Not to mention he had Giles' support. Wood was justified. I'd think that part of having a soul would be showing regret or remorse for the evil you'd done (see Angel).

In the Buffyverse philosophy of good and evil, within the moral framework of the Buffyverse, how was Wood justified? Wood was seeking vengeance. The Buffyverse philosophy so abhors vengeance that vengeance has its own demons to do it's bidding, that there are curses made out of vengeance, etc.

Besides, if he DID tell Wood, "I'm a different man now," I doubt Wood have gotten the message, and most of this board would have been howling "THEY'RE TELLING NOT SHOWING!!!" HEre, they DID show...they show'd that Spike has changed in some ways--I mean, Wood's alive--and in other ways, he really hasn't. As to Buffy, that I didn't care quite as much for, but she was (justifiably) angry, and I took it as a bit of overstatement to get her point across.

Wood already knew Spike was a different man now. That's pretty much why he triggered Spike, and darn near said as much.

Well, Spike is a vampire. Wood has dedicated his life to killing vampires. Justified.

Okay, then explain why the m-effer took back Wood's dead mother's coat - that's pretty damned low.

He didn't take it from Wood, did he? I thought it was at the school, which I didn't get, but it's not like Spike said, "hey, I didn"t kill you, but hand over your mother's coat."

Well, Spike is a vampire. Wood has dedicated his life to killing vampires. Justified.

Nikki was a human. Spike was an unsouled vampire. Their reason for being - the way they stay alive - is to kill humans. Does that mean all along, all these vampires have been justified?

If I make it my mission to eat all the chocolate in the world, am I justified if I take chocolate from you?

edited to expand on this...

I'm not saying Wood's desire and attempt to kill Spike were not understandable. But there's a huge gulf between understandable (and even sympathetic) and justified.

The Buffyverse philosophy so abhors vengeance that vengeance has its own demons to do it's bidding, that there are curses made out of vengeance, etc.

Ohmygoodness. That's true. And I've managed to completely miss that for all this time. I'm really dense.

eta: thank you.

Ohmygoodness. That's true. And I've managed to completely miss that for all this time. I'm really dense.

That's why nobody staked Spike after he got the chip.

Well, Spike is a vampire. Wood has dedicated his life to killing vampires. Justified.

If Wood kills Angel in the season finale is that justified? I would be pretty pissed. And Angel spent a large portion of his life as an evil-murdering vampire.

Spike did take the coat away from Wood - prick.

Cindy, the distinction I would make is whether things are done for good or evil. Vampires' intent is evil. Vampire killers are on the side of good. So Wood has been acting on the side of good by killing vampires. While I see your point on the vengeance thing, I still think he'd be justified in killing Spike merely because he's a vampire. The fact that he can get his rocks off because the guy killed his mother is just gravy. And for the record, your chocolate scenario is of the evil :)

That's why nobody staked Spike after he got the chip.

I thought nobody staked Spike after he got the chip because he'd been defanged. He was no longer a threat.