, this has gone on long enough and all that's left for this thread is an admin decision, or something along those lines.
I will not continue discussing it here.
Posts: 707
Threads: 51
Joined: Sep 2012
It sort of isn't. If the rule is unclear, that's the fault of the admins in general for not clarifying it, not Huk's in particular for applying his interpretation of the rule.
My 1/50 of a buck: Huk acted fine and I would have done the exact same thing. I don't really think the rule needs to be clarified since the intent is pretty clear, and over-specializing the rules gives ammunition to rules lawyers and loophole hunters.
Posts: 46
Threads: 3
Joined: Sep 2012
I don't think the implications of the law need to be lain bare, but rather just provide some more examples of how it applies; I don't think that could be abused.
Also a lizard is crawling up my chest and trying to eat my beard, god damnit Jenny you are dumb.
Posts: 707
Threads: 51
Joined: Sep 2012
Winterous Wrote:I will not continue discussing it here.
Winterous Wrote:I don't think the implications of the law need to be lain bare, but rather just provide some more examples of how it applies; I don't think that could be abused.
desist
Posts: 161
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2012
The funny thing is that the inaction clause was removed because AIs and borgs kept using it to be supercop jerklords.
Posts: 1,235
Threads: 54
Joined: Oct 2012
popecrunch Wrote:My 1/50 of a buck: Huk acted fine and I would have done the exact same thing. I don't really think the rule needs to be clarified since the intent is pretty clear, and over-specializing the rules gives ammunition to rules lawyers and loophole hunters.
But poopcrunch, the Asimov laws of robotics are written specifically FOR loophole hunters. He made them super ambiguous so it would create drama within his stories.
I don't exactly agree with what this dude did and I think Huk X 3 was right to gib him, and I myself would have given him a dayban once he started crying about getting gibbed. Just my .10
Goonhub
