Bay 12 Games Forum

? and they are ?

ah. they are in the first post
so. what is that number actually? how did you calculate it? it takes values greater than 1 so it's not the correlation coefficient ...

Download the most recent save version:
Download the Utility "EMBARK ANYWHERE" or it's partner "JUST EMBARK"
Found a 7x7 Fortress around the Dwarf city location of "Silverysects" where we are headed to.

1. Why? The area is embarkable just fine without such a tool.
2. 7x7? That's crazy big for some of us .. My old but trusted computer can't do bigger than ~4x5 while maintaining an acceptable framerate

That's it, I'm mailling the local socialist party this evening and I'll enlist in the Pirate party.

That's great

Quote from: lorb on June 25, 2012, 04:24:52 pm

this should ensure that the ultimate goal (or at least part of it) of the breaking of the law is to be a signal to those that make the law or are responsible for it (the majority) that something is amiss and should be changed

Alright, makes sense.

Personally I think there's more ways out of moral responsibility than martyrdom. I'm more sympathetic to the "just following orders" excuse than many. A hypothetical officer than enforces a law they don't agree with can defer responsibility to whoever enacted the law, in my opinion, as they're just a tool in someone else's hands. That excuse doesn't carry weight in the cases of them being overzealous in enforcing the law, nor if they helped it come to pass (voting for it, etc), though.

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
I see potential for great danger in the part i highlighted. I do not think it's ok for our hypothetical officer to do nothing about a law he does not agree with. It need not be martyrdom but he ought to do something. At least in a democracy he has partial responsibility for every law in place and voting is only the very baseline absolute minimum of participation you/he should feel obliged to. But raising his voice in the democratic process ans breaking the law sure are different things and the latter should only be an option after the former failed. But in the case that legal actions are not sufficient to right grave wrongs officer joe has a moral duty to break the law. Obviously it is not clear what "grave wrongs" are and in an attempt to ensure that at least the case of breaking the law without a good cause is ruled out i put up the that list of requirements for civil disobedience in the earlier post.
Besides that it is very very hard to give rational proof or similar for normative statements but i do think at least some basic (natural) rights apply to everyone simply by being human and any violation of those legitimates breaking of law. Those rights are (in my opinion) also absolute, universal and objective moral standards.

edit: wow. spellchecking is great. so many words i can freely use without worrying whether they are spelled wrong or right

Quote from: lorb on June 25, 2012, 03:04:53 pm

Sometimes the rules from number 2 should be given priority over law. In that case the right thing to do is to break/not follow the law.

Here's where the problems with that lie:

The police are there to enforce rules other people made. Not rules they made. If an individual police officer decides to enforce a law they made up, or decides to forgo enforcing a law they disagree with, then big problems can arise.

Imagine a police officer who's racist. In their mind, the "right" thing to do is something along the lines of what the KKK advocates. So, when they come across a hate crime, they might ignore it with the excuse of "I'm doing the right thing, not what the law says" and under your logic they'd be entirely justified.

Now you could argue objective morality to counter that, but the fact of reality is everyone has their own system of morality. There is no authority to decide what is truly "right and wrong," so there would be no way to objectively determine whether a police officer breaking the law for moral reasons would be justified or not. If we're going by popular vote about morality, that's what the laws are ideally supposed to already represent. We already tried going by what God says, and I dearly hope you're not advocating yourself or any other individual person to be the absolute authority on morality, so...

A police officer should follow the law to the letter. If the law is corrupt, then it needs to be changed (and said officer has just as much power to change it as you do).

I will not be able to argue against that and it is extraordinary hard to avoid the naturalistic fallacy but i will try to at least defend a somewhat weaker position of what i believe to be correct. civil disobedience is never wrong if the person breaking a law does so under the following circumstances:

• he/she is not personally gaining from it
• it is public
• he/she does it in a way or acts in a way that makes it conceivable for the majority that he/she is acting out of a perceived moral duty
• he/she does not resist being legally charged for it

this should ensure that the ultimate goal (or at least part of it) of the breaking of the law is to be a signal to those that make the law or are responsible for it (the majority) that something is amiss and should be changed

edit: i also believe that objective morality exists and that ethical truths can in fact be established/discovered by means of discourse.

edit2: also pointing to my signature i kind of feel the need to install a package for english spellchecking. please bear with my english

Because they have to follow the law which by definition is unrelated to morality.

It is not? Law _should_ be just. If it became law that a specified minorty (eg blacks) are excluded from some parts of society/public life (eg public transport) it would be the right thing to break and not enforce this law. (even for a policeman) no?

As much as I dislike myself for saying this, he's still not allowed to do it. It's not up to the police officer to decide what law should or should not be followed. That's up to the courts and the legislation.

I hate to say this, but the police's job is to enforce the law, not anything else. If you law are stupid, that's your problem.

Uhm, there is a point where you are morally obliged to _NOT_ follow the law.

I'm in Austria. How about this? http://www.mediafire.com/?xe0122lzerk8pyd

Edit:

It's currently downloading (very, very slowly) for me from DFFD, if it makes it and functions I'll put it on my personal hosting.
Going to take a bit to download at ~60k/s and then upload at 40k/s though.

Okay, I'm getting way too many 'download was inturrupted' and 'couldn't be downloaded' messages for my liking, so could someone please put it on mediafire? I tend to have difficulty downlading things from dffd.

I have the same problem(s). I switched to using wget which by default allows up to 20 interruptions in a download and still finish with the file intact.