On Tue, 8 Sep 1998, arromdee@inetnow.net wrote:

On Tue, 8 Sep 1998, Brendan wrote:

	Ultimately it's not a question of weather or not she did 
something beneficial to the parties concerned, it's a question of weather 
or not she was justified deciding the course Ranma and Akane's future 
should take and then acting to force them to take that course.

Isn't that exactly the same thing that Genma and Soun did?

	In a sense.  They both decided that there was a course Ranma and 
Akane's future should follow, and concluded that they were justified 
attempting to make them follow that course.  The difference is that Nabiki's 
motive was her personal antipathy toward Ranma and Genma and Soun's was a 
mixture of love for the art and a desire to become in-laws.  Ultimately there 
are two differences.  First there's the simple fact that Genma and Soun never 
questioned the rightness of their motivations, whereas Nabiki recognised the 
selfishness of hers in the fict.  And secondly there is the fact that in the 
manga Genma and Soun are so incompetant that they were like most of the 
villians on the Aladin cartoon series, they had threatening sounding plots 
but they were such loosers that they brought defeat on themselves.  IE, they 
were technically low level vilians but weren't competant enough to take 
seriously.  Nabiki on the other hand planed and accomplished her goal 
flawlessly, she defined herself as a villian by the same criteria as Genma 
and Soun, however she was a serious villian because she was competant.