The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

Now here’s a dilemma: you’re Robert Neville and, you have a chance to save the remains of humanity, with your ‘pure blood’, But this story hasn’t the alternate Will Smith ending. You know it will end badly for you, but there will be a “chance” that you will give mankind a chance at living, again. Do you take that chance?

Or, do you live out your life, as best you can and, damn the rest?

Yes, a good question and one not without foundation. Personally it would depend on the nature of those encountered before deciding whether to act.

If exposed to Kardashians wanna bee drunks who keep saying "it's a jersey thing" I suspect most would pass.

Thus to be fair, a degree of travel and careful judgement is necessary. The world is not full of women who want 99 pairs of shoes and matching handbags. Nor is it full of mindless football fans who think good TV is the X factor, but it is coming alarmingly close.

If there's a chance I'd survive with the rest of the world, I might take a risk, and do it.

MM2

Ditto with the Green Knight...;) It would also depend upon the chances given...is it 50/50? or 70/30 to the bad?....If all I had was a 30% chance to save humanity in the face of the Kardashian nightmare? Hrrmm...I'd rather save Fran Drescher.

Personally, I liked the Darkseeker world better than the current one. If I knew family or close friends would be helped, then I'd be a good guy. Otherwise, it's time to push the reset button, may the better species win, and enjoy the ride.

so far, it seems the original version of the telling of the tale is winning out...

and, I'll grant you.. with my own view of society, in general.. and the cult of celebrity and capitalism failing.. and.. well, mebbee reset time is long overdue...

tho.. there are good souls out there..

should they suffer, for the X-Factor generatipn?

But if you save society, you save the bad as well as the good and the staus quo remains. If you hit the reset button, the nobler virtues of mankind become positive survival assets once more, at least giving these virtues a chance for survival, rather than a slow painful death at the hands of Hollywood.

no.. you give the good and the bad a chance.. and I do not know if The Earth could take mankinds ways a second time.

I'd do everything the exact same way he did, only in the end instead of trying to body slam one of the infected with a grenade in my hand, i'd get in the damn safety box and then throw the grenade, seeing as they don't explode as soon as you let go of them.

Mm, my apologies.
Anyway, i'd save them one person at a time, thereby creating a society of chosen individuals with the potential to shape future society as our ancestors did not have the choice to do.
As for the chances.... well...
Sink or swim.

With many lives yet to be lived, I would serve humanity.

One at a time CB?
Lets do the math on that...say 3 people judged per hour x 12 hrs a day=36 x 350 days ~12, 260
So you would ONLY save about 0.0003 percent of the popultaion?
Excellent, I am with you CB.
No, OC is right, I must treat others as I would myself wish to be treated...
Actually~ on reflection its probably worth it, pass me the noose then I can do the whole world a favour . Stands on the balcony " For the X factor "(Peirs Morgan n Cowell~) Voms and jumps melting the plastic kardashians.
You know it makes sense.

I'd take the chance, failure if better then not trying.

I would die to give humanity a chance at survival. Definitely.

Believe it or not, I come prepared for things like this...

If I feel the choice out ways my right to chose, I flip a coin.
I carry a silver dollar in my wallet. I assign a value and flip the coin...

I let fate decide...

.. I think that wasn't personal.

But, to return to the issue as it stands. This is a moral dilemma and, I wonder with human nature being as selfish as it can be [[emphasis on 'can be']] would an indivual, under pressure, think logically.

It was a split second decision... and, that infers the decision would be instinctual...

This is an interesting discussion so far so let's keep personal attacks out of it. I've removed the 2 posts that violate this and ask everyone to respect the viewpoints of fellow VR members.

Whats the lifespan of the mutated humans? anyone know?
Could save em all.

**hand over mouth**

crap, can't do it.

Nightgame, I understood that it was a dig. no more.
we're guy's ... [[looks down]] "yep..." it's what we do.

Cabrion.. it never was mentioned.
So, undetermined, I guess.

And.. I am trying to avoid the alternate shmaltzy end.
Heck.. Looking at what we could become, I'd go with the Charlton Heston version.

Or.. possibly.. just 'pull the pin.'

the life span of mutated humans?...hmm...about as long s it takes to pull a gun on someone for gaseline and a jug of water?...Memories of Katrina's aftermath are still haunting me...:P

I really don't see why it's essential for every single person to be saved, especially considering that none of the mutants are sad (until that one's girl is stolen and experimented on).
There's no reason why i should assume they want to be saved, at least not until i saved a couple and asked them how they were happier, at which point my course could be altered.

interesting Cabrion. but how could we use our value base, to decide what makes a mutant happy, or not?

[[Silverhawk -- glad you made it.]]

Find a mutant, cure them, and ask the reformed if they remember anything, and what it was like.
From what i've heard, ignorance is bliss, so there'd probably be a lot of Ciphers (matrix reference... yes) who decide that having superhuman traits and limited understanding are simply... better.

I would have to be honest and say it would depend on who is left in the world to save. Would I play God and save those I deem worthy I probably would if I be honest with myself.

i would take the risk i think!

Cabrion... I think you'd be good pub company.

Back to 't thread.


Simply put.. it would be a chance not to play god.. but to be god.. are YOU prepared for that?

Hmmm...me? I think the body of government has already ousted the position of playing God. Quite simply, in observing the effects of how downright ridiculous people get when chaos erupts in any place, I think God has the better advantage of staying the hell out of it and letting the populace kill itself off.....Mutated? I don't think we need the help.

In reference to my earlier statement regarding Katrina's aftermath...even if you did something truly astounding to help save the human race, I don't think you'd find them as thankful or happy as you might think...while some might appreciate the expenditure of what you did to give them something back...even their life...those that think they should have had the gold-plated full-meal deal will want to know why the hell you brought them back from the brink of destruction and not give them a freakin' mansion and a massive amount of bling-bling.

Case in point: When what was left of the dregs of welfare society was put on a bus and packed out of New Orleans and sheltered in the communities of east Texas and north Louisiana, we found out up front and personal what a "mutated" human can act like....without the mutation.

We hosted nearly 500 people in our community. Those in this area are not wealthy here, as this parish is smack in the middle of the map between Shreveport and Alexandria....80 miles either way you go from those major cities. Our poor communities banded together however and cleaned out our own closets, cooked food out of our own pantries and even pulled together cash donations that each refugee was given $300 cash in their hand to help them start out.

Scavengers met us at the door, picked through clothes and turned their noses up at our food and scoffed at the money given so freely and told us that "we could have done better than this mess." What did we do wrong?

We did not bring steak dinners. We did not bring name-brand clothing. We did not bring any jewelry. We didn't bring a king-size bed with only the best mattresses for them to lie upon. We didn't bring them enough cash in their hand.

While saving the world populace from utter destruction is at its heart a wonderful and ideal thing to do, the reality is that while a few good people will appreciate what you do for them...the mutant dregs of society will hate you for it and blaspheme your name as a dippety-doo-da God/dess...even from the broadcast of a local radio station (*which is my endearing reference for my diatribe here).

As one old saying clearly marks the truth of it all that I hold dear:

"There is nothing new under the sun."

Unfortunately and realistically, I have to agree with Silverhawk. I'd play God and try to save those whom I deemed worthy. However, the math has been done in a previous post and I could never save enough by personally choosing. Under the original premise of the movie, after all was said and done, there would still be about 300 million people on the planet. This is more than enough, mankind has had worse odds in the past and come out better for it. The Darkseeker situation would eliminate those who insisted on steak dinners and bling bling more efficiently than I could by personally choosing. My version of playing God would be to sit back and do nothing.

It's also important to remember that the choice isn't between saving the world as it is now and letting the Darkseekers loose. It's about whether you take the remaining 300 million and try and reestablish the current society or whether you take the 300 million and let natural selection work for a bit. Plus 300 million might not be a large enough population to fight Darkseekers plus support those who refuse to contribute. By trying to be kind, you might be condemning everyone.

Apart from disease the only other chance of such a reduction is a volcano such as the last big one 7o,000 yrs ago, Lake Toba , Indonesia; it is estimated only 1000 breeding pairs survived.
I,m off to Yellowstone to pray for the Kardashians ; )

I know.. I know.. silverhawk there's sense in there...

but when I meet that one in ten.. it makes the other nine have some sort of merit...

i agree with Lord Doru and expand by saying there must b a balance in all things good/bad light/dark and so forth and site the scientific law for every action there is an egual but opposite reaction ty

When I meet that one in ten, it makes me want to protect them from the other nine. But Touchjewlz is right, there does need to be balance.

you're better off in this world alone but everyone needs someone at some time or another whether we want too admit it or not

I would be happy just to let humanity die off.

I will just take my chances and let humanity die out and if I was to survive with any others then use my blood to help them or maybe not maybe it will be best to leave things alone

yet.. there is that chance for redemption.. isn't there?

Quite honestly, I don't believe anyone would know until presented with a real situation. We all have biases so I doubt anyone is that altruistic that they would save everyone if given the chance. I'm afraid I like the happy ending but life really doesn't go that way. My first thought would be to save the young children and hope in doing so many of the things that have affected them in the present would no longer exist and they might create a better world being untainted. That would mean some of the adults and I would pick those in all phases of society that dealt with medicine, various sciences, historians and builders, not to forget the arts, etc, As for the others, I honestly don't know. I think most would go for love one's first and beyond that it would get into judgments of who is deserving. Would I sacrifice myself to do so, I don't know. I am older so it would depend on the odds and what was involved in doing so. That's the only opinion I can give and keep it honest to the best of my ability without the actual experience. Yes I know, I left out political and religious leaders :)

i think honestly we should start over with children and bring the world too be a better more safer place too live for all. it would be a blessing if we could get rid of racisim and crud like that...

there is always a chance...

hope.. is.. good.
But, hope with a little certainty is better.

And, does man offer that?
albeit.. mutant man, that is.

Sacrifice myself for the rest.

but when there is no certainty.....and normaly there isnt ...theres hope and maybe a lil faith and frankly without those ...its giving up

i read a series of books called the Circle Trilogy, in which a disease takes the people of the world and the cure is in a man's bloodstream, meaning solutions of his blood could be inejected. After he decided to let the medical people take his blood to make solutions. They said they would leave just enough to let him survive, but when he found out that this would come at the expense of a couple million lives, he declined, telling them to take all they could.
There are people like that in the world, and really i hope places like heaven exist for them.

Show me something worth saving and I will sacrifice myself.

Ultimately, like has been said before, it is a choice that no one really knows the answer to until confronted with that choice.

It seems like we have a few people who would be willing to play god and in a way wouldn't they be god it they had the sole decision?

Interesting side note about the move. Neville's birthday is Sept. 6th. Numerology has this as 666. The population deaths are also taken out of the book of revelations from the Bible. That is a whole different discussion though.

Will Smith's name in I Am Legend is Robert Neville.

The name of the main protagonist in the book, I Am Legend is Robert Neville, as is The Vincent Price film version of the same name and; The Omega Man, the version of the story with Charlton Heston in it.

**Breathes out**

I like all three.. well, count the alternate ending, four.

Well in answer to your question, what would you choose... I would choose myself man kind has done enough I rather wait out my time and die like the rest without saving man kind. I would do the world and mother nature a favour.

Really? We deserve extinction?
I don't.