The SPVC intentions are radically opposed to the SPCV intentions!!
The SPVC act for the guiding hand's interests
without the villagers' interests and the SPCV because the villagers' interests are the guiding hand's interests
The SPCV reflect what we believe, a kind of profession of faith.
I don't know what is the SPVC reflecting except maybe a "game of the contradictions"
[Seriousness]
As stated repeatedly, the SPVC is a joke. There is no real intent to be hurtful towards villagers, pixels or not. Such an attitude is unhealthy, regardless of how 'real' the target is.
The SPVC reflects a sense of humor. That is all. Not cruel intentions, not disregard for human suffering, just a sense of humor. I understand that the SPCV tries to reflect an opposition to cruelty in all forms, by founding it on the more lighthearted issue of the villagers, and it's an admirable attitude that I am not seriously trying to challenge. I don't know how many times I have repeated these words, but people keep seeming to take it too seriously. My only aim in this is to get a chuckle, and I hold and admire the values and freedoms that the SPCV treasures.
As I've said elsewhere; there is enough injustice in this world to make me cry. Let's not invent it where it doesn't exist.
[/Seriousness]
[Humor]
As to the opposition of the tenets of the SPVC and the SPCV; perhaps they were created in an opposing spirit, but they are not fundamentally incompatible. The villagers have been given rights; doesn't the Guiding Hand deserve rights, too? And the Guiding Hand, given those rights, may choose to exercise those rights in the upholding of tenets similar to (Since it's forbidden from subscribing to those tenets) the SPCV's. Both sets of rules can be upheld simultaneously.
And, as a member of both organizations, one would have to.
[/Humor]
EDIT: Sorry, I missed this post, Jazzo.
I think I understand your theory. You're saying both organizations share the same overall goal. We both want our villages to be successful. We just get there by different means. However, the fact that the different ways contradict each other, makes it impossible for one to do both, therefore impossible for one to be a member of both groups. There are many other examples of this. For example, take American politics. The two candidates both just want America to be a better country. They just have different ways of doing it. You can't support both though. And let me just add, though it's irrelevant right now, the SPCV does have an endorsement from Arthur.
Your rebuttal?
My rebuttal is that the means are not neccesarily different; if the Guiding Hand has the goals that he would HAVE to have as a member of the SPCV, the means could not be different; using cruelty as a means would be counterproductive to the goals of happiness and security.
Therefore, the most efficient means - which the SPVC demands - would be the same kind and cuddly means that the SPCV demands.
Oh noes! The SPVC isn't endorsed by Arthur?
The SPVC has the endorsement of Lurkily. Do I get more cookies to give out if Arthur endorses the SPVC? Do I get an 'Endorsed by Arthur' seal to include in SPVC images? Sheesh.
Just for that, I AM going to make an "Endorsed by the SPVC" logo, for use on any post involving cruelty to villagers.
Previous Topic
Index
