You must not know a thing about Elasmobranchology.
And I'm sure you're a world-renown expert.
Any person who commits suicide (Whether directly or indirectly) is responsible for their own demise one way or the other.
Are you now claiming that it was Jane's intention to have Kenny kill her? Because regardless of how ridiculous that is, I've already addressed even that point, something you either forgot or never realized in the first place: "Hell, even if she had intended for Kenny to murder her (equivalent to me intending for the murderer to murder someone after I release him), Kenny is still the one who made the decision to murder and thus still bears the majority of the responsibility for it, just as the murderer in my scenario would." If my plan to kill myself hinges on someone else committing a crime against me, that person is still responsible for said crime committed against me, unless my actions forced that person to commit that crime against me.
Since when does being justified for doing something make it completely right?
Since the 14th century. When something is justified, it means that it was right to do it. Kenny was right to be angry. He was not right, not justified, in attacking Jane.
Does it makd it okay for me to beat her up or throw her off a rooftop? Debatable.
No. Not debatable. The fact that you said that shows how completely ass-backwards you are on this whole issue. Great example.
What affect does this have on those two short paragraphs I quoted you on?
Because if I said straight out in plain English that I blame Jane for the fight and then say that Kenny was the first one to physically attack her, any idiot and his blind monkey would understand that I'm not equating being the first to physically attack someone as starting the fight. Literally the only way those three quote could possibly contradict the previous paragraph you quoted is if, again, you already have in your mind that starting a fight and being the first to attack someone are the same thing. Are you just being willfully ignorant because you don't want to admit that you made a comprehension error here? Is that what's going on?
You see, you keep bringing that comparison between a "bunch of mindless animals" and a human being. Wait, who said Sharks are mindless, anyw… moreay? You must not know a thing about Elasmobranchology. Dome...my example was meant to illustrate how regardless of whether a person is putting herself in a situation fo be devoured by walkers or get killed by an unstable man, they should be held responsible for their own death. Specially when that person had a chance to stop the brawl right before it became a fight to death. Instead, she went along with her plan because she thought she could take out an already wounded man who was also missing an eyeball. I don't even know what you're arguing for at this point. Any person who commits suicide (Whether directly or indirectly) is responsible for their own demise one way or the other. Dome, it's like I have to explain simple concepts like this one all the time and once I do you completely ignore it and jump o… [view original content]
You still included the unused clip in your response. Plus, that "Facial expression, etc" point you're making is highly debatable. I did provide you with a fact on the other hand.
"Troy, we talked about this..."
"You said you'd help, then I'd help."
Any logical person understands that rape was never even implied based on this conversation.
So one conversation, nay... two short lines of dialogue, is justification for it not existing? That's not fact, it's a flimsy base from little information. (Not saying mine is provably better, just that yours is as completely out in the air as mine) But in any case, largely uncritical. I see the nuances, you don't.
And to nullify this case:
Even if she wasn't abused by Troy she was still his victim, as was everyone locked away and held at gun point and made to toil for slave labor. It's still unfair to ask, or as you seem to, expect, the victim to very potentially throw their life away for the sake of giving him a happier end. That's just cruel.
I may have been basing on assumptions as much as you, but I've at least used scenes that actually happened in the game to support my ideas.
Right. Scenes that would not exist. That's like saying Darth Sidious would have been thrown down the hole in the death star if Anakin was killed as a child. How can you say that? Everything after his death would change. Those scenes lend you absolutely no aid in this situation.
Your assumption on the other hand have no base so far. You're just saying what you think. The only time you actually tried to buttres your point with actual facts you came up with a questionable arguments that's up for interpretation.
No, I've supported it with validated information confirmed by me, most all other fans of TWD, and TWD wiki. Pertaining to the situation in which Jane has killed Troy, and the situation which would follow. This is a critical thinking and application matter.
Troy was still fresh meat, and they heard him yelling not too long ago.
Then they saw a woman throw a big, red fire ball at his face then targeted her. They have the memory of a maggot, they are instinct. They don't recognize food on the ground, they recognize movement and sound. Two things Troy has since ceased doing after being so kindly executed.
Again, this is nothing more than another far-fetched assumption with the "Who knows" factor thrown in there.
This is how zombies work.
You would imagine that walkers are not preferable to people that have been dead for a while, but you were arguing that the walkers were almost on top of us. So why are you coming to the conclusion that they would just completely forget about Troy? You simply don't know how they would react in that situation.
Did I say not dead for awhile? I thought I said they prefer the living. Troy was dead. Jane was making noise and moving around. Targeted. They completely forget Troy for the same reason they are eating people. They don't have the ability to remember anything. Not from their past life, or who they ate first, or why they are missing an eye. In order to forget, you must remember.
To the rest of the group? No. Like I said, they were all quiet, away from Jane, and covered in walker guts.
They weren't far away. Plus, as I said, what happens when she needs to go running past them and they falter?
To Jane? Debatable.
It's really not debatable.
You're basing on a Wikipedia statement that could be as inconsistent as the writting in S2.
Go watch the TV series, or read the comics, or replay S1. Countless times zombies arise from the feast at their feet to chase down the living. Why? Because they're fucking dumb and they wouldn't be menacing if you could throw a dead squirrel at their feet and they would be distracted for minutes on end.
You're jumping to yet another conclusion by implying that the walkers would conpletely ignore Jane being covered in guys and go after her because they heard a shot?
What is with you and this blunderish "You're assuming. You're jumping to conclusions. Etc." No. This is a repeated fact throughout the entire franchise. When they recognize the living, they kill the living.
That rather smart. However, you're arguing below that they're dumb creatures. What side are you on?
What are you talking about? They are dumb because they don't recognize the food on the floor. It would be smart to eat that instead of having to chase their food. I've already explained this.
I didn't take from the unused audio clip, I took from nuances.
You still included the unused clip in your response. Plus, that "Faci… moreal expression, etc" point you're making is highly debatable. I did provide you with a fact on the other hand.
"Troy, we talked about this..."
"You said you'd help, then I'd help."
Any logical person understands that rape was never even implied based on this conversation.
Which would be a solid argument if your were basing your side on fact. Seeing as we are arguing over something that didn't happen, and that would have completely changed the scene you think is a good "fact", you are playing on assumptions just as much as me. I have provided sound thinking prompted by the repercussions for killing Troy without Troy there to take the blame, you on the other hand have have played off of what did happen and not what would have happened had Jane humanely killed Troy.
I may have been basi… [view original content]
You still included the unused clip in your response. Plus, that "Facial expression, etc" point you're making is highly debatable. I did prov… moreide you with a fact on the other hand.
"Troy, we talked about this..."
"You said you'd help, then I'd help."
Any logical person understands that rape was never even implied based on this conversation.
So one conversation, nay... two short lines of dialogue, is justification for it not existing? That's not fact, it's a flimsy base from little information. (Not saying mine is provably better, just that yours is as completely out in the air as mine) But in any case, largely uncritical. I see the nuances, you don't.
And to nullify this case:
Even if she wasn't abused by Troy she was still his victim, as was everyone locked away and held at gun point and made to toil for slave labor. It's still unfair to ask, or as you seem to, expect, the victim to very potentially throw the… [view original content]
Youi can stick out your tongue all you want ,it was a possibility thats all
Was the discussion about Jane and Troy or not ?
And i gave my POV, i don't say you are wrong
What do you think this :P is ?
Ther is very little known about what happened between Jane and Troy, her shooting his dick off could be revenge and a diversion but it also could be only a diversion
It was to satisfy Jane, and I don't condemn her for doing it. It did benefit the group, and I don't condemn her for doing it.
Covered awhile ago. I'm not arguing it was only for a diversion. I have no doubt Jane had a sense of justice/revenge doing what she did. But it was necessary.
Also, I didn't make that connection. I thought you thought I was being disdainful when you said "You can stick out your tongue all you want." I was just trying to lighten the mood
What do you think this :P is ?
Ther is very little known about what happened between Jane and Troy, her shooting his dick off could be revenge and a diversion but it also could be only a diversion
It was to satisfy Jane, and I don't condemn her for doing it. It did benefit the group, and I don't condemn her for doing it.
Covere… mored awhile ago. I'm not arguing it was only for a diversion. I have no doubt Jane had a sense of justice/revenge doing what she did. But it was necessary.
Also, I didn't make that connection. I thought you thought I was being disdainful when you said "You can stick out your tongue all you want." I was just trying to lighten the mood
I'd totally bang Jane if I was also a drawn character in the game (that is presumably also voiced by me). But then again I'd bang a black snake with a festered arse if ya held it's head, sooo....
I'd totally bang Jane if I was also a drawn character in the game (that is presumably also voiced by me). But then again I'd bang a black snake with a festered arse if ya held it's head, sooo....
I'd totally bang Jane if I was also a drawn character in the game (that is presumably also voiced by me). But then again I'd bang a black snake with a festered arse if ya held it's head, sooo....
yea i would have never guessed i was shocked and you know what else is funny Bonnie, Tavia, Jane, Edith, Katjaa, Lilly, Vera are all the same model lazy telltale being lazy
Lol To Everyone who says jane looks a monkey, yall are messed up xD but actually, I think jane is pretty, and I just love her voice, it's like raspy but not, if that makes any sense. Lol
I guess she's nice looking, not my kind of thing though. She does sort of resemble a monkey, but it's not an overpowering feature like everyone keeps mentioning.
yea i would have never guessed i was shocked and you know what else is funny Bonnie, Tavia, Jane, Edith, Katjaa, Lilly, Vera are all the same model lazy telltale being lazy
Comments
Molly is the worst waifu though.
And I'm sure you're a world-renown expert.
Are you now claiming that it was Jane's intention to have Kenny kill her? Because regardless of how ridiculous that is, I've already addressed even that point, something you either forgot or never realized in the first place: "Hell, even if she had intended for Kenny to murder her (equivalent to me intending for the murderer to murder someone after I release him), Kenny is still the one who made the decision to murder and thus still bears the majority of the responsibility for it, just as the murderer in my scenario would." If my plan to kill myself hinges on someone else committing a crime against me, that person is still responsible for said crime committed against me, unless my actions forced that person to commit that crime against me.
Since the 14th century. When something is justified, it means that it was right to do it. Kenny was right to be angry. He was not right, not justified, in attacking Jane.
No. Not debatable. The fact that you said that shows how completely ass-backwards you are on this whole issue. Great example.
Because if I said straight out in plain English that I blame Jane for the fight and then say that Kenny was the first one to physically attack her, any idiot and his blind monkey would understand that I'm not equating being the first to physically attack someone as starting the fight. Literally the only way those three quote could possibly contradict the previous paragraph you quoted is if, again, you already have in your mind that starting a fight and being the first to attack someone are the same thing. Are you just being willfully ignorant because you don't want to admit that you made a comprehension error here? Is that what's going on?
its clem as a teenager
Okay, I officially suck
So one conversation, nay... two short lines of dialogue, is justification for it not existing? That's not fact, it's a flimsy base from little information. (Not saying mine is provably better, just that yours is as completely out in the air as mine) But in any case, largely uncritical. I see the nuances, you don't.
And to nullify this case:
Even if she wasn't abused by Troy she was still his victim, as was everyone locked away and held at gun point and made to toil for slave labor. It's still unfair to ask, or as you seem to, expect, the victim to very potentially throw their life away for the sake of giving him a happier end. That's just cruel.
Right. Scenes that would not exist. That's like saying Darth Sidious would have been thrown down the hole in the death star if Anakin was killed as a child. How can you say that? Everything after his death would change. Those scenes lend you absolutely no aid in this situation.
No, I've supported it with validated information confirmed by me, most all other fans of TWD, and TWD wiki. Pertaining to the situation in which Jane has killed Troy, and the situation which would follow. This is a critical thinking and application matter.
Then they saw a woman throw a big, red fire ball at his face then targeted her. They have the memory of a maggot, they are instinct. They don't recognize food on the ground, they recognize movement and sound. Two things Troy has since ceased doing after being so kindly executed.
This is how zombies work.
Did I say not dead for awhile? I thought I said they prefer the living. Troy was dead. Jane was making noise and moving around. Targeted. They completely forget Troy for the same reason they are eating people. They don't have the ability to remember anything. Not from their past life, or who they ate first, or why they are missing an eye. In order to forget, you must remember.
They weren't far away. Plus, as I said, what happens when she needs to go running past them and they falter?
It's really not debatable.
Go watch the TV series, or read the comics, or replay S1. Countless times zombies arise from the feast at their feet to chase down the living. Why? Because they're fucking dumb and they wouldn't be menacing if you could throw a dead squirrel at their feet and they would be distracted for minutes on end.
What is with you and this blunderish "You're assuming. You're jumping to conclusions. Etc." No. This is a repeated fact throughout the entire franchise. When they recognize the living, they kill the living.
What are you talking about? They are dumb because they don't recognize the food on the floor. It would be smart to eat that instead of having to chase their food. I've already explained this.
Addressed in the above paragraph.
its simple Jane had Troy in her backpocket with the promise of some nookie
I disagree. But again, largely inessential.
Well promising something doesn't mean she'll do it, maybe she even promised a life together after the Z-A
She is a manipulator we all know that
10/10 would bang.
Leaves thread hurriedly
Again, largely irrelevant to the debate
Youi can stick out your tongue all you want ,it was a possibility thats all
Was the discussion about Jane and Troy or not ?
And i gave my POV, i don't say you are wrong
I'm not sticking out my tongue. It just so happens that your point of view has little context on the debate. As which, I nullified that premise above.
What do you think this :P is ?
Ther is very little known about what happened between Jane and Troy, her shooting his dick off could be revenge and a diversion but it also could be only a diversion
Covered awhile ago. I'm not arguing it was only for a diversion. I have no doubt Jane had a sense of justice/revenge doing what she did. But it was necessary.
Also, I didn't make that connection. I thought you thought I was being disdainful when you said "You can stick out your tongue all you want." I was just trying to lighten the mood
We both have a point, i don't disagree with you or anything...
My morals are the Judge will be Judged.
I don't see a psychopath. All I see is an escaped monkey :P
I'd totally bang Jane if I was also a drawn character in the game (that is presumably also voiced by me). But then again I'd bang a black snake with a festered arse if ya held it's head, sooo....
jane is just a modified verison of lily soooooooo yea
No.
She's a cartoon video game character.
Jane? No she isn't?
Run.
Now.
I'd totally bang Luke.
If you've been on this forum for quite some time, you'll know that.
Jussayin.
That's putting it mild.
Shut up, Coorrrall.
what the fuck...
yes she is i do model swapping i know these things jane uses lily's files she is a rehashed model
Oh, really? Hmph. They did a great job on making her look completely different.
yea i would have never guessed i was shocked and you know what else is funny Bonnie, Tavia, Jane, Edith, Katjaa, Lilly, Vera are all the same model lazy telltale being lazy
CORRAAALL, BACK IN THE HOUSE.
I always loved Lillys personality. She was so fiery.
It was cute.
Lol To Everyone who says jane looks a monkey, yall are messed up xD but actually, I think jane is pretty, and I just love her voice, it's like raspy but not, if that makes any sense. Lol
she is totally smokin' same Molly.
400th comment And also yeah i think her face is but i mean beauty comes from the heart of kindness and trust in a woman or man not there looks
I guess she's nice looking, not my kind of thing though. She does sort of resemble a monkey, but it's not an overpowering feature like everyone keeps mentioning.
I'm pretty sure Tavia and Brenda St. John are the same model. I don't think they're with the rest.
Same.
Loved it.