Re: Rupert?



PJ Wilson wrote:

> Elle said...
> >
> >"PJ Wilson" <pwilnospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote
> >snip
> >> But no amount of Googling is likely to cure your inability to see the
> >> fundamental moral difference between a Rob and a Rupert. And
> >> that's the real pitty.
> >
> >Did Rob break any of the game rules in playing "Survivor"?
> >
> >Was it wrong for Rob to play a game as aggressively as possible to
> >win the Million?
>
> An emphatic "hell no" to both questions.
>
> Rob broke no rules in the game of "Survivor". But he broke many rules
> in the game of decent human behavior. And he did it without having the
> justification of pursuing some strategic goals. He did it simply to be
> mean.
>

Rupert grabbing JF is considered decent human behavior? Rob did have a goal.


> Now let's contrast this with Rupert's transgression. Was Rupert's
> reaction understandable? I think so.

No.


> Did it serve a strategic purpose
> in the game? Absolutely. It was meant to intimidate Fairplay into not
> voting against Rupert next time.

And it failed completely. It made JF more determined to boot him. Not very
strategic.


> Was Rupert's reaction outside the
> range of acceptable human behavior? Sure it was.

Absolutely. Yet you idolize him.


> But Rupert's 'crime' was a crime of passion, committed in the heat of
> the moment. Even the real-world legal codex allows for a different
> treatment of crimes of passion.
>

Still receive jail time meaning it was wrong.


>
> Mariano's crime had no such extenuating circumstances. His was very
> much a premeditated, malicious crime, designed to sadistically inflict
> the maximum amount of pain on his victim. And yet, we have people
> here professing to admire such pathological behavior simply because
> it's 'entertaining'.
>

His "victims" were unaware at the time. He did it for the viewers
entertainment. He accomplished his goal. To make himself memorable and make
lots of money after the show.


>
> So what do you think it says about such people? Do you think they
> have progressed all that far from the bloodthirsty masses at the
> Collosseum?

You are talking about Rupert's behavior, right? Rob's name calling verses
Rupert's bullying and rage.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Rupert?
    ... >> fundamental moral difference between a Rob and a Rupert. ... >Did Rob break any of the game rules in playing "Survivor"? ... But Rupert's 'crime' was a crime of passion, ... the maximum amount of pain on his victim. ...
    (alt.tv.survivor)
  • Re: Rupert?
    ... >>> fundamental moral difference between a Rob and a Rupert. ... > Rob broke no rules in the game of "Survivor". ... So when people got angry with Lex for getting angry with Rob, I said, ... > But Rupert's 'crime' was a crime of passion, ...
    (alt.tv.survivor)
  • irony quite refuses Priscillas mind
    ... the game in the bad old days? ... activists declare their intention to prevent crime. ... Secret Service: ... Robert Marsh is the head of the President's Commission on Critical ...
    (rec.arts.poems)
  • Some gaps dare, rid, and pick. Others longer attract.
    ... game in the bad old days? ... activists declare their intention to prevent crime. ... Secret Service: ... Robert Marsh is the head of the President's Commission on Critical ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Crime and Punishment
    ... Crime: Pakistan stayed in the dressing room too long. ... Punishment: They were forced to forfeit the game. ...
    (rec.sport.cricket)
Loading