Interview with Shepard

Who the Hell is it...?
Time for our interview with the mystery man to begin.
How ya doin, boss?
Great, thanks. Now, tell us a little bit about yourself!
Hahaha, you thought it would be that easy? No, in all seriousness... I cannot tell you a single thing about myself. Maybe. Unless you ask really nicely or are possibly a cute girl. Other than that, I'll answer anything!
Now, onto the questions. First, from Jim: Who are you? Why are you interested in Maytag?
Hey, are you a cute girl? Then why are you even asking? Now I suppose you will tell me that you are a cute girl named Jim! As if I would buy that... nice try, nice try. But I will tell you why I am interested in Maytag... and the answer to that is... obvious. Or at least it should be, if you have eyes! She is quite obviously an interesting person. Ok, next?
Florn: What is your favorite kind of soup?
Well, I can't say I'm particularly crazy about soup. I'm not saying I won't eat it, and given my stature you probably guessed there's not a lot I won't eat! But given my preference, I'd much rather have a hunk of meat.
Toyota: Are you evil in any form shape or size?
You'll have to be more specific. Define evil.
Arthur Denton: Have you met any of the other people from the story beforehand? Like Maytag and Bern for example?
Absolutely not, boss. I have never seen either of them before, and likely never will again. Of course, I could be lying, have you ever considered that? Suppose there was some reason I didn't want to tell you that I have seen them before... well then, I would likely reply with an answer like "absolutely not, boss." But in this case, I am telling the truth.
Korias: Ahem. My question may stump you, for I am neither a cute girl nor do I ask nicely.
Ah, so you admit you are not a cute girl! What a waste, after all with an abiguous name like Korias, you could have easily claimed to be a girl. But you didn't, and I appreciate your honesty. Of course, I'm not going to answer your question... but I applaud you for your honesty none the less!
Mellifluous Appoggiatura: I hear it's terribly difficult to get a good workout when you're incorporeal... have you ever thought about trying a low-carb diet?
I hate to point this out, but there's a bit of a flaw in your question. You're assuming I am incorporeal, and if that were in fact the case, I could not eat a thing, much less go on a diet.
Alouradona: Would you still be doing what your doing (or planning on doing/not doing) if your Mother knew about it or would find out about it, young man?
Well, it's hard to say with absolute certainty, as she is dead... but if she were alive, I believe she would approve of 90% of what I do. But as you may be aware, 70% of all statistics are pulled out of my ass.
Hans: You said you will answer anything. So, what is the meaning of life?
That's an easy one boss. The definition of the word "meaning," is something that is conveyed. So, who is conveying this "meaning" that you speak of? To put it another way, if "life" is a painting, then who is painter? Whoever is the painter is the one who decides what meaning the painting has. Now, depending on your outlook, the painter is either yourself, or God. Depending upon how you answer that question, you should now be able to figure out the answer.
Selphie Trabia: In most hostage situations, aggravating the hostage holder may cause a detrimental breakdown in negotiations and may cause the hostage holder to hurt the hostage further due to a loss of temper. Despite this, you show a preference for more aggressive tactics to be used in negotiation. Is this generally your preferred way to handle negotiations, or do you simply think that Maytag's actions are the best way to handle the current situation?
You are absolutely correct. Aggravating the hostage holder is always a bad idea, for the exact reasons you described. However, usually the hostage holder needs the hostage for protection. In Maytag's situation, that was not the case. In negotiation you need some sort of leverage for bargaining, and in order for that to happen you must have control; you must have power. Maytag had absolutely none. There was only one possible way for her to gain leverage, and that was through intimidation. Now as you stated, she had to be very careful not to antagonize him too much, but she had to push him just far enough to earn his respect and fear. Obviously, that's a very difficult tightrope to walk. But that was her only option.
Rhadan: Would you have allowed Derricks to rape and kill Bernadette if Maytag hadn't intervened?
Possibly. You see I am in this town for reconnaissance only; it is against the law for me to intervene. Now, that doesn't mean I don't have a heart! But you have to remember, the people of the town of Solstice have made a choice to not accept the help of the Phalanx.
Bikuto: Greetings, my good man. A couple of questions; Firstly, does the name "Rayluster" ring any bells?
Only one question at a time, please. Sorry my good man, I have no bells to ring. But if I did, my sheer size would constantly cause them to ring! Therefore, there would be no way of knowing if the name "Rayluster" was the cause of the ringing!
Nelly: Hey there mystery man! I'm a cute girl, how about dinner some time? <3
I'll be there with bells on, and they'll be ringing for you! Actually, they'll be ringing because my body is in a state of perpetual motion, but never the less I will claim that they are ringing because of you! You see, I have been known to bend the truth! As well as certain other things...!
Darque: You stated that the Conclave prefers not to assert it’s authority over the region by force. Is there a possibility, then, that if Solstice keeps rejecting the Phalanx’s protection the Conclave will use force to take over?
Not really. Heheheheh, some questions are easy to answer!
Toyota: evil is "if you think you are evil then you are evil"
I can play the fake definition game too! My word is "flubatory." Allow me to define it... flubatory is a state of mind. So if you think you are flubatory, you are flubatory! Understand? No? That's because I didn't say anything, you gigantic dumbass! Let me know when you're done working on that definition of evil for me...
Elennar: Solstice is the only city in the north wich follow the Knights and their laws, but their laws don't forbid the magic? It it's so, why Crest use "everyday enchantaments" and is worried about magic locks, May can use freely her purse or her "Angel breth" and Dice can go around freely? The Knight forbid only the curative magic and not the offensive?
It's not that simple, my good man. The knights do not make "laws," per say. Rather, they define what they believe to be the natural order, and strive to uphold it. The governor of Solstice is who makes the laws.
Jeffh4: Shepard, based on what you know of Maytag's capabilities and motivations, how would you have handled the situation in her place? Or are you willing to admit she handled it as well as you could have?
She handled it very well, but in my view she made a couple of mistakes. I believe she took a bit too long to show him her ability with knives, which was crucial to keeping him in check... but in her defense, she had to be very careful not to alarm him with any sudden moves. Secondly, cutting off her finger was a very gutsy play, but also very risky. In my view she should have applied pressure more slowly and exhausted other options before resorting to something so drastic. But... on the other hand, it was a bit genious in the sense that cutting off her own body parts without flinching is probably more intimidating than any demonstration of special abilties. At that point, I think Derricks would have not only been inclined to accept her deal, but terrified of what would happen if he didn't... despite the obvious fact that Maytag was making herself very vulnerable.
Le Blue Dude: Since people are stupid and cannot define Evil worth a damn I will define it using my logical way. Of course my way paints the world as a mess of grey as opposed to black and white. Any action that limits the freedom of others is evil, and action that increases it is good. To determin if a course of action is evil or good you see if it limits freedom more then it increases it or vice versa. True freedom is like a plain, so theoreticly laws (which erect walls) are evil. However laws allow you to build higher making a tower, and allowing you to inhabit a space instead of a plain, meaning that carefuly selected and chosen laws to build a frame work are good. See?

For example a second degree murderer murders in the heat of the moment. Since killing someone signifiantly reduces their freedom they (by living) reduce people's freedom by the risk that another heat of the moment will happen. Therefore it makes sence to punish them for killing so that they are less likely to do so again. Under the proper circumstances the best punishment is death, which insures that they will not repeat the crimes. Under other circumstances other punishments are better.

To determine if you are good or evil you try to figure out how much you have limited freedom, and see if the balance is positive or negative. Odds are, no matter who you are, the balance is negative. But, still, if you work at it you can have a positive balance.

Posting this, for example, was a distinctly evil act. I forced others to abandon their freedom to post stupid statements (I never suffered fools gladly) and I am shoe-horning you into finaly answering the question "are you evil" the only way you can given this criteria. Or you could choose to ignore my question/statement.
Well my good man, if we follow your logic it seems like what you are saying is that the ideal form of society is anarachy. You were a little fuzzy there on how laws to build a framework are good, even though limiting freedom is bad. Something about your logic just doesn't add up! But putting that aside, I believe you are making up this definition as your own personal definition of evil. The reason you have to do that is because there is no commonly accepted definition. That's the entire problem with the word evil. It's not a useful word to use in public discourse, people simply use it to mean "people they don't like." If that's what you mean, you should say that. Let's get rid of words like evil which have no purpose in the real word for anything other than progaganda!

And that'll do it for my interview! For my next act... I will dissapear!


MENU