Posts from Sacred Haven of Debauchery Auto-translated

Then I am neutral. I don't care what the rapist does to the victim, or what she does to him. For me, it's neither good nor bad.
This is generally the case, but again, there are many nuances. For example, I have the opportunity to stop the rapist, knock him out, or kill him. Then everything changes: this act is good because I will save the victim, so to speak, and earn praise from everyone: from the law, the victim, her parents, my parents. The attitude of those around me will improve, and so on. And if the victim turns out to be some girl, I might even get a girlfriend.
Or maybe everything will be completely different, and so on. In principle, I don't see the point in dividing actions into good and bad.

Added 1 minute ago
Yes, these are completely obvious and equally useless things.

no one was going to share it, and I don't need it anyway.
I'm talking about personal perception of actions and attitude towards them, for example, if it happened with unfamiliar people. Also, the question is about choosing a side in the conflict.

the battle button isn't working when it should >< and when it shouldn't, it somehow works!
and that way, I would have already used up all my reserves)

Added 1 minute ago
well, I've told you everything, meaning I've answered your question. That's how my egoistic perception works).

I think it all started when you, Ar, wanted to convey to Volk that life definitely has pleasant moments, and these moments are so pleasant that it's worth living for them and, if possible, avoiding the unpleasant ones that spoil our lives. Then someone said, for some reason, that "good" and "bad" are different for everyone, I don't know why, but it was out of place and irrelevant. Now, some strange conversation is going on about this.

so you'll stay out of it, huh?.. hmm, if I change the nuances, you'll definitely change your mind. so I won't even do that.

then I'll ask this: why is this neutral for you?) are you afraid of responsibility, or do you just not care about the victim? maybe there are other reasons.

and you don't always have to choose a side. Sometimes it's better to stay out of it when two other wolves are fighting. Otherwise, they might eat you for interfering.
but sometimes you do need to intervene.
however, this is all quite obvious.

avoid unpleasant situations

rather, don't create them. But if you see them, you should often intervene.

Added 2 minutes later
Wolf, wouldn't it be upsetting if you were the victim and someone just walked by?

Why should I care? If this were happening somewhere far away, then fine, because if it were close by, as I already said, I would look for an opportunity to profit from it. But if it's far away, then who cares? I don't know these people, they are not important to me, and I don't need them. Why should I care about their problems?

I didn't say you *had* to. I just asked which side you would choose.

Of course, it would be upsetting. But if I help the victim, it doesn't mean that someone will help me in return.

Added 1 minute ago
A draw. A neutral outcome. I'll stay out of it, and in ten seconds, I'll forget about it and go back to my own business.

Remaining neutral should only be done in very rare cases (usually in love affairs, although sometimes it's necessary to intervene). In other situations, you need to choose a side... and neutrality mostly indicates a fear of responsibility, of being wrong, and simply characterizes a person in a negative way. IMHO.
P.S. Not counting situations where a person is simply unfamiliar with the essence of the issue. You can give an example from the game "Heroes," where two sides are arguing about something, and the third person doesn't care, they don't even know the essence of the argument...
although this is a bad example, because I was talking about important things... and not about silly arguments about the game, which won't change anything.

Whose side would you choose? In a similar situation, without any nuances, if it happened in a neighboring town.

Added 1 minute ago

Remaining neutral should only be done in very rare cases (usually in love affairs, although sometimes you need to intervene in those as well). In other cases, you need to choose a side... and neutrality mostly indicates a fear of responsibility, of being wrong, and simply characterizes a person in a negative way. IMHO.

Why? This applies to all the statements (I'm too lazy to quote each one separately from my phone).

Whose side would you choose?

victims

Why?

this is just my opinion.

I would punch the attacker in the face, break his arms, fracture his ribs, knock out his teeth, and watch him cough up blood as he bleeds out. Then I would take out a knife and finish him off:smile20:

Why would you choose the side of the victim? You yourself can't explain why you think that way. Added after 52 seconds And I had some honey with tea, it's delicious ^^ and good for the throat.