Useless Ponko - Vol. 6 Ch. 40 - Ponpoko Ponko

[AnimuVsMango]

Uh oh, there goes law number 2.

 

[Truerror]

Seriously, a tanuki robot?!

Also, I hate that kind of parent. They are responsible for millions of Asians not achieving their full potential (my own dad was like that). 🤬

Again, do NOT bother the cute loli maid robot! #stoploliabuse

 

[thefifteenth]

Ahhhh run away Ponko. Fuck that prude.

 

[emmypacer]

time for ponko to put those arm lasers to use

 

[luminary]

Racoon robot? Is that you Doraemon?

 

[ed3d]

runaway ponko?

Spoiler

terminator ponko?

Spoiler

ponko: become human?

 

[Novak_Vai]

Ponko has achieved true sentience, lol, she refused to be decommissioned, and the first thing she thought was to grabbed her master's granddaughter and book it

 

[Haydrion101]

@ed3d

Ponko: Become Useful

@marcopolonian
A-are those really the upcoming names for chapters? The end? The sadness and sweet bitter end? 😭

Also that mother is a psychopathic ho that deserves a thorough spanking. Ponko is a gift to her father by her mother and wishes to throw her away. Wench. Hate parents like her.

 

[RanaRana]

@Oeconomist
I think you are overreacting with the begging for her life.
Especially in that the old guy did not new she would be scrapped when she did that.
She only explained that afterwards.

And I don`t think that representing a fucked up situation is a sign of a "broken moral-compass"
If you want to defend that position you must have a better argument.
Your response to @shadowknight007 is also a bit of a non sequitur.

 

[Oeconomist]

@RanaRana—

the old guy did not new she would be scrapped when she did that

He did not know it at the start of the process, but she had to continue begging after he did.

I don`t think that representing a fucked up situation is a sign of a "broken moral-compass"

You're waling on a straw-man. It is in how a fucked-up situation is treated that we see whether a moral compass is broken or working.

Your response to @shadowknight007 is also a bit of a non sequitur.

Rather than being any bit of a non-sequitur, it was a logical take-down of a stale line of defense. Were humor simply equated with that which causes amusement to someone, then everything would be humorous; and then if a claim that something were humorous were sufficient to dismiss a moral claim, then every moral claim could be dismissed.

(Someone who wanted to argue that there were no north could claim that all compasses lie, but that would be a different line of defense, with no need to make claims about humor.)

 

[yurirei]

The maidbot is even more human than that bloody A-hole mother. What's a shitty parent!

 

[Ibri]

I wonder how the arc will end, not like they can change how her mother treats her after the summer unlike she has an unlikely (but common in media) change of heart.

 

[PrideChicken]

this mom and daughter relationship just hits right at home

 

[pmntamp]

fucking parent that see their child as a continue coin for new game of their own failure past life

 

[nightwatch25]

This is the cutest robot rebellion I've ever seen.

 

[Betony]

I felt so bad for Ponko when she looked between the grandpa and Yuuna, and neither of them came to her defense. ;-; These people are the closest thing she has to a family and they just let the mom bust in and talk about her like an object that can be easily replaced. I can understand Yuuna's submissiveness, being a child and all, but I'm really disappointed in gramps. Hope he steps up next chapter.

 

[DjAlexDubCheck]

@RanaRana He's a bit of a non-sequitur king, don't bother to correct him

 

[RanaRana]

@Oeconomist

He did not know it at the start of the process, but she had to continue begging after he did.

No, page 18 she explains she will be scrapped page 19 he is thinks about this and 20 he gives in,
trial for a week, but in chapter 3 he doesn`t care about that anymore.

You're waling on a straw-man. It is in how a fucked-up situation is treated that we see whether a moral compass is broken or working.

you are making an accusation against the moral character of the author, because of the situation they represent in their fiction.
but you are not making a proper argument for why this would be the case.
or show any decent examples that would lead you to this conclusion.

I could go make an argument against your views on the nature of humor and comedy, but that would be an irrelevant digression but still I want that noted.

Rather than being any bit of a non-sequitur, it was a logical take-down of a stale line of defense.

it is a non-sequitur because the nature of humor is not relevant to you making an accusation on the moral character of the author.


@DjAlexDubCheck
don`t mind me I just like arguing.

 

[manabi]

@LordZero The mother doesn't know that, but I'm also pretty sure she wouldn't care. She probably views Ponko as an household appliance, not an intelligent being.

@yetiwarrior @PrismCrescent He doesn't know that, he believes his sons were the ones who had Ponko sent to him (and they were involved, see chapter 1 where one decides to call the association after Gen refuses to come live with them). Ponko doesn't know either, because her memories are always wiped before she's sent to a new job.

 

[Oeconomist]

@RanaRana—

No, page 18 she explains she will be scrapped page 19 he is thinks about this and 20 he gives in,
trial for a week, but in chapter 3 he doesn`t care about that anymore.

After she explains that she would be scrapped, she's no longer speaking but she is still begging.

you are making an accusation against the moral character of the author, because of the situation they represent in their fiction.

That doesn't somehow change the point that you were waling on a straw-man.

but you are not making a proper argument for why this would be the case.

I wasn't asked to make a proper argument. First you asked me to clarify what I was saying, and I did. Then you asked me to be specific, and I was. Apparently, you've been looking for an argument under false pretenses.

or show any decent examples that would lead you to this conclusion.

So far, you've shown that you didn't understand what, morality aside, is actually happening in the example to which I pointed, so you could then proceed to evaluate it properly. If I have to work just to get you to acknowledge that one can beg without speaking, why should I now bother trying to make an argument about anything more complex or subtle?

I could go make an argument against your views on the nature of humor and comedy, but that would be an irrelevant digression but still I want that noted.

I would expect your argument on that matter to be even worse than the other arguments that you've so far made.

it is a non-sequitur because the nature of humor is not relevant to you making an accusation on the moral character of the author.

Nonsense. Being amused simply by suffering reveals moral character. What one finds humorous is one key to moral character. When someone tries to excuse something with the formula that it is just a joke, it is proper (towards a moral conclusion) to consider why and how it is a joke in the eyes of some.

I'm quite glad to have been afforded an opportunity to make that point obvious, so that the formula loses its psychologic force. Of course, some people are going to be upset when told “Look in that mirror.”