Balancing the Risks

[freiana]

In all honesty, I would not know how I would've behaved in such a situation. I hope I would be brave enough to stand up for freedom, but I have never been in such a situation so do not know what I would do.
I do know that I am very glad that I live where I live, with a relatively big freedom and open information about most things, so I can make my own decision based on comparison. I am very glad to live in a democracy and not in a communist country, and I know so because I have the information to compare...

So, what I wonder is how this holds reference to the original poll all this (very interesting though by now very off-topic) discussion started about. I think we agree that democracy is better then the system the sovjet union used, right? Doesn't that translate into the usefulness of a poll in the taking of a decision?

[Cogliostro]

No, I'm afraid we don't exactly agree.

Didn't you know? The Soviet Union too billed itself as the country where the citizens are free, in fact, the free-est and most highly educated citizens on the earth, that's the Soviets under Stalin.

When you're taught to say, in school, that this is pure propaganda, it's pretty hard to say anything else about it. Very well! It is propaganda, but if a word of what you just said about living in a free country and having great choices and access to information is true, then so is what the Soviets said about themselves.

It is absolutely the exact same thing. They are two things equally true and untrue, despite the fact that several decades have passed and the exact notions of "freedom", "choice", "Information" have naturally continued to change. If one is propaganda, in the pejorative sense, the other certainly is too. Have you ever stopped to wonder why you'd think that propaganda is such a bad thing though? Originally, that word shortened a longer ecclesiastical phrase which meant "the gathering for spreading of the faith".

That's why you were not really able to perceive an alternative AS alternative, even when Nalaris spelled it out explicitly. You were still talking about how there's no better alternative, and how lucky it is that you're here to teach to Nalaris the great democratic principles of the modern free nations of the world. Have a little look-see for yourself, your posts to each other are all still there.

Check out what Nalaris is talking about there, dev teams, efficiency, best practices, scientific method, what results come from what, historical precedent, keystone competency... And then Henkie out of the blue calls Nalaris a Socialist, the exact same way a fat greasy Cardinal might've woken up in the middle of a meeting for the spreading of the faith in the middle of the Middle Ages, and shouted "HERETIC!"

[EchoMan]

There is a Non-Cantr-Related Discussion forum for discussions about politics and what not.

Discussions in this part of the forum should be related to Cantr.

[freiana]

If you will look through my posts, you will see that at several points I did say thinks should be discussed, overthought, all the things you and Nalaris both want, but that we should -also- think of what the people want. I have clearly stated I would not want to make decision purely based on this, I want it to be -part- of the method.
I believe that if we want to make a change that will affect all people, there should be a broad base of acceptance with those people, influenced by this change -and- the plan must be perfectionized in the way you say it should. These two are by no means opposites, they should be used well-balanced.

Sorry, EchoMan. We're getting carried away, I realize that. I do believe that it is related to Cantr, though, as the way decision are made is discussed...

[Cogliostro]

Yeah, EchoMan - this is the clash of giants, and was from the start. Overlapping Cantr / Forum / Metapolitical learn-from-each-other gathering. Repressing things like this with moderator red print could lead to erectile dysfunction and sleep problems years down the line.

Freiana, I just know that Henkie and you are good people who are trying their best to be good.

But it's an ongoing emergency in Cantr. The combat system doesn't fit. At all.
The arguments good people make as a result of that system's failings are delusional (like the "they can't wipe out a town" thing).
The subsequent GAB nerfing decisions made using irrelevant polls and as a result of player backlash have step by step rendered the game stagnant and sterile.

Gotta work hard on it, and fix it already, at the source of the problem.

[freiana]

What you have to accept is that even though a group of people(do realize, I am in that group) think changes should be made this is not directly TRUE. If it is true then it should be possible to convince others of the need of change through solid argumentation. Once convinced they are able to change their input through the poll. This way there is a solid base for the change and thus it can be implemented without argueing afterwards and people running away angrily.
There will always be a group against change, but if an idea is really good the majority can be convinced.

[Henkie]

Cogliostro, I won't feed it to you, but maybe it's a good idea to fine all the subjective theories in your posts... You are very convinced of your own righteousness (nothing wrong with that, most people have that), but you advocate it as facts... Repeatedly.
Sure, if you could break down to zip and start over your systems might work, but they won't be accepted into the current 'flow', and that's the biggest problem I have and always had with you and your suggestions (and I think I can safely say I'm not alone). You advocate a NEW system, instead of IMPROVING the current, history pretty well shows that doesn't work.

[EchoMan]

Anyone who can not keep their discussions in a respectful and polite manner will face a forum ban. Repeated offences leads to longer bans and eventually a game ban too. If you can't be civilized go somewhere else and don't be it.

[Nalaris]

Oh my god, I log off for the night and this thread gets Godwin'd hard. Bugger all. I'm just gonna back up and try and find the last post that was actually about the game or its community and not the Soviet Union or whatever...

As I said, a poll can be an indication of what people want, an argument that can be used in the discussion.

Okay, that looks good. I've answered this one before, though: No, a poll is not an indication of what people want. It's an indication of what a fraction of a fraction of people want. It's deceptive and useless data that tells us absolutely nothing. If people want to have a voice in the discussion, they can just, y'know, post. And actually contribute to the conversation. And preferably not start an argument about who hates the commies more.

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

Oh, wow, it's an actually on-topic post, that's cool.

Dragging someone into a building to gank them kills roleplay by chopping up the battle into tiny pieces which can't be seen by half the participants. The point of the battering ram is that it makes dragging people into a building and locking it an utterly useless strategy that no one will ever attempt (unless a town is new or foolish enough not to have a battering ram on hand). If battles happen in the main part of a town rather than in locked huts and vans, there's no particular incentive not to roleplay after you've finished smacking people around. In my opinion, combat isn't working right until dragging isn't a part of it and gank tactics are suicidal unless you actually outnumber the opponent by a huge margin, because those two things are what make it impossible to roleplay a battle. Attackers isolate themselves with a small number of defenders who are killed instantly, no one talks. Boring.

[Black Canyon]

The point of the battering ram is that it makes dragging people into a building and locking it an utterly useless strategy that no one will ever attempt (unless a town is new or foolish enough not to have a battering ram on hand).

Actually... I personally don't think that the dragging and locking should be an utterly useless strategy. But I like the idea that a response to this strategy can be added to the game. I like the battering ram idea for a few reasons, one being that it would require some collaboration and cooperation from a number of characters in order to be effective. If the town itself doesn't have enough awake characters to participate, then radios could be used to enlist the help of nearby towns.

[Nalaris]

I don't see any good in the drag and lock approach. It's bizarre to picture, it lopsides the fight in favor of people who are online at the same time rather than people who are better prepared for a fight, it makes it far more difficult to RP a battle, it's completely unrealistic. What is dragging and locking bringing to the table to make up for all that?

[Black Canyon]

Well... it's an effective strategy, for one thing. And.... it's how things have been done in the world of Cantr. You do realize that there are many things in Cantr that are unrealistic.... right? I disagree that RP can't happen. If you look at the Pirate Hunt story, the drag and lock strategy was used throughout that saga and there was a bit of RP there as well.

However, I believe the battering ram might be something that could provide an incentive to negotiation (and hence RP), since it could eventually succeed in breaking down the door and rescuing victims or apprehending criminals or whatever...

[Nalaris]

Well, yeah, it's an effective strategy, that means nothing. Its being an effective strategy is an unintended side effect of the way the game was designed. You're supposed to be able to drag people against their will and you're supposed to be able to stab them to death, but I can promise you Jos didn't sit down and say "yes, these two should combine into a super-strategy that is vastly superior to everything else that anyone could ever try." It was a mistake, and sticking by a mistake just because "that's the way we've always done it" is a bad idea. Just because RP isn't always quashed by the drag and lock strategy doesn't mean it doesn't dramatically reduce the amount of RP. Yeah, sure, one saga had occasional bouts of in-battle RP. But how many battles don't? Battles are rare and important enough that every single one should have some notable RP to it, but most don't and that is a tremendous failure of the system. The fact that the failure has been around for a while is not a reason to keep it.

[freiana]

I think I agree with Black Canyon here. A battering ram is a good idea, and it creates a situation that forces the 'draggers' to RP something if used well; when the door is rammed out, they will face the entire town, possibly warned people from other towns, too. In my opinion the biggest problem with the dragging/fighting is the lack of RP, and this, if used good, could solve that problem.
-if- there is still no RP going on, we might also consider that this is a lack from the people who play it. In essence, Cantr never forces us to RP anything. We could live an entire life in our green world without ever saying one word if we wanted to, it is not only true for this particular situation. The game relies heavily on people RP'ing, if they don't, it might be more a mistake from the people than from the system.

[Nalaris]

No. It is not a coincidence that people roleplay everything except battles. If battles were roleplayable, I guarantee they would be roleplayed.