I would give anything to find out who the shooter was. He's (or she's) the fucktard who brought it all down.Quote:
Originally Posted by nikvoodoo
Printable View
I would give anything to find out who the shooter was. He's (or she's) the fucktard who brought it all down.Quote:
Originally Posted by nikvoodoo
There seem to be a lot of people on the Forum that are extremely fond of the Mallers, to the point that they’re willing to overlook some pretty glaring character flaws. Let’s not forget that the Mallers are, at their core, a criminal society. The Mallers’ territory wasn’t clearly defined, but we know it included all the areas where they scavenged for supplies, and we know that that included the Tower (Tardust and Bricks were just blocks away hunting for runaway slaves when they captured Lizzie). The incident with the tanker didn’t cause the conflict, it just put the Tower on the Mallers’ radar. In my opinion the Mallers felt that they already owned the Tower, and that everyone in it was a squatter and an unclaimed slave.
Cabbage Patch, I agree with your post. The Mallers operate under toddler mentality. "If I can see it its mine." "If you think its yours. Its mine" "If I touched it in the last day. Its mine" etc... How do you defend your self against a force that has already decided your stuff is theirs?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabbage Patch
I agree. When the Mallers first came to the Tower (both when they sent Scratch and Latch and then later when they showed up en-masse for the War) they weren't looking for their stolen tanker. They were looking to negotiate a deal to move in. And to me that means they most likely wanted to take over from the inside, since they had the numbers advantage. And while the shots that started the War cut off the negotiations so we'll never know for sure how things would have ended up if the Tower and Mallers had brokered a deal, my suspicion leads me to think it would have been more Trojan Horse than alliance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabbage Patch
I agree. People seem to ignore how aggressively violent they are. Yes, the tower fired at them, but then (Angel or Michael, can't remember) tried to explain to them that it was a rogue person. Plus how willing they are to kill all these innocent people and hold people slaves does not justify that they're "just trying to survive". Honestly, I feel more sympathy for the colony. While I feel that the chain of command was bad, I can also see the logic in it. The mallers have completely lost their since of humanity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabbage Patch
It's hard to say the Mallers claimed the places they scavenged as their territory. We don't know exactly how large they think their territory is, but they hit Locked and Loaded but I don't think they consider that their territory. No one was standing guard there when Angel and Saul went there, but they did have people looking out for the fuel depot (Scratch, Latch and Charlie). And we don't know how far away Lizzy was when she was kidnapped by Bricks and Tardust. Presumably, she was close to the Tower, but we don't know for certain.The Mallers were en route to the Arena when she was found, and The Tower is on the way to the Arena from the Mall. Lizzy's circumstances are most likely completely coincidental.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabbage Patch
The attraction to the bad guy in any piece of entertainment is usually for one reason: they do the things you'd love to do, but you know you can't. I don't think any of the Pro-Maller crowd would claim they forget they are convicts or even bad people. I think they embrace the fact that they were convicts and are now free from the rules of society and can really go to the extremes of their personality. But to claim that they are simply bad people and that's that is short sighted. They are still people, meaning they have multiple facets to their personality. If Scratch didn't have the ability to care or love, she wouldn't have flipped her shit when Latch was killed. If Durai was a cold blooded sociopath, he wouldn't have sounded scared or anxious when the Shots Heard Round the World were fired in chapter 12.
You can hate them, but don't think they are your simple run of the mill mustache twirling bad guys who tie damsels in distress to the railroad tracks for no reason.
Yeah I do find many of the Mallers to be intriguing and even sympathetic. Bricks comes to mind first as he seems to be more of a "dumb muscle" type or is at least treated that way by those around him. But he seems to show more compassion than the others we've seen (heard). Even Tardust would come off as more affably evil if he hadn't been introduced as a scumbag rapist (I don't care how many witty lines he gets, there's no coming back from that). And Durai strikes me as more of an organized crime type, a "professional" who is more calculating than most. Scratch though is rage incarnate. Even when she's "under control" her voice comes off as seething rage bubbling just beneath the surface and when she blows up I feel the need to put on my brown pants if you know what I mean.Quote:
Originally Posted by nikvoodoo
She's been willing to not only kill some 20 odd Tower residents in her quest for revenge, but has also show a willingness to "dispose" of anyone who even remotely stands between her and what she wants. She uses the other Mallers as cannon fodder because they are "weak" and she may be planning to usurp even Durai. Scratch is a well done character but she doesn't exactly bring out the warm fuzzy feelings.
The whole tanker innsident could have been handled more.... well slightly diffrent I suppose....... like the tower suggesting they bring somehow empty it then have brought it back, but it was in that confrintation that brought the tower group to the notice of the mallers and it was meationed earler the mallers are a bunch of hard core criminals so pretty much full of aggression and once they found out where the tower was and relazing that they had power (once the power went out) that aggresive side of the group came out and regardless of how the talks went when Duri showed up they came prepared to aggressively take what they wanted whether or not the tower said sure come on in there would have been a fight, and Mike said quite clearly we dont know you well enough and not prepared to let you in at this point in time, even though he had no intentions of ever letting them in, and Pegs killed Latch when he came in to the tower to cause harm violence and potentally death to her Mike and the rest of the tower, what was she to do LET HIM, and then there is Scrach the woman who was a slight nutter beforehand loses her twin which pushes her even more over the edge and starts coming up with varrious situations in order to exact her revenge for her much milder mannered twin brothers death and the tankers at the arena and the one the didnt get blown up there gave her the oppritunatty to do so, and getting her hands on a memeber of the tower(Lizzie) was just icing on the cake
Well I mean... let's not say things we can't take back or anything. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss
I don't mean to de-rail the discussion, but that was a pretty impressive run-on sentence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss
incorrect, my view of the we're alive story is through the lens of my own sense of right and wrong and has nothing to do with the story itself. personally i think all the mallers should be executed. they're criminals who acted agressively towards the tower. remember when durai shot out the cameras? first shot. and by your logic scratch and latch should have died when they drew down on saul lizzy and burt during the tanker incident.Quote:
Originally Posted by Osiris
what seperates man from beast is humanity. humanity is defending the defenseless from tyranny. i just wish pegs had more bullets and finnished scratch when she had the chance
Im sorry that I spent most of my life being illiterete untill a few years ago and that my grammer skills arnt up to your standerds, but I was under the idea this wasnt a site about poor grammer skills but about a really awsome audiodramaQuote:
Originally Posted by Guestmaster
You can prove none of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by yarri
This is less about what we know and what we assume so can we all just agree to disagree until we actually know anything definitive or absolute about this antagonist?Quote:
Originally Posted by reaper239
Quote:
Originally Posted by reaper239
Again, you failed to see my point. You also seem to consider Durai's actions as being the catalyst of it all. You are clearly wrong. The action which lead to all of it was Burt, Saul and Ditzy stealing the tanker. You are blind if you don't see that. By my logic Scratch and Latch should NOT have died when they drew on the three riders who had invaded their territory (ignorant of doing so or not). By my logic they were legitimately trying to protect what was theirs. Remember when Burt took a pot shot to show his prowess with a pistol? That happened long, long before Durai popped any cameras at the tower.
What separates man from beast is NOT humanity. It is the ability to communicate abstract thoughts and the need for comfort above all - albeit a western philosophy. Humanity is NOT defending the defenceless from tyranny. Humanity is the quality or condition of being human; human nature. As we all know human nature is to kill for what's mine. It has been since the dawn of time and will continue to be so long after you and I are both dust, my friend.
By nature humans are vile to each other. I take what is mine. I take what is yours if I want it. Don't mistake your personal ideals for those globally accepted as canon. You're deluding yourself to do so. Read a newspaper or pick up a history book. From the beginning of documented history people have been shitty assholes to each, often for no better reason than they disagreed.
I full on agree with this but I'd say the shot fired first wasn't so much durai taking out cameras, or Saul/Burt/Lizzy taking the tanker, but the mystery person who opened fire on the mallers right as the two sides were having a stand off. Until then there were other possibilities, maybe not possibilities that seemed appealing to either side, but possibilities other than direct warfare existed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Osiris
Right on, brotha.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ra1th
You're looking at this with a HEAVY bias in favor of the tower. In that situation both sides are on red alert, Michael and Durai were in a heated argument, they are on the verge of blows, ANY action that is considered even remotely aggressive would start a war. There is no "Wait we didn't mean that". Once those shots were fired, that sealed their fate. Think of it this way, you are about to be in a fight with another guy. You're both pissed and tensions are high, and you're in each other's faces, and then all out of no where you punch him in the face. After that point, you are now in a fight. It doesn't matter if your arm acted on its own, there are no "wait I didn't mean it" the fight will end when one of you is on the floor or if someone pulls you two apart. It's the same situation here. The tower was either sabotaged by the rat into fighting a war by the rat shooting on person, or some drunk tower resident shot. Either way it doesn't really matter, by that point the war had already begun. An even better example of this was in 1914, when Serbian militants assassinated Austria's Duke Ferdinand. It didn't really matter that the serbians who did it were acting on their own and not on orders from Serbia. Austria retaliated with war, and because of the alliances that had been set up at that point, every major European power was sucked into what we now call WWI.Quote:
Originally Posted by Creem_Filling
From the maller's perspective, the tower opened fire on them, the tower declared war, the Mallers will retaliate.
Majority of We're Alive listeners look at the We're Alive universe with a HEAVY bias in favor of the Tower. I highly doubt it was anyone's intention to make the Tower residence seem like the "good guys" but the simple fact that the story follows this particular group of survivors is enough for people to look at them with gold tinted glasses and easily justify any and everything the Tower residence or artists formerly known as Tower Residence do, have done, and most likely ever will do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ra1th
Kind of like that guy who calls himself a "patriot" simply because he'll jump to defend any and every action that can be linked to the United States. Whether it be the Vietnam War, the rest of the Cold War, nation building via imperialism etc...
by you're logic the tower folks were also fully justified in all their actions. in fact you can't say that anyones actions are wrong because they all fall under the rubric of "doing what one must to survive" so the reality is you have a bias against the tower people. now that's fine but don't try to pass it off as saying that you are logical and i am not when your own statements violate the very tenants of your philosophy. unfortunately you also seem to have a very twisted view of human nature as i for one and most people i know for two don't line up with your human nature. the people who do line up with that view tend to be criminals, and the exact same people who make up the mallers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Osiris
1. Did I say anyone's actions were wrong? No. I said they were doing what they to in order to survive or to protect what is theirs. I honestly don't believe that either side was wrong. I believe both sides were acting as they had to in order to make the best of their respective situations. So yes, by that logic the Residents were justified in their actions when defending their home. Just as the Mallers were justified in protecting what was theirs. If you stop for one minute and say 'If the Mallers tried to take what belonged to the tower and got mashed, then the tower was justified in its actions' you must also admit that the Mallers were equally within their rights to try and protect what they had claimed as theirs. Doing otherwise completely contradicts your own edict. Thanks for pointing out your fallacy. The reality is that YOU have a bias with regard to the story and that sides firmly with the Residents being the just side. I'm open to both sides of the coin. Pay attention there's a test later.Quote:
Originally Posted by reaper239
2. See point 1 and argue accordingly.Quote:
now that's fine but don't try to pass it off as saying that you are logical and i am not when your own statements violate the very tenants of your philosophy.
3. My view of human nature is based entirely off what I see on a daily basis in my city, province and country as well as across the globe [Mr. I Think They're Evil And Should Be Executed... prove me more right with every word you type]. Welcome to reality, human nature is to take. We are greedy by design. We are the only creature on the planet that kills for FUN. We kill for pleasure. Is it sinking in yet? Do I need to draw you a pretty picture? You don't watch the news? You never bothered to pay attention to the wars being waged across the globe? The atrocities being committed across huge sections of Africa, China, The Middle East? Christ, throw a fucking rock and you'll hit someone who has committed some sort of crime. Ever pick up a newspaper or history book? I'm afraid they would disagree with your philosophy. It is NOT shared by the majority of the planet I'm afraid. If it were there would be far, FAR less crime. This is not rocket science, this is common sense as well as common knowledge. Think of how your own view of reality is distorted through the lens of the story line. You're seeing a single perspective of a dire situation and you're trying to transpose your reality on top of that. Are you absolutely positive that every Maller is a criminal? That they are all deserving of capital punishment? You can say with absolutely certainty that each one of them should be executed? You're going to pass that judgment on people whom you have no frame of reference towards with the exception of the recollections of past events through one set of eyes?Quote:
unfortunately you also seem to have a very twisted view of human nature as i for one and most people i know for two don't line up with your human nature. the people who do line up with that view tend to be criminals, and the exact same people who make up the mallers.
Remember that this story is in fact being told in the past-tense. Consider that the victors are the ones who write the history books. Now, that being known (and it is fact) consider for a moment the spin YOU would put on your story. Would you tell your story from the side of an aggressive, greedy, manipulative group of warmongers? Or would you choose to paint yourself in the light of what is just and morally acceptable? The greater good.
Also, thanks for calling me a criminal, having no basis whatsoever to do so. I'll keep that in mind when you open your mouth next and perhaps I will return in kind. Backpedal. I'll wait patiently for you to do so.
I'm going to interject myself briefly into the current conversation. Please stay away from personal attacks, and lets not assume anything about anyone's background or thought processes. Lets keep the conversation focused on the story and not on the individuals commenting on the story.
This is an interesting debate in and of itself especially since it's touching on a perspective we aren't privy to as listeners of We're Alive. We don't get the human perspective from the Mallers Camp as often as we hear from the Tower. It's really great to see people deconstructing, and thinking analytically about the motivations of all of the characters in a really deep and meaningful way. It helps add to the story for all of us. But there's no need to train the barrel on each other. Let's keep in constructive.
I'm not saying don't get invested or emotional about the debate. You can get heated about the conversation certainly and that's bound to happen. But keep the comments on point please.
This is not aimed at any one individual responding in this thread. I'm just saying in general lets keep cool heads when debating with opposing view points and remember we're all here to have fun.
Continue!
you've been saying the tower people were wrong the entire time. now you are right that the mallers would be justified in protecting what was theirs, so latch and scratch tracking them down to talk is perfectly reasonable, except that when lizzy tried to approach in a non hostile manner to begin dialogue, that action was met with aggression. after they managed to disarm the situation the tower people tried to reason out a deal, to poor results. the first thing the mallers did upon encountering the tower people was act with aggression, and if i was saul, i would have neutralized the potential threat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Osiris
regarding me "proving your point" my objective in that situation would be to protect those in my charge and myself. to that end, acts of aggression would be met with overwhelming force to ensure that my charges are safe. the mallers act with aggression, that aggression would be met with force, do you see the causality here?
if you notice throughout history, where there is evil, there is good fighting against it. good tends to prevail throughout history. that's why we don't all speak german, or french. and have you ever noticed how atrocities tend to be committed by a small group of people with power against a larger group of people without power? remember the golden rule? it came from somewhere.
i never called you a criminal, i said tend to be criminals. i know law abiding citizens who hold the same philosophy as you do, and they are people i choose not to spend my free time with.
owned much!
in any case i too am very happy the tower is gone i would of liked some loose ends tied up but maybe they will be tied up in there new habitat? I just wonder how the rest of the main group will get there...
And the mallers are annoying and deserve to die! although they are badass characters especially scratch.
I wonder if they will stay within the story seen as they have flown to a different region?
Owned? Yeah, I have no idea why he continually tries to bury himself.Quote:
Originally Posted by PirateBeew
Quote:
Originally Posted by reaper239
I'm going to suggest something to you right now and let's hope that I can explain it slowly enough for you. The story is being told from one perspective. That perspective is will, quite naturally, list to one side. Whichever side the story is being told from is going to be the side 'in the right'. Whatever force that side opposes is going to be portrayed as 'in the wrong'. You with me so far? Ok, let's take another step:
Quote:
The Mallers act with aggression, that aggression would be met with force, do you see the causality here?
I'm going to post a question to you know and let's see if you can grasp where I'm going with it. If I come to your city - post-apocalypse - and unknowingly steal something that belongs to you, something that to you has a great value/need/function will you do what is necessary to protect it? I'm going to quote you now so that I don't lose you.
By your own admission you are now in the right to use whatever force you deem necessary to protect what you have or who you are with. These are your words now, not mine. I urge you to think carefully as to what that statement implies. I have and see more holes in your logic than a block of Swiss. Your own reasoning places the Mallers clearly 'in the right'. Tell me it doesn't and you're going to need a shovel to dig yourself out of the hole you put yourself in. Are you following me still?Quote:
to that end, acts of aggression would be met with overwhelming force to ensure that my charges are safe.
Having read back through the thread in its entirety to find the offending post which spawned:
To my shock and surprise, I could find no such comment made. I said nothing to the effect that 'the tower people were wrong the entire time'. I said Pegs was in the wrong. As for 'the causality' which brought the situation to a head, that still lies firmly at the feet of Saul, Lizzy and Burt. Were it not for the confrontation between the five [ counting Scratch and Latch] there would be little reason to believe that the Mallers would even know that The Tower existed in the first place, thereby leaving the Residents to go about their business of trying to maintain a somewhat functional lifestyle amidst chaos and death. True? Yes. Dispute? Feel free, you're only going to run in circles. Without the singular acts of a) theft b) defiance and finally c) taking a shot at random from an undetermined balcony on behalf of the Tower and its Residents, there is a definite possibility for, at the very least, an acerbic cohabitation. The old addage 'The enemy of my enemy' is most assuredly applicable in this situation and had the Residents at least been open to negotiations from the beginning - as opposed to the 'watch how far away I can get ya with my gun' attitude, from he who shall remain nameless - the season may well have ended quite differently. As for the hostility that Lizzy was met with during the first encounter… well… take a peek at the end of the post here and see if you can find a way to reason yourself out of the hole you’ve dropped yourself in. Had I been in Scratch’s position and you in Lizzy’s, I wouldn’t have bothered warning you. I would have shot the three of you. Your philosophy would agree with me. See the end of the post for proof of that.Quote:
you've been saying the tower people were wrong the entire time.
Now I would like to draw your attention to something that has puzzled me from the very beginning about your so called 'righteous stance'.
Quote:
that may make sense to the criminally insane, but i think someone should put her on her knees, make her beg for her life, and then put two in the back of her head. execution. and i'd do it to anyone running wild like that, two to the head, make sure they don't come back.
Quote:Quote:
personally i think all the mallers should be executed. they're criminals who acted agressively towards the tower.
Quote:
i just wish pegs had more bullets and finnished scratch when she had the chance
Quote:
unfortunately you also seem to have a very twisted view of human nature as i for one and most people i know for two don't line up with your human nature. the people who do line up with that view tend to be criminals, and the exact same people who make up the mallers.
Two of these quotes are not like the others. Can you guess which?Quote:
what seperates man from beast is humanity
Let me provide you with a final thought – this ought to blow your hair right back – and be done with this mess you’ve worked so hard on. Everything you have said has contradicted your final words to me.
Did you call me a criminal in so many words? No. Perhaps you did not directly accuse me of criminal behaviour. However, you certainly aligned me with them based on your personal philosophy ‘punish the wicked’ which is in direct contradiction to my own philosophy – which you seem to have a firm grasp of, without ever having asked me what it was. Good to know that if I don’t agree with you, I am clearly wrong. Ask questions before you make assumptions. It makes you look like an ass. I’m sorry you feel as though people that hold some of my beliefs are not ones you would choose to spend your free time with. You’re probably missing out on a good group of people. You know… the kinds who are more willing to find a way to work together for a common goal rather than execute anyone who violated their personal tenants.Quote:
i never called you a criminal, i said tend to be criminals. i know law abiding citizens who hold the same philosophy as you do, and they are people i choose not to spend my free time with.
Incidentally, people who kill en masse are considered criminally insane. Were you aware of that? Think of that the next time you start condoning mass murder of ANY living human being. Your argument has been read, critiqued and found wanting of civility and a working knowledge of what is morally just. These are facts that are not available for dispute as they are your words, not my own.