Anyone know of a good alternative to Flagfic? It seems the always brilliant staff of fanfiction.net have decided to block flagfic permanently.

Ideally it should be a website and support emailing to Kindle.

 

FanFictionDownloader. I verified that the software itself still works, but I haven't tried the web version for kindle. They referenced the death of flag though, so it probably works.

 

So what stops an insane person or pedophile from getting their hands on some polyjuice, getting on the Hogwarts express and having their way with the children? Is there any security on it?

 

You have to either make it yourself, an extremely difficult, apparently complex process requiring a month(?), or get it from someone else (potions master, etc.), who would likely, knowing that you were planning something nefarious, tell you to fuck off. Especially if you're visibly unstable. I mean, who takes Polyjuice intending to do something altruistic? Is that even possible? To do something altruistic while on Polyjuice? Isn't the very act of acting as someone else, taking their very body and shredding any concept of privacy, morally reprehensible?

. . . That makes that scene in CoS different for me, now. Hmm. And the Ministry break-in.

It might not be that easy to "have your way" with children . . . who have magic. The train is also likely to have some form of boarding security, and there are multiple instances where we see that teachers can/do ride it as well.

 

You mean like using it to break into a heavily guarded enemy site and steal an important item that is needed to bring down a tyrant, all while minimizing collateral losses by posing as people who won't arouse suspicion?

Just saying.

 

I'm gonna go with, couples in stable relationships polyjuicing as each other for some enlightening sexual experiences.

----
Or if a loved one was irreversibly injured, lost both legs and their wand arm, offering them the use of your body would be a very thoughtful thing to do.
Basically if the hair donor consents and you are not trying to fool/take advantage of a third party - go for it!

 

Well, I know they were doing it for good reasons, but that doesn't justify the act itself. It just means that sometimes bad things have to be done for the greater good. Wait...

Anyway, you know what I mean. It's a point Rowling tried go make herself in Ron's case in that very instance. And what did Mafalda Hopkirk ever do to Hermione? Nothing. She just happened to work for an unjust institution that likely would have killed her for resisting.

 

Um, what? It totally justifies the act: from both your moral perspective and mine, the harm done by disabling those individuals and polyjuicing into their forms was far outweighed by the benefits of the mission. At least, I hope you think so.

 

Generally I agree, but if faced with this as a personal problem, I don't think I would agree with my imitator's actions. I don't know how to describe it, just this lingering sense of identity and how I do want to be the only one who can say they've been me. Or something. I don't know, I just hate the thought of someone else being me, even if I'm not that special of someone to be.

 

The good outweighs the bad yes, but stealing to save your family from starvation is still stealing. Perhaps 'justify' was the wrong term. But the act of polyjuicing into someone, even if it's justified, is still in and of itself ...a violation against that person. I don't know if I'm being clear enough.

 

What you're articulating is the clash between two systems of morality... one based on consequences, one based on acts/rules. A consequentialist system would laud the DH use of polyjuice, a deontological system would castigate it.

 

I'm not saying there isn't a moral downside. Just that I can imagine circumstances where a moral person would do that and be justified in doing so. But I'm mostly a consequentialist, with a large heaping of TDT thrown in.

Edit: sniped by Taure. Heh.

 

To be clear, I still agree with their actions, I would've told them to do the same. I'm just trying to see things from the perspective of the people being imitated.

 

LMAO. Not touching that.

 

It's only a violation if you consider yourself to 'own' your physical appearance. Polyjuice only replicates the most superficial aspects of a given person. It doesn't supply memories, experiences, emotions or any of the thousand subtle building blocks that add up to a distinct person. It just makes someone look like you.

Is your precise physical appearance something you can claim as your property? When you are broadcasting it at all times to anyone who can see you? If someone is clearly not impersonating you, and openly admits to their true identity, is it still a violation if they look like you? How does that effect less precise methods of imitation, like celebrity impersonators?

I sort of look at it like this: you have a really impressive house. Your neighbors like the way it looks, so they all erect facades on their houses so that they look just like yours. Doesn't change the layout of their houses, just the outward appearance. Have they taken anything from you?

 

I am not considering "I only followed orders" as a valid defence. Especially in case of dictatorships. And this one had genocide as a fundamental priority.

 

IRL if you make an advertisement with a picture of a movie star without paying them, you'll get sued.

 

My physical form doesn't have to constitute my entire idea of my identity for its theft and misuse be a violation. I don't know why you would mention something like this when the reasons you wouldn't want someone who looked and sounded exactly like you acting in the world as you are rather obvious. It's not simply the matter of looking exactly like someone, it's the capacity of being easily able to pretend to be them that is the primary issue. It doesn't need to supply those things for you to wreck someone's life.

Really? I mean, just because people can see what I look like doesn't make an ability to then assume that form and act as me okay. Your logic is incomprehensible.

Of course not, but this is never how Polyjuice is used (except perhaps for the seven Harrys, which Harry is clearly uncomfortable with, in part because his privacy is being stripped away by those closest to him - and they are technically impersonating him, just with his knowledge), nor is it the usage I was speaking of, clearly, so that point is completely irrelevant.

It doesn't, so I don't even know why you would bring it up. Celebrity impersonators don't get to occupy the genetic code of they people they're impersonating, or have the same hair and fingerprints.

That's such a terribly false equivalency I don't even really know where to begin with it. Would someone living in a house just like yours be able to perfectly impersonate even your voice as a result? No.

Would having a house just like yours allow them to perceive the entirety of your body without your permission? No.

Would it allow them to bamboozle your friends, family, and perhaps, as in DH, even your spouse by manipulating your DNA, which is also usually forcibly taken without someone's knowledge and permission? No.

We're not talking about people who were given permission to do this.

EDIT: And yes, someone's image is to some extent their property. This is why using anyone's image without their permission is usually considered a crime, and it's why waivers and releases need to be signed in most cases. Unless that's just America?

 

Um, so has there ever been canonical proof that the train is protected against intrusion(the Dementors got in) and there are usually aren't any teachers on board(Lupin went to see the engineer and not another teacher). On the other hand we have never seen any of the parents go into the train itself, so perhaps that says something?

I just want to know whether it would be plausible for someone to get on the train and harm one of the students.

 

Slughorn was also on the train.