We do not know in fact that he had any obligation - be it by Klingon or Federation law - to help Gowron.
We can however assume that, since the Klingons and the Federation were in an alliance, that he was allowed to ask the Klingons for help in a matter pertaining the Romulans. Him bringing up his role of an arbiter was just a way to expedite an entirely legal request, nothing more.
Oh come on! Regardless of how you dress it up, it's calling in a personal favor!
Helping Gowron however in a civil war might was certainly against Federation regulation, and it might even be against the specific terms of their alliance.
Disobeying his superior officer was also certainly against regulations, but Picard pulled his pips off and resigned his commission... Had he wanted to do so to assist Gowron, he could have done the same thing...
And of course, there is also the aspect that Picard actually helped Gowron already in the war. In his role as arbiter, he refused Duras' TRIBBLE as viable candidate for chancellorship at the time. Any decision he could have made there would probably have ended in a civil war, but it was somethnig that helped Gowron's position.
And he them used up that favor by getting the Klingon ship... Given his willingness to drop Gowron's name, he should still have helped him out, even if it meant the resignation of his commission, which he then did for some woman he had only just met... For someone who's always held up as some paragon of virtue, and who lorded his Federation Morality over others, Picard sure knew how to flipflop when the situation called for it...
You don't see the difference?
Gowron didn't want Picard, or the Enterprise, to lend a hand. What he wanted was the Federation to assist him. Picard taking of the rank pips and joining him aboard one of his Klingon Battlecruisers would have done nothing for Gowron. And considering that Picard was a high-ranking, decorated and trusted officer in Starfleet, even if he resigned his comission, it would be a serious deal and cause political problems.
Worf was just a lowly Lieutenant that actually had a family member and his own species involved in the conflict - his behavior might get him into trouble, but most likely not the Federation.
And Picard did not stand idly by and do nothing either - he helped install a tachyon detection net to reveal any Romulan involvement.
In both cases Picard did take action in a manner that improved, if not outright saved, the situation, and didn't just wash his hands clean, nor did he pull the Federation into a dangerous adventure.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Fixed that for you. I am curious why you seem to think the Valakians are Prisoners of War. They do not seem to fit into any of the categories as defined in the treaty.
I don't think they are prisoners of war, and I never said they were... You did that when you reworded my post so you could create a strawman... Rather than thinking you're clever by changing things, perhaps you would care to address the actual point I made, which is that ultimately, your point comes down to only extending assistance if you want to help them or not... You want to act the Big Man by changing posts? Have the stones to stand behind your convictions and defend them like a man, rather than acting like a child... The Geneva Conventions may not directly apply,
then why did you waste people's time quoting irrelevant trivia?
but as I said before, they were cited as an example of codes of conduct to assist those in need, regardless of 'which side' they are on...
Read the Laws of War. I don't think you have. I don't think you know why they exist, or even what they say. As I mentioned before, it's about not torturing prisoners... It has nothing to do with charity or humanitarian aid.
As lordrezeon observed, the PD has become an excuse for apathy, and from your comment that you wouldn't want to help the Valakians, you are truly apathetic...
Tell me, do you give money to every needy person you see? Hmm? Charity is a virtue because it is not normal behavior.
There is no regulation for mandating humanitarian aid because it's a stupid idea. Military commanders typically don't have the resources. And if they did, they would probably start by contacting their superiors and not by taking direct action themselves. Why? because civilian organizations are usually better able to handle it. In a true emergency, which this was not despite the distress call, a commander might act only as a stop gap until civilians take over.
Gowron didn't want Picard, or the Enterprise, to lend a hand. What he wanted was the Federation to assist him. Picard taking of the rank pips and joining him aboard one of his Klingon Battlecruisers would have done nothing for Gowron. And considering that Picard was a high-ranking, decorated and trusted officer in Starfleet, even if he resigned his comission, it would be a serious deal and cause political problems.
Worf was just a lowly Lieutenant that actually had a family member and his own species involved in the conflict - his behavior might get him into trouble, but most likely not the Federation.
And Picard did not stand idly by and do nothing either - he helped install a tachyon detection net to reveal any Romulan involvement.
In both cases Picard did take action in a manner that improved, if not outright saved, the situation, and didn't just wash his hands clean, nor did he pull the Federation into a dangerous adventure.
I can see that there are differences in the circumstances, but ultimately, I just see instances of Picard getting involved with, or not getting involved with, a situation, depending in how he felt about it, rather than consistently applying a rule (the danger of multiple writers)
And indeed, Picard didn't just stand by and do nothing in the Klingon civil war, as you quite rightly put, but he did still involve Federation personnel in the situation (possibly even operating within Klingon space, I can't recall) rather than retaining absolutely 100% neutrality....
Picard had the Federation specifically intervene to prevent other intervention during the civil war - I think technically they were within Klingon space, but within rights under the Alliance to guard against Romulan incursion.
Fate - protects fools, small children, and ships named Enterprise Will Riker
Member Access Denied Armada!
My forum single-issue of rage: Make the Proton Experimental Weapon go for subsystem targetting!
He took advantage of Tasha when she was under the influence of the alien virus... His behaviour before revealing the construction of Lal was also extremely shifty... I believe he manipulated his way off the Enterprise with the Borg, when under the influence of Lore's emotion projector... He manipulated Samuel Clements into dropping the doohickey and thus revealing his presence... He manipulated the Zaktorn strategist into entering a game which he had not intention of winning outright, thus forcing him to throw the match in frustration... He manipulated the Borg Queen...
Rewatch "The Naked Now", Tasha took advantage of Data, under circumstances in which he had no reason to believe her faculties had been compromised (and, in fact, was himself infected as a result). He didn't say he was building Lal because no one asked, and his understanding of human behavior hadn't yet advanced to the point of volunteering information not pertaining to the current conversation. If you think he manipulated Sam Clemens into anything, you didn't watch "Time's Arrow" very closely, nor do you know much about Mr. Clemens himself. The stratagema rematch was in fact because Data didn't understand how he could possibly have lost; his opponent needed no "manipulation", merely a request for another game. Only the Borg Queen example could possibly be thought of as "manipulation", and even then it was more a matter of not giving the enemy information (as required by military regulations). I'm not entirely certain you understand the concept of "manipulation" - it's not just asking someone to do something, or acceding to a request.
He took advantage of Tasha when she was under the influence of the alien virus... His behaviour before revealing the construction of Lal was also extremely shifty... I believe he manipulated his way off the Enterprise with the Borg, when under the influence of Lore's emotion projector... He manipulated Samuel Clements into dropping the doohickey and thus revealing his presence... He manipulated the Zaktorn strategist into entering a game which he had not intention of winning outright, thus forcing him to throw the match in frustration... He manipulated the Borg Queen...
Rewatch "The Naked Now", Tasha took advantage of Data, under circumstances in which he had no reason to believe her faculties had been compromised (and, in fact, was himself infected as a result). He didn't say he was building Lal because no one asked, and his understanding of human behavior hadn't yet advanced to the point of volunteering information not pertaining to the current conversation. If you think he manipulated Sam Clemens into anything, you didn't watch "Time's Arrow" very closely, nor do you know much about Mr. Clemens himself. The stratagema rematch was in fact because Data didn't understand how he could possibly have lost; his opponent needed no "manipulation", merely a request for another game. Only the Borg Queen example could possibly be thought of as "manipulation", and even then it was more a matter of not giving the enemy information (as required by military regulations). I'm not entirely certain you understand the concept of "manipulation" - it's not just asking someone to do something, or acceding to a request.
And, to be fair, the instance with the Borg Queen is in a context where Data was explicitly stated to have his emotion chip on. Manipulation is a form of deceit, and deceit is an emotional function.
then why did you waste people's time quoting irrelevant trivia?
So you consider something which gives an example which could be applied, as irrelevant? Actually, don't answer that, I really don't care what you think about anything. If you consider my posts a waste of time, rather than passive aggressive hostility, just stop responding to them.
Read the Laws of War. I don't think you have. I don't think you know why they exist, or even what they say. As I mentioned before, it's about not torturing prisoners... It has nothing to do with charity or humanitarian aid.
And as I said, it is an example of a standard of behaviour... I think you are well aware of that, and simply being facetious and deliberately disingenuous.
There is no regulation for mandating humanitarian aid because it's a stupid idea. Military commanders typically don't have the resources. And if they did, they would probably start by contacting their superiors and not by taking direct action themselves. Why? because civilian organizations are usually better able to handle it. In a true emergency, which this was not despite the distress call, a commander might act only as a stop gap until civilians take over.
I will admit, in Star Trek, there is no specifically cited regulation mandating a distress call be answered (although Code 1-Alpha-Zero: Indicated a starship in distress. (TNG: "Relics")) However, in real world terms:
Given Starfleet's clear use of naval practices and traditions, it is not unreasonable to speculate that a similar Starfleet regulation exists, even if it has not yet been cited on screen.
For you to attempt to argue that assistance need not be extended by a starship, because there is no regulation which states that they must help, frankly is utterly abhorrent and shows an extremely disturbing personal outlook...
Rewatch "The Naked Now", Tasha took advantage of Data, under circumstances in which he had no reason to believe her faculties had been compromised (and, in fact, was himself infected as a result). He didn't say he was building Lal because no one asked, and his understanding of human behavior hadn't yet advanced to the point of volunteering information not pertaining to the current conversation. If you think he manipulated Sam Clemens into anything, you didn't watch "Time's Arrow" very closely, nor do you know much about Mr. Clemens himself. The stratagema rematch was in fact because Data didn't understand how he could possibly have lost; his opponent needed no "manipulation", merely a request for another game. Only the Borg Queen example could possibly be thought of as "manipulation", and even then it was more a matter of not giving the enemy information (as required by military regulations). I'm not entirely certain you understand the concept of "manipulation" - it's not just asking someone to do something, or acceding to a request.
I admit, I am being uncharitable in some/many of those examples. Data should have suspected that Tasha had been compromised, given he had to be assigned to find her, and when he found her, she was seriously out of uniform... He should have realised that her faculties were compromised, and resisted her advances. Incidents like that (ie sober guy doing a drunk girl who throws herself at him) can quite easily be classed as statutory TRIBBLE due to the compromised ability to give consent by one party, and the other party being in full command of their own faculties... With regard Sam Clemens, Data observed that the component was toxic. He might have been being literal, but equally, it could have been a ruse to get the as-yet-unidentified intruder to reveal themself... Data's persistent attempts to befriend Artim after being rebuffed, qualify as 'obsessive' rather than typical behaviour. At one point, Sojef even gives him a 'Get the TRIBBLE away from my boy, you freak' look...
The master of a ship at sea which is in a position to be able to provide assistance on receiving information from any source that persons are in distress at sea, is bound to proceed with all speed to their assistance, if possible informing them or the search and rescue service that the ship is doing so. This obligation to provide assistance applies regardless of the nationality or status of such persons or the circumstances in which they are found. If the ship receiving the distress alert is unable or, in the special circumstances of the case, considers it unreasonable or unnecessary to proceed to their assistance, the master must enter in the log-book the reason for failing to proceed to the assistance of the persons in distress, taking into account the recommendation of the Organization, to inform the appropriate search and rescue service accordingly.
Thus ultimately, it is up to the discretion of the commander what aid, and how much. Thus the regulation only actually requires him to evaluate the situation. It is not a blanket requirement to provide aid to anyone who needs it.
So yes, your understanding of real-world analogies is fundamentally flawed. I highlighted something very important. If a ship has a major malfunction at sea, then that IS an actual emergency. The Valakian example was akin to getting a message from a sea-port that they have an epidemic and want medicine. The quoted regulation is inapplicable.
For you to attempt to argue that assistance need not be extended by a starship, because there is no regulation which states that they must help, frankly is utterly abhorrent and shows an extremely disturbing personal outlook...
but when I question whether you apply that philosophy to your own life... you tell me it's irrelevant... I think not.
Your stance is that if you know someone needs assistance you are morally obligated to provide that assistance no matter what..... NO real-world rule does so. Every similar rule has a very limited scope. Why? Because it's impossible to help everyone who might possibly need it.
Thus ultimately, it is up to the discretion of the commander what aid, and how much. Thus the regulation only actually requires him to evaluate the situation. It is not a blanket requirement to provide aid to anyone who needs it.
The master of a ship at sea which is in a position to be able to provide assistance on receiving information from any source that persons are in distress at sea, is bound to proceed with all speed to their assistance, if possible informing them or the search and rescue service that the ship is doing so. This obligation to provide assistance applies regardless of the nationality or status of such persons or the circumstances in which they are found. If the ship receiving the distress alert is unable or, in the special circumstances of the case, considers it unreasonable or unnecessary to proceed to their assistance, the master must enter in the log-book the reason for failing to proceed to the assistance of the persons in distress, taking into account the recommendation of the Organization, to inform the appropriate search and rescue service accordingly.
I would argue that the regulation is stating that the obligation is there to provide assistance, unless there are some significant reasons for preventing them from doing so, ie not having the capacity or capabilities to provide the aid, but to then pass the situation to an overseeing organisation, who then could redirect the necessary assistance.
Example: A small shuttle picks up a distress call from a significantly larger ship. It does not have the resources to effect repairs or to evacuate the ship's party, so they inform Starfleet Command (or whomever) and they then assign a larger starship to provide the assistance.
So yes, your understanding of real-world analogies is fundamentally flawed. I highlighted something very important. If a ship has a major malfunction at sea, then that IS an actual emergency. The Valakian example was akin to getting a message from a sea-port that they have an epidemic and want medicine. The quoted regulation is inapplicable.
Semantics... The Valakians were actively seeking help from space-capable species.
For you to attempt to argue that assistance need not be extended by a starship, because there is no regulation which states that they must help, frankly is utterly abhorrent and shows an extremely disturbing personal outlook...
but when I question whether you apply that philosophy to your own life... you tell me it's irrelevant... I think not.
I had not put
And honestly, I can see why Archer would take the easy way and go "I'm not getting involved". I wouldn't want to help the Valakians either.
on forum. You did... You put your personal views onto public form, I did not. Also, the question of if I do or do not give change to beggars etc, is irrelevant to if I would, as the captain of a Starfleet vessel, i) extend assistance, and ii) possibly (more than likely) be procedurally required to do so...
Your stance is that if you know someone needs assistance you are morally obligated to provide that assistance no matter what..... NO real-world rule does so. Every similar rule has a very limited scope. Why? Because it's impossible to help everyone who might possibly need it.
My stance is that I strongly suspect that starship captains likely have a procedural obligation to provide aid. And that they have a moral obligation to provide it if they can. Your stance, appears to be that you would only extend assistance to someone in need that you want to help...
Thus ultimately, it is up to the discretion of the commander what aid, and how much. Thus the regulation only actually requires him to evaluate the situation. It is not a blanket requirement to provide aid to anyone who needs it.
The master of a ship at sea which is in a position to be able to provide assistance on receiving information from any source that persons are in distress at sea, is bound to proceed with all speed to their assistance, if possible informing them or the search and rescue service that the ship is doing so. This obligation to provide assistance applies regardless of the nationality or status of such persons or the circumstances in which they are found. If the ship receiving the distress alert is unable or, in the special circumstances of the case, considers it unreasonable or unnecessary to proceed to their assistance, the master must enter in the log-book the reason for failing to proceed to the assistance of the persons in distress, taking into account the recommendation of the Organization, to inform the appropriate search and rescue service accordingly.
I would argue that the regulation is stating that the obligation is there to provide assistance, unless there are some significant reasons for preventing them from doing so, ie not having the capacity or capabilities to provide the aid, but to then pass the situation to an overseeing organisation, who then could redirect the necessary assistance.
Example: A small shuttle picks up a distress call from a significantly larger ship. It does not have the resources to effect repairs or to evacuate the ship's party, so they inform Starfleet Command (or whomever) and they then assign a larger starship to provide the assistance.
Which still means nothing. You're trying to apply this to a PLANET. It's not the same thing. Also the regulation specifically applies to emergencies. This situation is not.
So yes, your understanding of real-world analogies is fundamentally flawed. I highlighted something very important. If a ship has a major malfunction at sea, then that IS an actual emergency. The Valakian example was akin to getting a message from a sea-port that they have an epidemic and want medicine. The quoted regulation is inapplicable.
Semantics... The Valakians were actively seeking help from space-capable species.
For you to attempt to argue that assistance need not be extended by a starship, because there is no regulation which states that they must help, frankly is utterly abhorrent and shows an extremely disturbing personal outlook...
but when I question whether you apply that philosophy to your own life... you tell me it's irrelevant... I think not.
I had not put
And honestly, I can see why Archer would take the easy way and go "I'm not getting involved". I wouldn't want to help the Valakians either.
on forum. You did... You put your personal views onto public form, I did not. Also, the question of if I do or do not give change to beggars etc, is irrelevant to if I would, as the captain of a Starfleet vessel, i) extend assistance, and ii) possibly (more than likely) be procedurally required to do so...
This entire discussion is about personal views and interpretations about ethics which only seem to apply in the situations where you feel like applying them. AND you went so far as to make claims about my personal character. So yes, I feel I was right to ask you whether you practice what you preach. Clearly you do not.
Your stance is that if you know someone needs assistance you are morally obligated to provide that assistance no matter what..... NO real-world rule does so. Every similar rule has a very limited scope. Why? Because it's impossible to help everyone who might possibly need it.
My stance is that I strongly suspect that starship captains likely have a procedural obligation to provide aid. And that they have a moral obligation to provide it if they can. Your stance, appears to be that you would only extend assistance to someone in need that you want to help...
So you're arguing from head-canon again. AND your stance conflicts with canon... AGAIN.
Which still means nothing. You're trying to apply this to a PLANET. It's not the same thing.
No, it's not the same thing, but it's the closest comparable analogue. Planets can and do issue distress calls. Planets are in space, and so are ships...
Also the regulation specifically applies to emergencies. This situation is not.
In your opinion... Meaning that once again, you are deciding what and whom you consider worthy of assisting... The Valakian's situation is certainly not the same as the situation with Sarjenka's people, the latter was certainly more desperate. But once again, the Valakians were actively seeking aid from outside sources. If you want to cite the Prime Directive so as not to intervene, fine.
General Order 1: "No starship may interfere with the normal development of any alien life or society." (TAS: "The Magicks of Megas-Tu")
But if your decision to not help is simply down to personal bias, and aren't going to help them because you do not want to help them, that is a different matter altogether...
This entire discussion is about personal views and interpretations about ethics which only seem to apply in the situations where you feel like applying them.
And yet I can actually justify my reasons for those situations with something more concrete than "I wouldn't want to help them..." and pedantic attempts to semantically twist examples into something you can then try and strawman...
AND you went so far as to make claims about my personal character.
Claims? I've stated facts about your conduct... You've behaved -- and are still behaving -- in a hypocritical manner... You revised one of my posts just so you could strawman the manipulated words, and you split hairs about examples just so you can try and disqualify them rather than actively refuting them... It's not my fault that you've shown yourself up and continue to do so...
Your stance is that if you know someone needs assistance you are morally obligated to provide that assistance no matter what..... NO real-world rule does so. Every similar rule has a very limited scope.
Really...?
Argentina
Argentina has legislation on "abandonment of persons", Articles 106-108 of the Argentine Penal Code, which includes the provision in Article 106 that "a person who endangers the life or health of another, either by putting a person in jeopardy or abandoning to their fate a person unable to cope alone who must be cared for ... will be imprisoned for between 2 and 6 years"
Canada
In Quebec, which makes use of civil law, there is a general duty to rescue in its Charter of Rights: "Every human being whose life is in peril has a right to assistance...Every person must come to the aid of anyone whose life is in peril, either personally or calling for aid, by giving him the necessary and immediate physical assistance, unless it involves danger to himself or a third person, or he has another valid reason." Criminal law in Canada is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, so failure to comply with an article of the Charter in Quebec does not constitute a criminal offence except if by doing so a party also violates the Criminal Code of Canada.
Other provinces follow common law.
In Canadian air law, it is mandatory to make oneself and one's aircraft available to aid search-and-rescue efforts if the aircraft is in the immediate area and a distress signal is received.
France
The photographers at the scene of the fatal car collision of Diana, Princess of Wales, were investigated for violation of the French law of "non-assistance à personne en danger" (deliberately failing to provide assistance to a person in danger), which can be punished by up to 5 years imprisonment and a fine of up to $100,000.
Anyone who fails to render assistance to a person in danger will be found liable before French Courts (civil and criminal liability). The penalty for this offence in criminal courts is imprisonment and a fine (under article 223–6 of the Criminal Code) while in civil courts judges will order payment of pecuniary compensation to the victims.
Germany
In Germany, "Unterlassene Hilfeleistung" (failure to provide assistance) is an offense according to section 323c of the Strafgesetzbuch; a citizen is obliged to provide help in case of accident or general danger if necessary, and is normally immune from prosecution if assistance given in good faith and following the average reasonable person's understanding of required measures turns out to be harmful. Also the helper may not be held responsible if the action he should take in order to help is unacceptable for him and he is unable to act (for example when unable to act at the sight of blood). In Germany, knowledge of basic emergency measures and First Aid and CPR Certification is a prerequisite for the granting of a driving license.
Russia
In Russia, Article 125 of the criminal code prohibits knowingly abandoning people who are in life- or health-threatening situations when said people can't help themselves. However it binds only those who are either legally obligated to care for said people or who themselves have put said people into life or health threatening situation. The maximum penalty is 1 year in prison.
Serbia
In Serbia, a citizen is required by law to provide help to anyone in need (after for example a major car accident) as long as providing help does not endanger him or her personally. Serbian criminal code Articles 126 and 127 state that should one abandon a helpless person and/or not provide aid to a person in need, one could receive a prison sentence of up to one year. If the person dies of injuries due to no aid having been provided by the bystander, a sentence up to 8 years in prison can be imposed.
I am not suggesting that starships have an obligation to provide aid 'no matter what', and indeed the previously cited suggestion allows for the master of a vessel to not act if it is not appropriate to do so. But. It also states that they must still make note of the reasons why, and report the matter higher so that adequate help can be deployed...
No I'm not... I may be engaging in logical conjecture, but that is not the same thing as head-canon. Head-canon would be, for example, to say:
In one of my stories, General Order 33 states: A vessel is to extend immediate assistance to any and all requests for it, not to determine the authenticity of said requests, therefore, Archer should have followed General Order 33 and helped the Valakians...
But I haven't done that.
At all.
I've simply made a reasonable assumption that there would be an as-yet uncited Starfleet regulation, stating that starship captains likely have a procedural obligation to provide aid in response to distress calls... It might not have been cited on screen, but it is not an unreasonable assumption given Starfleet's use of naval tradition and practice. Tuvok's TRIBBLE has never been shown on Star Trek, but given that he has several children, it's a reasonable assumption that he has one... Logical conjecture, not head-canon...
Marcus, not wanting to help someone and choosing not to help someone are two different things! I wouldn't necessarily want to help the Valakians given the situation of the Menk, but as I've said I'd probably do it anyway.
Marcus, not wanting to help someone and choosing not to help someone are two different things! I wouldn't necessarily want to help the Valakians given the situation of the Menk, but as I've said I'd probably do it anyway.
Exactly... And to be honest, that is my feelings on the Valakian situation as well if I were to have been in Archer's position: I don't think that they necessarily deserved to be helped, given their treatment of the Menk, and some may argue that the PD would forbid interference, but I would argue that their request for assistance and a moral obligation to help others in distress overrides the PD, and I would hope that by someone showing them mercy and assistance, they might come to reconsider their attitudes toward the Menk...
Marcus, not wanting to help someone and choosing not to help someone are two different things! I wouldn't necessarily want to help the Valakians given the situation of the Menk, but as I've said I'd probably do it anyway.
Exactly... And to be honest, that is my feelings on the Valakian situation as well if I were to have been in Archer's position: I don't think that they necessarily deserved to be helped, given their treatment of the Menk, and some may argue that the PD would forbid interference, but I would argue that their request for assistance and a moral obligation to help others in distress overrides the PD, and I would hope that by someone showing them mercy and assistance, they might come to reconsider their attitudes toward the Menk...
But that's my point! You're accusing Markhawkman of poor character because he wouldn't help the Valakians, but he never said that! He said that he wouldn't want to help the Valakians, not that he absolutely wouldn't help them. Not once has he said that. That's why he's offended!
[
But that's my point! You're accusing Markhawkman of poor character because he wouldn't help the Valakians, but he never said that! He said that he wouldn't want to help the Valakians, not that he absolutely wouldn't help them. Not once has he said that. That's why he's offended!
I've called markhawkman for poor character because he is behaving with it: Hypocrisy, manipulating posts, pedantic semantic reduction for no reason other than to be contrary... His comments re the Valakians are simply a side issue, and if indeed, he would help them, then perhaps he should have clarified that. If he has, and I have missed the post, then I will gladly retract that criticism, but the rest stands...
But that's my point! You're accusing Markhawkman of poor character because he wouldn't help the Valakians, but he never said that! He said that he wouldn't want to help the Valakians, not that he absolutely wouldn't help them. Not once has he said that. That's why he's offended!
I've called markhawkman for poor character because he is behaving with it: Hypocrisy, manipulating posts, pedantic semantic reduction for no reason other than to be contrary... His comments re the Valakians are simply a side issue, and if indeed, he would help them, then perhaps he should have clarified that. If he has, and I have missed the post, then I will gladly retract that criticism, but the rest stands...
Physician heal thyself. You've engaged in personal attacks simply because I dared to state my personal opinion. AND you've been purposefully distorting every single thing you've quoted. And then you play at having the moral high ground? NO.
So no starship has ever responded to a distress call? I believe canon shows that they have...
I mean really? You want to talk about "strawman" arguments? Have you made a single post that didn't have one? I have yet to state my personal opinion of you, and I will not do so now.
Physician heal thyself. You've engaged in personal attacks simply because I dared to state my personal opinion. AND you've been purposefully distorting every single thing you've quoted. And then you play at having the moral high ground? NO.
I mean really? You want to talk about "strawman" arguments? Have you made a single post that didn't have one? I have yet to state my personal opinion of you, and I will not do so now.
Incase you hadn't noticed, there was another post directed at you, which countered every point you made. Given that you have elected (as you have several times in our 'conversations') to ignore points I make which counter yours, I can only conclude that you cannot counter them. With regards your personal opinion of me, you don't know me personally, not have we engaged in any personal correspondence for you to have any idea about my life, values or opinions, beyond what I have chosen to post publicly on this forum. So frankly, I don't give a damn what your opinion of me is, and you're welcome to it, because it is likely to be so far off base as to be utterly irrelevant...
My stance is that I strongly suspect that starship captains likely have a procedural obligation to provide aid. And that they have a moral obligation to provide it if they can. Your stance, appears to be that you would only extend assistance to someone in need that you want to help...
So you're arguing from head-canon again. AND your stance conflicts with canon... AGAIN.
That you have not even attempted to refute this point, it will stand until you do so, but either way, I have no interest in continuing this debate any further, as there is clearly nothing to be gained from the discussion...
Physician heal thyself. You've engaged in personal attacks simply because I dared to state my personal opinion. AND you've been purposefully distorting every single thing you've quoted. And then you play at having the moral high ground? NO.
I mean really? You want to talk about "strawman" arguments? Have you made a single post that didn't have one? I have yet to state my personal opinion of you, and I will not do so now.
Incase you hadn't noticed, there was another post directed at you, which countered every point you made.
Since you begged for me to shred it....
Argentina
Argentina has legislation on "abandonment of persons", Articles 106-108 of the Argentine Penal Code, which includes the provision in Article 106 that "a person who endangers the life or health of another, either by putting a person in jeopardy or abandoning to their fate a person unable to cope alone who must be cared for ... will be imprisoned for between 2 and 6 years"
applies only to single individuals who need help, not entire civilizations.
Canada
In Quebec, which makes use of civil law, there is a general duty to rescue in its Charter of Rights: "Every human being whose life is in peril has a right to assistance...Every person must come to the aid of anyone whose life is in peril, either personally or calling for aid, by giving him the necessary and immediate physical assistance, unless it involves danger to himself or a third person, or he has another valid reason." Criminal law in Canada is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, so failure to comply with an article of the Charter in Quebec does not constitute a criminal offence except if by doing so a party also violates the Criminal Code of Canada.
only applies to actual emergencies.
Other provinces follow common law.
In Canadian air law, it is mandatory to make oneself and one's aircraft available to aid search-and-rescue efforts if the aircraft is in the immediate area and a distress signal is received.
again, emergencies only
France
The photographers at the scene of the fatal car collision of Diana, Princess of Wales, were investigated for violation of the French law of "non-assistance à personne en danger" (deliberately failing to provide assistance to a person in danger), which can be punished by up to 5 years imprisonment and a fine of up to $100,000.
Anyone who fails to render assistance to a person in danger will be found liable before French Courts (civil and criminal liability). The penalty for this offence in criminal courts is imprisonment and a fine (under article 223–6 of the Criminal Code) while in civil courts judges will order payment of pecuniary compensation to the victims.
again, emergency aid.
Germany
In Germany, "Unterlassene Hilfeleistung" (failure to provide assistance) is an offense according to section 323c of the Strafgesetzbuch; a citizen is obliged to provide help in case of accident or general danger if necessary, and is normally immune from prosecution if assistance given in good faith and following the average reasonable person's understanding of required measures turns out to be harmful. Also the helper may not be held responsible if the action he should take in order to help is unacceptable for him and he is unable to act (for example when unable to act at the sight of blood). In Germany, knowledge of basic emergency measures and First Aid and CPR Certification is a prerequisite for the granting of a driving license.
once more, actual emergencies only
Russia
In Russia, Article 125 of the criminal code prohibits knowingly abandoning people who are in life- or health-threatening situations when said people can't help themselves. However it binds only those who are either legally obligated to care for said people or who themselves have put said people into life or health threatening situation. The maximum penalty is 1 year in prison.
same song, different verse
Serbia
In Serbia, a citizen is required by law to provide help to anyone in need (after for example a major car accident) as long as providing help does not endanger him or her personally. Serbian criminal code Articles 126 and 127 state that should one abandon a helpless person and/or not provide aid to a person in need, one could receive a prison sentence of up to one year. If the person dies of injuries due to no aid having been provided by the bystander, a sentence up to 8 years in prison can be imposed.
Could be better but... lol no.
I am not suggesting that starships have an obligation to provide aid 'no matter what', and indeed the previously cited suggestion allows for the master of a vessel to not act if it is not appropriate to do so. But. It also states that they must still make note of the reasons why, and report the matter higher so that adequate help can be deployed...
Ok... then what ARE you saying then? Because curing a planet-wide ailment goes far beyond emergency medical aid. In fact, every real-world rule you've quoted applies only to immediate danger and/or life-and-death emergencies. EVERY SINGLE ONE. THAT is why every one of them is utterly irrelevant to the discussion. You keep ranting on and on about moral obligations to help others... But you keep ignoring that the Valakian situation does not meet a real-world definition of an emergency.
And for the record, I'm not going to waste my time replying to further personal attacks from you. you're too thick-headed to understand why they're irrelevant.
You are both spouting more of the same, you are both having no effect on each other (and anyone else reading this) aside from a diminished opinion of the other, and you are both starting to approach the point where moderator intervention is required. (If you haven't reached it already. I'm still debating that.)
Find a nice pack of ice (cream, preferably? ) and cool off.
(Edit: Seeing as both of you ended your last posts with a variant of 'I'm not going to bother anymore', I guess I'm about one night too late... )
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
My stance is that I strongly suspect that starship captains likely have a procedural obligation to provide aid. And that they have a moral obligation to provide it if they can. Your stance, appears to be that you would only extend assistance to someone in need that you want to help...
So you're arguing from head-canon again. AND your stance conflicts with canon... AGAIN.
And again refuse to acknowledge a point which counters yours (my illustrating the difference between head-canon and logical conjecture)...
You keep ranting on and on about moral obligations to help others... But you keep ignoring that the Valakian situation does not meet a real-world definition of an emergency.
Tell that to the Valakians... I'm sure facing extinction seemed like an emergency to them... Or better yet, tell them that you won't help them because a) there's no Starfleet regulation (which you are aware of) that says you must help them, and b) you wouldn't want to help them because you don't like them!
If you think that 'definition of an emergency' is a good enough semantic argument to not render aid to someone in need, or deny an obligation to do so, you are either just a deliberate contrarian, or one warped individual without an ounce of human morality... Either way, I'll not respond to another post you make on any subject.
That you have not even attempted to refute this point, it will stand until you do so, but either way, I have no interest in continuing this debate any further, as there is clearly nothing to be gained from the discussion...
If you think that 'definition of an emergency' is a good enough semantic argument to not render aid to someone in need, or deny an obligation to do so, you are either just a deliberate contrarian, or one warped individual without an ounce of human morality... Either way, I'll not respond to another post you make on any subject.
Need I say more?
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Guys, the position of "the new worffan" is not one that needs filling.
At least he was (mostly) entertaining, as were his stories.
Speaking of which, I wonder what's happened to the Masterverse... it seems the literary content of these forums has degraded to Shevet's occasional post or the ULCs.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Guys, the position of "the new worffan" is not one that needs filling.
At least he was (mostly) entertaining, as were his stories.
Speaking of which, I wonder what's happened to the Masterverse... it seems the literary content of these forums has degraded to Shevet's occasional post or the ULCs.
There was a reluctant realization and feeling that writing for an essentially non-responsive audience was something of a waste of time... I don't know if anything else is in the pipes at present, but I wouldn't hold your breath... On a personal level, I can only say that a lack of feedback makes me wonder if it is worth writing anything else. I don't write for praise, but because I enjoy to do so, but at the same time, without feedback, I can't grow as a writer. To not receive comment on work does make me wonder if I am wasting my time to be writing something which will go un-appreciated, and that then blocks my inspiration...
This is just my .2c on a realization from some months ago, I can't say if that has changed, but can only reinforce that I am not presently aware of any new or continuing Masterverse work from either patrickngo or sander...
Guys, the position of "the new worffan" is not one that needs filling.
At least he was (mostly) entertaining, as were his stories.
Speaking of which, I wonder what's happened to the Masterverse... it seems the literary content of these forums has degraded to Shevet's occasional post or the ULCs.
There was a reluctant realization and feeling that writing for an essentially non-responsive audience was something of a waste of time... I don't know if anything else is in the pipes at present, but I wouldn't hold your breath... On a personal level, I can only say that a lack of feedback makes me wonder if it is worth writing anything else. I don't write for praise, but because I enjoy to do so, but at the same time, without feedback, I can't grow as a writer. To not receive comment on work does make me wonder if I am wasting my time to be writing something which will go un-appreciated, and that then blocks my inspiration...
Hmm, I see your point. Can't particularly act on it, seeing as my literary criticism seems to consist of 'good' and 'not good' (ironic, given my own preference for more detailed feedback where possible ), but I definitely see it.
This is just my .2c on a realization from some months ago, I can't say if that has changed, but can only reinforce that I am not presently aware of any new or continuing Masterverse work from either patrickngo or sander...
I'm not aware of any activity from either of them. That's part of what worries me, especially since the universe seemed to be going in an interesting direction...
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Hmm, I see your point. Can't particularly act on it, seeing as my literary criticism seems to consist of 'good' and 'not good' (ironic, given my own preference for more detailed feedback where possible ), but I definitely see it.
Speaking strictly on my own behalf, I would have taken 'good' or 'not good', over the tumble-weed-filled silence which followed the end of Academy Daze... I don't particularly think it is The Best piece I've ever written, but it did afford me the opportunity to take two previously 'bit-part' characters (I'K'rR'h and Lucas) into more developed forms. Feedback on that (not just from yourself, but readers in general) would have been appreciated, and I can't deny that the lack there of has had an impact on my motivation to write, although ironically, the last few ULCs have sparked my imagination. My issue, is balancing the desire to write, against the "No one's going to say anything anyway, why bother..." ennui...
I'm not aware of any activity from either of them. That's part of what worries me, especially since the universe seemed to be going in an interesting direction...
Likewise... I can't give any more detail without revealing private conversations, but personally, that is why I say not to hold your breath for anything else. Without naming names, I will say that one of the Masterverse authors, was (several months ago) extremely demotivated by an unresponsive readership, and I suspect, that that is that. But. People can and do change their minds, so who knows, that feeling may change/have changed since then (but I do not know)
I would like to stress that this is not an attempt to guilt people into giving feedback -- and I know I can be remiss in always providing it myself -- simply what I feel is only fair to explain publicly, of what I know thus far, given your post wondering about potential future Masterverse material...
Comments
Gowron didn't want Picard, or the Enterprise, to lend a hand. What he wanted was the Federation to assist him. Picard taking of the rank pips and joining him aboard one of his Klingon Battlecruisers would have done nothing for Gowron. And considering that Picard was a high-ranking, decorated and trusted officer in Starfleet, even if he resigned his comission, it would be a serious deal and cause political problems.
Worf was just a lowly Lieutenant that actually had a family member and his own species involved in the conflict - his behavior might get him into trouble, but most likely not the Federation.
And Picard did not stand idly by and do nothing either - he helped install a tachyon detection net to reveal any Romulan involvement.
In both cases Picard did take action in a manner that improved, if not outright saved, the situation, and didn't just wash his hands clean, nor did he pull the Federation into a dangerous adventure.
There is no regulation for mandating humanitarian aid because it's a stupid idea. Military commanders typically don't have the resources. And if they did, they would probably start by contacting their superiors and not by taking direct action themselves. Why? because civilian organizations are usually better able to handle it. In a true emergency, which this was not despite the distress call, a commander might act only as a stop gap until civilians take over.
My character Tsin'xing
And indeed, Picard didn't just stand by and do nothing in the Klingon civil war, as you quite rightly put, but he did still involve Federation personnel in the situation (possibly even operating within Klingon space, I can't recall) rather than retaining absolutely 100% neutrality....
Member Access Denied Armada!
My forum single-issue of rage: Make the Proton Experimental Weapon go for subsystem targetting!
And, to be fair, the instance with the Borg Queen is in a context where Data was explicitly stated to have his emotion chip on. Manipulation is a form of deceit, and deceit is an emotional function.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
And as I said, it is an example of a standard of behaviour... I think you are well aware of that, and simply being facetious and deliberately disingenuous.
My behaviour is not under discussion, and I will not give an affirmative or negative answer, because either way, is none of your business...
I will admit, in Star Trek, there is no specifically cited regulation mandating a distress call be answered (although Code 1-Alpha-Zero: Indicated a starship in distress. (TNG: "Relics")) However, in real world terms:
Regulation 33 - Distress Situations: Obligations and procedures
Masters obliged to respond to distress messages from any source.
Ships can be requisitioned by the master of a ship in distress or the search and rescue authorities.
Given Starfleet's clear use of naval practices and traditions, it is not unreasonable to speculate that a similar Starfleet regulation exists, even if it has not yet been cited on screen.
For you to attempt to argue that assistance need not be extended by a starship, because there is no regulation which states that they must help, frankly is utterly abhorrent and shows an extremely disturbing personal outlook...
So yes, your understanding of real-world analogies is fundamentally flawed. I highlighted something very important. If a ship has a major malfunction at sea, then that IS an actual emergency. The Valakian example was akin to getting a message from a sea-port that they have an epidemic and want medicine. The quoted regulation is inapplicable. So it's fine for you to try telling me: but when I question whether you apply that philosophy to your own life... you tell me it's irrelevant... I think not.
Your stance is that if you know someone needs assistance you are morally obligated to provide that assistance no matter what..... NO real-world rule does so. Every similar rule has a very limited scope. Why? Because it's impossible to help everyone who might possibly need it.
My character Tsin'xing
I would argue that the regulation is stating that the obligation is there to provide assistance, unless there are some significant reasons for preventing them from doing so, ie not having the capacity or capabilities to provide the aid, but to then pass the situation to an overseeing organisation, who then could redirect the necessary assistance.
Example: A small shuttle picks up a distress call from a significantly larger ship. It does not have the resources to effect repairs or to evacuate the ship's party, so they inform Starfleet Command (or whomever) and they then assign a larger starship to provide the assistance.
Semantics... The Valakians were actively seeking help from space-capable species.
I had not put on forum. You did... You put your personal views onto public form, I did not. Also, the question of if I do or do not give change to beggars etc, is irrelevant to if I would, as the captain of a Starfleet vessel, i) extend assistance, and ii) possibly (more than likely) be procedurally required to do so...
My stance is that I strongly suspect that starship captains likely have a procedural obligation to provide aid. And that they have a moral obligation to provide it if they can. Your stance, appears to be that you would only extend assistance to someone in need that you want to help...
My character Tsin'xing
In your opinion... Meaning that once again, you are deciding what and whom you consider worthy of assisting... The Valakian's situation is certainly not the same as the situation with Sarjenka's people, the latter was certainly more desperate. But once again, the Valakians were actively seeking aid from outside sources. If you want to cite the Prime Directive so as not to intervene, fine.
But if your decision to not help is simply down to personal bias, and aren't going to help them because you do not want to help them, that is a different matter altogether...
You admit it then...
And yet I can actually justify my reasons for those situations with something more concrete than "I wouldn't want to help them..." and pedantic attempts to semantically twist examples into something you can then try and strawman...
Claims? I've stated facts about your conduct... You've behaved -- and are still behaving -- in a hypocritical manner... You revised one of my posts just so you could strawman the manipulated words, and you split hairs about examples just so you can try and disqualify them rather than actively refuting them... It's not my fault that you've shown yourself up and continue to do so...
And I'm still within my rights to decline to answer...
Merely an assumption on your part...
Really...?
I am not suggesting that starships have an obligation to provide aid 'no matter what', and indeed the previously cited suggestion allows for the master of a vessel to not act if it is not appropriate to do so. But. It also states that they must still make note of the reasons why, and report the matter higher so that adequate help can be deployed...
No I'm not... I may be engaging in logical conjecture, but that is not the same thing as head-canon. Head-canon would be, for example, to say:
In one of my stories, General Order 33 states: A vessel is to extend immediate assistance to any and all requests for it, not to determine the authenticity of said requests, therefore, Archer should have followed General Order 33 and helped the Valakians...
But I haven't done that.
At all.
I've simply made a reasonable assumption that there would be an as-yet uncited Starfleet regulation, stating that starship captains likely have a procedural obligation to provide aid in response to distress calls... It might not have been cited on screen, but it is not an unreasonable assumption given Starfleet's use of naval tradition and practice. Tuvok's TRIBBLE has never been shown on Star Trek, but given that he has several children, it's a reasonable assumption that he has one... Logical conjecture, not head-canon...
So no starship has ever responded to a distress call? I believe canon shows that they have...
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
But that's my point! You're accusing Markhawkman of poor character because he wouldn't help the Valakians, but he never said that! He said that he wouldn't want to help the Valakians, not that he absolutely wouldn't help them. Not once has he said that. That's why he's offended!
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
My character Tsin'xing
Incase you hadn't noticed, there was another post directed at you, which countered every point you made. Given that you have elected (as you have several times in our 'conversations') to ignore points I make which counter yours, I can only conclude that you cannot counter them. With regards your personal opinion of me, you don't know me personally, not have we engaged in any personal correspondence for you to have any idea about my life, values or opinions, beyond what I have chosen to post publicly on this forum. So frankly, I don't give a damn what your opinion of me is, and you're welcome to it, because it is likely to be so far off base as to be utterly irrelevant...
That you have not even attempted to refute this point, it will stand until you do so, but either way, I have no interest in continuing this debate any further, as there is clearly nothing to be gained from the discussion...
And for the record, I'm not going to waste my time replying to further personal attacks from you. you're too thick-headed to understand why they're irrelevant.
My character Tsin'xing
Find a nice pack of ice (cream, preferably?
(Edit: Seeing as both of you ended your last posts with a variant of 'I'm not going to bother anymore', I guess I'm about one night too late...
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
And again refuse to acknowledge a point which counters yours (my illustrating the difference between head-canon and logical conjecture)...
Tell that to the Valakians... I'm sure facing extinction seemed like an emergency to them... Or better yet, tell them that you won't help them because a) there's no Starfleet regulation (which you are aware of) that says you must help them, and b) you wouldn't want to help them because you don't like them!
If you think that 'definition of an emergency' is a good enough semantic argument to not render aid to someone in need, or deny an obligation to do so, you are either just a deliberate contrarian, or one warped individual without an ounce of human morality... Either way, I'll not respond to another post you make on any subject.
Need I say more?
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Now let's see if they actually follow through, or come back for one more go at having the "last word".
(comes back, sees new posts in thread)
......
Guys, the position of "the new worffan" is not one that needs filling.
At least he was (mostly) entertaining, as were his stories.
Speaking of which, I wonder what's happened to the Masterverse... it seems the literary content of these forums has degraded to Shevet's occasional post or the ULCs.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
This is just my .2c on a realization from some months ago, I can't say if that has changed, but can only reinforce that I am not presently aware of any new or continuing Masterverse work from either patrickngo or sander...
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
Hmm, I see your point. Can't particularly act on it, seeing as my literary criticism seems to consist of 'good' and 'not good' (ironic, given my own preference for more detailed feedback where possible
I'm not aware of any activity from either of them. That's part of what worries me, especially since the universe seemed to be going in an interesting direction...
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Likewise... I can't give any more detail without revealing private conversations, but personally, that is why I say not to hold your breath for anything else. Without naming names, I will say that one of the Masterverse authors, was (several months ago) extremely demotivated by an unresponsive readership, and I suspect, that that is that. But. People can and do change their minds, so who knows, that feeling may change/have changed since then (but I do not know)
I would like to stress that this is not an attempt to guilt people into giving feedback -- and I know I can be remiss in always providing it myself -- simply what I feel is only fair to explain publicly, of what I know thus far, given your post wondering about potential future Masterverse material...
Member Access Denied Armada!
My forum single-issue of rage: Make the Proton Experimental Weapon go for subsystem targetting!