Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Conduct Unbecoming a Guild Officer and a Gentleman

24

Comments

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 32,780
    Eldurian said:
    I think most people's in-game and out-of-game alignment vary a bit but I really do think it can be applied anywhere.

    People you know in life that equate honor, law, and other concepts made up by society with morality would be lawful.

    People who don't care about law/chaos one way or the other beyond fear of punishment would be neutral.

    And people who actively disdain those who equate concepts of law and honor to morality would be chaotic.

    I'm sure you know of people who really perfectly fit alignments such as lawful-evil if you think on it:



    I've found those who I would identify as lawful find the idea of applying the system to real life the most offensive though. I think most lawful people find the idea of the existence of the "chaotic-good" alignment preposterous. 
    Who is this guy?
    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited May 2018
    Martin Shkreli

    Edit: So the reason I saw he was lawful-evil is he was a pharmaceutical company manger who jacked prices on life saving drugs to increase profits. There was a big media circus where they basically told him he was an evil person but he had that smug smile the whole time because he knew he never broke a law and there wasn't crap they could do to him.

    Apparently he later went to prison for defrauding investors so I guess he was more neutral evil.
    MrMelGibson
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 24,273
    Eldurian said:
    Martin Shkreli

    Edit: So the reason I saw he was lawful-evil is he was a pharmaceutical company manger who jacked prices on life saving drugs to increase profits. There was a big media circus where they basically told him he was an evil person but he had that smug smile the whole time because he knew he never broke a law and there wasn't crap they could do to him.

    Apparently he later went to prison for defrauding investors so I guess he was more neutral evil.

    I think we are seeing the limitations of D&D alignments here, few people are truly evil, he would not make my list. Your story rather reminded me more of cosmic justice, he got his.

    Talking of which I have to wonder have I yet paid for my misspent youth? :)
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    I would say few people see themselves as evil but a majority lean farther evil than good. He would certainly make my list.
    KyleranMrMelGibson
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,975
    Eldurian said:
    I would say few people see themselves as evil but a majority lean farther evil than good. He would certainly make my list.
    I agree, he is clearly in the evil category,  he belongs in the "Phantom Zone" for sure.

    ;)
    MrMelGibson

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • bonzoso21bonzoso21 Member UncommonPosts: 380
    Eldurian said:
    I would say few people see themselves as evil but a majority lean farther evil than good. He would certainly make my list.

    Really? I guess it depends on how you view "evil", which is kind of a moving target that's different for some. I tend to think most people just try to exist, generally being civil and decent but not often going out of their way to be truly good except to their family and friends...lawful neutral, maybe. It's an overly simple number I pulled from nowhere, but I'd say 20% Good, 70% Meh, and 10% evil. Now if you think someone who closes their eyes to an injustice or is apathetic about something is evil, well, people suck pretty bad then. 
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    bonzoso21 said:
    Eldurian said:
    I would say few people see themselves as evil but a majority lean farther evil than good. He would certainly make my list.

    Really? I guess it depends on how you view "evil", which is kind of a moving target that's different for some. I tend to think most people just try to exist, generally being civil and decent but not often going out of their way to be truly good except to their family and friends...lawful neutral, maybe. It's an overly simple number I pulled from nowhere, but I'd say 20% Good, 70% Meh, and 10% evil. Now if you think someone who closes their eyes to an injustice or is apathetic about something is evil, well, people suck pretty bad then. 
    I think most people are overcome by conscience if they have to look their victim on the eye. I'll give you an example. There are three scenarios.

    1. You could go rob someone's house right now who has done nothing to you, and whom will suffer hardships if you take their valuables but the laws apply as normal.
    2. You could go rob someone's house right now who has done nothing to you, and whom will suffer hardships if you take their valuables but the legally they aren't allowed to stop you and they have no power to retaliate. However, they get to be there and you have to look them in the eye.
    3. You could go rob someone's house right now who has done nothing to you, and whom will suffer hardships if you take their valuables but you're legally allowed to do it, they won't be home, and they will never get to know who did it.

    Imagine presenting these scenarios to three people and asking "Do you want to rob them?" in each. Personally if you say yes to any of these scenarios I'd say you lean more evil than good. Maybe not "evil" on the 9 step alignment system but further evil than good in the neutral step. And I think most people would say yes to 3 if the scenario was actually presented to them in real life.

    If they wouldn't say yes, why do we lock our doors? If they wouldn't say yes, why does every game that allows you to kill other players end up with high levels robbing low levels for their lunch money? If they wouldn't say yes why are there so many people who treat their romantic partners so poorly?

    I do believe man is inherently evil. Maybe not sacrificing children's hearts to a demon god evil, but hurting others to benefit themselves evil.


  • VyntVynt Member UncommonPosts: 757
    I can definitely see applying the alignment system to real life. It just really needs to be well defined.

    http://easydamus.com/alignment.html

    This seems pretty thorough. Even has an alignment test.
    I probably identify most closely with true neutral.  It is amazingly quite accurate about me in real life.
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,975
    Vynt said:
    I can definitely see applying the alignment system to real life. It just really needs to be well defined.

    http://easydamus.com/alignment.html

    This seems pretty thorough. Even has an alignment test.
    I probably identify most closely with true neutral.  It is amazingly quite accurate about me in real life.
    Actually I once read an interesting argument that True Neutral is the hardest alignment to play, and perhaps actually impossible for humans to do.

    You literally have to take all actions at random, save the child this time, kill him next time, leave him on the ground but kill his parents and then take a child and rear them as your own.



    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    Kyleran said:
    Vynt said:
    I can definitely see applying the alignment system to real life. It just really needs to be well defined.

    http://easydamus.com/alignment.html

    This seems pretty thorough. Even has an alignment test.
    I probably identify most closely with true neutral.  It is amazingly quite accurate about me in real life.
    Actually I once read an interesting argument that True Neutral is the hardest alignment to play, and perhaps actually impossible for humans to do.

    You literally have to take all actions at random, save the child this time, kill him next time, leave him on the ground but kill his parents and then take a child and rear them as your own.
    That's chaotic-evil with a streak of insanity. Only evil characters just randomly kill people and some good deeds don't outweigh that. You could have a redeemed evil character that killed someone and reared their child but they wouldn't still be actively killing people.

    I once played a True Neutral character. He commited deeds that were evil but nothing near as heinous as randomly murdering people (I won't go into the specifics because it will spark a huge debate). He had other areas he was softer though, and leaned more good though. Basically the areas he was inclined toward evil were mostly balanced out by the areas he was more inclined toward good. He was harsh and desired power and that caused suffering but also merciful and and slightly empathic to those he directly interacted with and did a lot of good for others too.

    You could also just be neutral by never going out of your way to help others unless you see a clear benefit to self but never screwing others over for your own gain either. For instance, up until he came back to save Luke, Han's actions in A New Hope were very chaotic-neutral. 
  • bonzoso21bonzoso21 Member UncommonPosts: 380
    Eldurian said:



    Imagine presenting these scenarios to three people and asking "Do you want to rob them?" in each. Personally if you say yes to any of these scenarios I'd say you lean more evil than good. Maybe not "evil" on the 9 step alignment system but further evil than good in the neutral step. And I think most people would say yes to 3 if the scenario was actually presented to them in real life.

    If they wouldn't say yes, why do we lock our doors? If they wouldn't say yes, why does every game that allows you to kill other players end up with high levels robbing low levels for their lunch money? If they wouldn't say yes why are there so many people who treat their romantic partners so poorly?

    I do believe man is inherently evil. Maybe not sacrificing children's hearts to a demon god evil, but hurting others to benefit themselves evil.


    Agree to disagree, I guess. I think you'd have to ask several more than 3 to find someone who would rob a neighbor's house even knowing they would get away with it. You would definitely find someone before too long, though, and that's why we lock our doors. Obviously there are plenty of bad people out there...I just don't think it's 33%, let alone the majority as you believe.
  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,574
    Han's character is just a facade and result of the time.  I think he was mostly chaotic good, but struggled both to show off how cool/strong/sexy he was due to his difficult life and the evil/neutral people he interacted with.  He didn't want people to think him weak by committing good acts, but he always ended up doing them.  I think a chaotic neutral character would commit some bad acts.  Luke would probably be neutral good and Leia would be lawful good IMO.

    Druids have to be true neutral in D&D.  I'm not certain if that is true anymore.  For them it isn't a personality trait so much as a class goal.  They try to keep the balance of nature and help whoever is on the losing side.

    True neutral and chaotic neutral characters can be a lot of fun to play due to the leeway you receive in terms of acts you commit.  This really helpful for a class like a thief (the one that doesn't seem to exist in games anymore).

    An evil character would likely be one who commits murder or mass murder for fun or profit.  There are definitely large companies out there that can fall under this category though it is more for profit than for fun IMO, but who knows.  It could also be someone who enjoys torturing others or seeing others in pain.

    One might argue that none of these traits are born with and every person could change given the right help.  Most issues are caused by society and the actions of people in it towards others IMO.  In a game it's nice to have black and white pictures though.  It makes it easier to a clear goal in mind that you feel good about.  One might argue alignment should be based on actions and not a set value at character creation.
  • VyntVynt Member UncommonPosts: 757
    Kyleran said:
    Vynt said:
    I can definitely see applying the alignment system to real life. It just really needs to be well defined.

    http://easydamus.com/alignment.html

    This seems pretty thorough. Even has an alignment test.
    I probably identify most closely with true neutral.  It is amazingly quite accurate about me in real life.
    Actually I once read an interesting argument that True Neutral is the hardest alignment to play, and perhaps actually impossible for humans to do.

    You literally have to take all actions at random, save the child this time, kill him next time, leave him on the ground but kill his parents and then take a child and rear them as your own.



    That is actually not what true neutral is, but often a misconception. Even chaotic neutral wouldn't be that way.

    They definitely have their own code that they stick to, but a lot centers on the self.

    Such as keeping your word, unless necessary to break, not killing unless for survival. Torture is fine as long as it is for information and not pleasure. Kind of a ruthless practicality focusing on self interest. The list of possible commandment and sins in interesting. The sins one more so, which can just be the commandments also in the opposite way.

    1. Trying to persuade others to take a stance on a moral or ethical issue.

    2. Failing to assist a friend or ally.

    3. Killing for any reason other than survival.

    4. Breaking your word to a friend or ally, unless life is threatened.

    5. Needless torture.

    6. Making a sacrifice for someone unrelated to you.

    7. Refusing to kill when important to your survival.

    8. Betraying an ally or friend, unless life is in danger.

    9. Showing mercy to a dire enemy.

    10. Taking sides in a conflict that doesn't affect your survival.


    Definitely wouldn't save a child, then kill the next time. Probably wouldn't have anything to do with the child unless it was necessary for survival in some way.


    Chaotic neutral tends to be a bit more whim based, but it is still following a code which is themselves lol. Good and evil are irrelevant.

  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,004
    edited May 2018
    One day everyone will have an ID chip implant.  Perhaps a computer will calculate your alignment automatically.  

    Perhaps it will be a little like the episode in Black Mirror 'Nose Dive' with a ratings system that defines your social status.
    Rafael Poulain  - rafallopz  Latest news Breaking


    ScotTheScavenger[Deleted User]MrMelGibson

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,574
    One day everyone will have an ID chip implant.  Perhaps a computer will calculate your alignment automatically.  

    Perhaps it will be a little like the episode in Black Mirror 'Nose Dive' with a ratings system that defines your social status.
    Rafael Poulain  - rafallopz  Latest news Breaking

    This sounds fairly terrible.  Apparently there are devices being developed that can read your thoughts.  How horrible would it be if that were the case.  I'm sure most of us have some unconscious thoughts about other people that we wouldn't say out load.  It would be especially awkward in a sexual sense. I like technology well enough, but I feel that is an invasion of privacy.
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    bonzoso21 said:

    Agree to disagree, I guess. I think you'd have to ask several more than 3 to find someone who would rob a neighbor's house even knowing they would get away with it. You would definitely find someone before too long, though, and that's why we lock our doors. Obviously there are plenty of bad people out there...I just don't think it's 33%, let alone the majority as you believe.
    I think that's shaped by the bias of the fact you generally interact with people face to face. The internet has show us how people act when they have anonymity, and it isn't pretty. Really though the evidence is there in other places to. Most people have been through multiple relationships in their lives, and for the majority of people whom I've heard "ex" stories from do not describe the majority of their exes behaving in a good or even neutral fashion. 

    That's because you can only wear a mask for so long. Once you are with someone long enough you see their true nature. And their true nature is generally evil.
  • DvoraDvora Member UncommonPosts: 499
    edited May 2018
    Some fun but maybe less than honorable stuff I did in days long past, in UO.

    Camp dungeon rooms while invisible, when someone comes in, block doors with barrels and frag them.

    Leave explosion trapped boxes on the ground in dungeons.

    Gate many monsters to my house, then open a gate there for unsuspecting peeps.  

    Gate ghosts of people I didn't like to an island with no healer to res them and no way off except calling a GM.

    Pretend to help someone kill a mob that someone was fighting, then charm the mob with bard-skill and change targets to them before they realize what is going on.  Of course this was not with my dread-lord toon.  I was blue and this was cheap, I know :)

    Last one was not really nefarious, but pretty hilarious at the time.  Two dudes had marked a rune into my castle on the ground before the castle was planted.  Later they ported in, and the spot was in a totally walled off spot where I could not get to them.  They laughed as I farted earthquake 3-5 times.  Finally it went off, oneshotting them and my buddy upstairs.  Their ghosts could not get out and they had to call a GM or something to get out, or one of them released with stat loss, can't remember how that worked anymore, but it took them a long time to get out.




  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,975
    Eldurian said:
    bonzoso21 said:

    Agree to disagree, I guess. I think you'd have to ask several more than 3 to find someone who would rob a neighbor's house even knowing they would get away with it. You would definitely find someone before too long, though, and that's why we lock our doors. Obviously there are plenty of bad people out there...I just don't think it's 33%, let alone the majority as you believe.
    I think that's shaped by the bias of the fact you generally interact with people face to face. The internet has show us how people act when they have anonymity, and it isn't pretty. Really though the evidence is there in other places to. Most people have been through multiple relationships in their lives, and for the majority of people whom I've heard "ex" stories from do not describe the majority of their exes behaving in a good or even neutral fashion. 

    That's because you can only wear a mask for so long. Once you are with someone long enough you see their true nature. And their true nature is generally evil.
    I can't really relate.  I'm from a place where when my son who was 12 at the time found several hundred dollars in a bank parking lot, I took him inside where we gave it to the tellers in case someone came back looking for it.

    When no one claimed it after two weeks they gave it back to him,  but not before telling a local news columnist who did a small story about it.

    We've always done the "right thing" even when faced with an opportunity to do wrong with no consequence.

    I'm the guy who in finding your wallet in a parking lot drives to your house to give it to you, with all of your money and credit cards intact. (True story, I actually did this) 

    ;)


    CryomatrixScot

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,004
    Kyleran said:
    Eldurian said:
    bonzoso21 said:

    Agree to disagree, I guess. I think you'd have to ask several more than 3 to find someone who would rob a neighbor's house even knowing they would get away with it. You would definitely find someone before too long, though, and that's why we lock our doors. Obviously there are plenty of bad people out there...I just don't think it's 33%, let alone the majority as you believe.
    I think that's shaped by the bias of the fact you generally interact with people face to face. The internet has show us how people act when they have anonymity, and it isn't pretty. Really though the evidence is there in other places to. Most people have been through multiple relationships in their lives, and for the majority of people whom I've heard "ex" stories from do not describe the majority of their exes behaving in a good or even neutral fashion. 

    That's because you can only wear a mask for so long. Once you are with someone long enough you see their true nature. And their true nature is generally evil.
    I can't really relate.  I'm from a place where when my son who was 12 at the time found several hundred dollars in a bank parking lot, I took him inside where we gave it to the tellers in case someone came back looking for it.

    When no one claimed it after two weeks they gave it back to him,  but not before telling a local news columnist who did a small story about it.

    We've always done the "right thing" even when faced with an opportunity to do wrong with no consequence.

    I'm the guy who in finding your wallet in a parking lot drives to your house to give it to you, with all of your money and credit cards intact. (True story, I actually did this) 

    ;)


    I remember reading articles about people who had stolen from the place they worked, a few had worked for the government, they anonymously apologized and returned the money they had gotten away with stealing, I think it was crimes committed 20 to forty years ago, they felt so guilty they had to make amends.  There are also people who feel it's their duty to report law violations done by strangers to their local police department.

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member EpicPosts: 3,223
    I found $200 at work on the ground and gave it to security. Never know what happened.

    One time I sent someone $400 on PayPal instead of billing it, he returned it immediately.
    Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix
    You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations. 
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    Kyleran said:
    Eldurian said:

    I think that's shaped by the bias of the fact you generally interact with people face to face. The internet has show us how people act when they have anonymity, and it isn't pretty. Really though the evidence is there in other places to. Most people have been through multiple relationships in their lives, and for the majority of people whom I've heard "ex" stories from do not describe the majority of their exes behaving in a good or even neutral fashion. 

    That's because you can only wear a mask for so long. Once you are with someone long enough you see their true nature. And their true nature is generally evil.
    I can't really relate.  I'm from a place where when my son who was 12 at the time found several hundred dollars in a bank parking lot, I took him inside where we gave it to the tellers in case someone came back looking for it.

    When no one claimed it after two weeks they gave it back to him,  but not before telling a local news columnist who did a small story about it.

    We've always done the "right thing" even when faced with an opportunity to do wrong with no consequence.

    I'm the guy who in finding your wallet in a parking lot drives to your house to give it to you, with all of your money and credit cards intact. (True story, I actually did this) 

    ;)
    To be clear I'm not saying I would steal from someone's house either. But the more I get exposed to people the more I am convinced in their inherent evil. Just the other day I forgot to grab a package off the porch before I went and picked my fiancé. We get back and the package is gone.

    People are evil. Most of them will do anything they can get away with.
  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member EpicPosts: 3,223
    Eldurian said:
    Kyleran said:
    Eldurian said:

    I think that's shaped by the bias of the fact you generally interact with people face to face. The internet has show us how people act when they have anonymity, and it isn't pretty. Really though the evidence is there in other places to. Most people have been through multiple relationships in their lives, and for the majority of people whom I've heard "ex" stories from do not describe the majority of their exes behaving in a good or even neutral fashion. 

    That's because you can only wear a mask for so long. Once you are with someone long enough you see their true nature. And their true nature is generally evil.
    I can't really relate.  I'm from a place where when my son who was 12 at the time found several hundred dollars in a bank parking lot, I took him inside where we gave it to the tellers in case someone came back looking for it.

    When no one claimed it after two weeks they gave it back to him,  but not before telling a local news columnist who did a small story about it.

    We've always done the "right thing" even when faced with an opportunity to do wrong with no consequence.

    I'm the guy who in finding your wallet in a parking lot drives to your house to give it to you, with all of your money and credit cards intact. (True story, I actually did this) 

    ;)
    To be clear I'm not saying I would steal from someone's house either. But the more I get exposed to people the more I am convinced in their inherent evil. Just the other day I forgot to grab a package off the porch before I went and picked my fiancé. We get back and the package is gone.

    People are evil. Most of them will do anything they can get away with.
    Your logic is flawed. Most people are not inherently evil, what happens if twenty random people passed by your porch and the 21st person took the package? 

    Your experience has skewed your perception of the total population.
    Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix
    You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations. 
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    Eldurian said:

    To be clear I'm not saying I would steal from someone's house either. But the more I get exposed to people the more I am convinced in their inherent evil. Just the other day I forgot to grab a package off the porch before I went and picked my fiancé. We get back and the package is gone.

    People are evil. Most of them will do anything they can get away with.
    Your logic is flawed. Most people are not inherently evil, what happens if twenty random people passed by your porch and the 21st person took the package? 

    Your experience has skewed your perception of the total population.
    The question of those who didn't take it, how many didn't take it because of fear of punishment, and how many didn't take it because it wouldn't be right to take it? Only one got the nerve to come grab it, but how many would have if they had the nerve? 

    All of human history up until very recently is filled with brutality. And even now there is brutality ruling over many places of the world. 

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pippa_Bacca

    Open World PvP Sandboxes are the greatest showcase of what people do in a world without consequence. There are no objectives. And there are no limitations. People could just as easily choose cooperation and building things as an objective as they could slaughtering anyone they meet. 

    And what do they choose? As someone who has played Open World PvP games under the premise "You don't mess with me, I won't mess with you" for over a decade at this point, I can tell you what option most people go with.


  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 24,273
    Kyleran said:
    Vynt said:
    I can definitely see applying the alignment system to real life. It just really needs to be well defined.

    http://easydamus.com/alignment.html

    This seems pretty thorough. Even has an alignment test.
    I probably identify most closely with true neutral.  It is amazingly quite accurate about me in real life.
    Actually I once read an interesting argument that True Neutral is the hardest alignment to play, and perhaps actually impossible for humans to do.

    You literally have to take all actions at random, save the child this time, kill him next time, leave him on the ground but kill his parents and then take a child and rear them as your own.




    This is why alignments fell out of favour in roleplaying, they are caricatures of real behaviour and create unrealistic binding constraints for players. Many GM's who still use them just give them a nod, they don't use them as hard and fast rules.
    [Deleted User]
  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 8,164
    Reading the recent responses to this topic and the discussion has gotten deep and a little uncomfortable.
    Scot

Sign In or Register to comment.