Balancing the Risks

[Nalaris]

This person does not exist. We live in reality, not in a perfect model.

Yeah, I didn't say they had to be perfectly fair and impartial, I said they have to care about the game but not be attached to specific characters. That's the dev team of almost every multiplayer game that exists.

Now, next you propose the Dev Team... that is a GROUP of people, and thus, by your former reasoning, not fair,

What? When did I ever say that having a group be responsible for the final decision was a bad thing? I said an idea shouldn't be judged because it came from a certain group of people, not that a certain group of people should never have the responsibility to judge an idea. Obviously some group (or individual), large or small, has to make the choice, and the reason small groups are better than large ones is something I've already gone over. They're more focused, have a more coherent decision-making process, there's more accountability, etc. etc.

It's "General Discussion", we can talk about whatever we want as long as it holds some connection to the topic, which it does.

No one wants to listen to you rant about how stupid you think I am. Let it go.

[Henkie]

Lol, sure, pretend you have the moral high ground XD

[freiana]

Nalaris, that last sentence just proves to me this discussion is useless. It is not a discussion. You are not willing to listen, you already think you are right and won't step away.

The reason that over the entire world the biggest part of the (more developed) countries are democracies, is because it works, not because we all find it fucking hilarious to vote every now and then or some other weird reason. This fact alone should be enough to make clear why I would like to have a poll.
Moreover, if someone is going to make a decision in the end, one part of information he/she needs is what the group thinks of it, for which he/she would need a poll. It simply -is- a factor in any decision; even if it makes perfect sense not to have cars in a game that is furthermore not that developed the biggest part of the people still wants it so it's there. Logic isn't everything if you want to keep the game -fun-.

[Nalaris]

No, I'm not interested in arguing with some dude who starts spitting out buzzwords and tries to politicize the discussion into some capitalism vs. socialism, America is good/bad/run by reptiles sort of thing. That doesn't mean I'm not willing to talk to people about the actual idea, but no one is discussing my idea, the original idea, or any related ideas. Everyone here is trying to find an excuse to shut the discussion down. I am all ears if anyone has anything to say about what I actually wrote or what the OP actually wrote or anything else that is actually about the ideas being talked about in this thread, but no one's talking about those things and I can't have a conversation with myself.

And no, there are zero pure democracies in the modern world. There is not a single nation anywhere on the planet that uses polls as any sort of indication of what policy should be. That political system describes mostly just pirates. What people do is elect representatives, smaller groups of people who are supposed to be kept fair and impartial by the fact that people can vote them out of office if they're unhappy enough with them, but who can have a single, coherent, consistent, and clear vision for what the country needs. When a country holds a political campaign, the politicians tell the voters what they want for the country and the voters pick one. The details and how well or not this or that iteration of the system works are not important. What is important is that history has come down, hard, against tyranny by majority, mob rule, against caring at all what a poll says when discussing an idea. A poll doesn't tell you what policies to implement, it tells you what people want. If you want a poll that's halfway useful, you need a poll that asks people things like how dangerous they want Cantr to be, not whether or not a specific system sounds like a good idea to them.

[freiana]

As I said, a poll can be an indication of what people want, an argument that can be used in the discussion. I -never- said that the outcome should directly translate into the decision, it's used, along with other arguments, to make a good decision.

The reason I did not directly gave an answer to your idea is that I do not think changes to the combat system are badly needed. Therefore, my opinion on your idea is hardly relevant, because I wouldn't want to see it implemented either way. -if-, though, the majority of the people -does- want to see a change, then who am I as an individual to stop them? -that- is why I started about a poll, so we can have an idea if the solution you propose is actually needed or if the majority of the people doesn't think there is a problem at all.
If people do think this is a real problem, I am very willing to think about the best way to solve that. But I don't know if this is actually true.

[Black Canyon]

Way back before this discussion degenerated into some kind of incoherent rant on political ideology... I did read something that sounded kind of interesting. It was that battering ram idea as a response to the locked or blocked building issue. Everything else I pretty much don't agree with... but this sounds like it might have promise:

Okay, so justice needs a battering ram, then. Literally. Breaking down doors needs to be something that's just not that hard to do. Have a battering ram (should be no more difficult than the average hut to craft, to insure that even small towns will have one), have it require three or four people to man, and then allow it to break open doors rendering them permanently open until repaired. The defenders can now bring superior numbers to bear against their opponents.

I don't exactly agree that it shouldn't be hard to do.... but I do think it shouldn't be impossible.
Maybe more than four people to man it should be required. Of course, there will have to be a door repair project afterwards

[Cogliostro]

Well, as our very own Henkie points out, it's the General Discussions part of the forum, and actually that tie-in with how politics and policies work & should work was fascinating. Don't we all wish there was more of that kind of debate in-world, too? There would be, on a large and dramatic scale, if game mechanics would even marginally support the theoretical possibility of such change, including violent change, instead of always erring on the side of swampy stagnation and continuing the proliferation of useless items in every aspect of the game (yay, Pierniks, yay, fireworks!), explained mainly by the fact that our team doesn't seem to have the balls to contemplate dramatic executive decisions to put the practice of selective nerfing behind us and instead bring change for the better across the board in Cantr. With thoughtful consideration extended to all possible sides during ingame conflicts, not just the one most people happen to morally support.

I'm especially delighted by the patient, well-reasoned contributions of NALARIS, which have the prenuptial opponents of Thought ("just accept it, it's bad but it's the best we have, accept the dogma, shut up") frothing at the mouth individually and in small groups.

The TOP idea that Nalaris wrote down, if you ask me, is the formula or vision for what combat ought to be like: not drag based, not lock based, not healfood based, but **SUPERIOR FIREPOWER IN YOUR FACE based**. This doesn't preclude it being comfortably slow-paced (in fact, that's a necessity, to eliminate stupid clickfests and babysitting combats) and such elements of action, conflicted struggle don't go against the premise of deeply woven, involving roleplay. Only those who have no imagination would still argue, in the face of all the contrary evidence, that a war is just a war, is only for pimply 13 year olds, and has no human dimension to it. Read what Black Canyon has written in the beginning about being part of a war as a new character. I have had the exact same experience, and wouldn't be in Cantr today if it weren't for the troubles caused by the Blackrocks way back when.

All Nalaris is telling you is that a good idea is good by virtue of the organic balance of forces that form its innards. In politics and in the natural world alike, it absolutely doesn't matter that some people like African cheetas for their beauty, and others hate them because they're ferocious predators with countless innocent victims. Can it sprint at 120km/hour??? I.e. can it do the unique thing it's made to do in the world? That's all that matters. That's the question we should be asking about the presented ideas too, not "do I kind of like it, or do I sort of not like it..." - this latter form represents completely degenerate emotivism, a psychological throwback to infantile human development stages.

It's verifiably true, a poll has no creative spark - it solves nothing, demonstrates nothing, accomplishes nothing. I continue to strongly oppose the use of idiot-polls in the Suggestions section, but they now edit my posts and forcibly insert pointless polls into them anyway.

[freiana]

I still don't really see the problem with having a poll just to have the information. I agree, IRL politicians will have to make changes based on what is best for people, not based on what they want (I mean, if we had the chance we'd all want not to pay tax, it's just better for the whole community if we do). This, however, is not politics, this is a game. A game is meant to be fun for people. Even though it would be better for the whole if we all started paying for playing Cantr, we better don't, because the player numbers will lower drastically. In making decisions for a game a very important factor should be if it is FUN for the people playing it -and- good for them. That means that if the majority of the people says that they don't want a change in the fighting system, maybe it would be better not to change it, because those are the people actually playing the game. You do have to keep them satisfied, even if that means that your idea, however great in your and others eyes, is better put aside.

[Cogliostro]

No, the views of the majority don't (and shouldn't) in practice matter. Forum Polls provide no new information, are biased, serve no purpose and are very misleading. The Game Administration Board, which if I'm right is headed by Doug R. at the moment, said many times that Cantr is not a democracy. That's very good news, if you think it over, because the majority of players here are neither game designers nor game shareholders. So why should their unsubstantiated, purely numeric "I like it/I don't like it " votes in polls matter for anything? " Mr. X likes it, what luck! ... Who's Mr.X again, anyway? And what if he's stupid, and WRONG in his liking it?" Just remember, the famous leader of Nazi Germany, whose name I forget, was democratically elected and served a happy majority.

Now, there's another side to it. If the same simple players, as the humble peons that they are, were to go to Suggestions and submit something really good there, something that makes sense and sounds like it would work perfectly to accomplish Cantr's stated goals, then the team looks at those contributions and eventually uses them to improve the game for everyone.

As one of the rank and file peons myself, I personally do it in Suggestions with unmatched fervor.

[freiana]

His name was Hitler. I don't know were you are from but you clearly did not have the same historical lessons on WW II as I had. Hitler, indeed, started with getting elected by a majority. At the time he had not declared the full extent of his plan. Once elected, he made himself a absolute ruler, a dictator, he did not have further elections and stopped listening to the majority. Only -then- did he start doing all the completely wrong things we now remember him for. Had the majority still had a chance to say anything, voted again, everything might have gone a whole lot different.

A decision can never be based on the opinion of one person, as this single person can never represent the entire group and come up with the best solution for the entire group. Humans are, sad as it is, selfish, and if given the chance will always tend to put themselves before the group. Thus, there must be discussion, all opinions must be heard, everyone needs to have rhe chance to talk. In my opinion a poll is a good addition to a dicussion, although -obviously- it can't be the only part and people must be able to chance their opinion if they get convinced by others.

[Cogliostro]

Freiana, I just find myself utterly charmed & disarmed by your personal character and approach to things, so I'm prepared to fully concede on everything we've been discussing!

Pray, comment just one theme, if you would: do you think that mass media brainwashing could maybe possibly have some effect on the way the majority casts their votes in polls, and if so, what would remain of the beautiful political principles of Democracy as they were once imagined by the venerable Greeks, and later apparently adopted by your history teacher, if mass media monopolies were allowed to sway Joe Publick any-which-way they wished it?

I ask this question because it is related to Cantr forum policies, where we too constantly suffer the effects of blunt mass media head trauma.

The Greeks did not have mass media; which makes the oft-repeated praises of their primitive democratic principles akin to saying that a moat is an excellent defense, one of the best invented by man, which it may well be - against horsemen with spears, but against the atom bomb?

[freiana]

I have a vague sense that I might need a sarcasm detector for that first sentence...

Mass media indeed does effect the way we view politics, and unfortunately not always just by giving information as they should. I fully agree that democracy as we have it now is not -perfect-, it just is the best system we know.

I am just curious... What mass media do we have, in Cantr? Which media gigant want to brainwash us in this game? As far as I know, all information on the game is freely available for anyone, there is no newspaper claiming anything... So I fail to see how this is relevant in this discussion.

[Cogliostro]

No no, you see, the effects of the real world mass media are sorely felt in Cantr and the forums. Thankfully there's only radio for mass media in Cantr, and no one pays any attention to it. So it would be a great place to carry out some democratic governance experiments, and many others if it weren't for one thing - mass media affects players, the way they vote in polls, and the way they play their characters more than the involved players could ever admit to themselves.

The experiment is tainted. It's a constant uphill battle. You cannot get the things that modern mass media postulates out of the player's minds, short of creating for them small miracles. Even so, this is my second favorite past-time in Cantr (miracle-making).

[freiana]

Okay, so it is a given fact every cantr player is influenced by mass media, I agree. This, though, does not only affect the polls, it will also affect the discussion going on. I think we all agree any idea can't be put in without discussion, if only because the idea needs to be perfectionized, gaps need to be filled, and so on. In this, we simply cannot evade the effect of mass media, this is not restricted to polls, only.

[Cogliostro]

Excellent thinking there, Freiana. Thanks for this great discussion.

Earlier you ordered Nalaris to state what actual alternative governance approach Nalaris had, to offer instead of the pushy mass-media shaped pseudo-democratic stuff that Henkie and also you decided to support for now, since literally you do not know anything better, which you both freely admit. You are smart, modern people and aren't into overtly pretending like your political views are perfect and everyone else's are wrong.

I only wonder if you think that, say, as a citizen of Stalinist Soviet Union, only a few short decades ago, you wouldn't be pushing for folks to organize themselves according to the right and holy ideals of Community, helping each other, and selfless work for the good of all? There isn't anything better, everyone knows very well the way that capital exploits the people, choking out their true voice, turning them into soul-less drones.

Or would you be the one amazing dissident deep in the Gulag, talking to the fingernail-sized fleas about how this is all too Stalinist by far? Would you just innately know, that this is all wrong, and damn, there needs to be more voting in this country?