Implied vs. Explicit

[Dudel]

So now we're taking what players emote over what's in the interface? I thought you were explicit about everything. Cantr only explicitly talks about humanity.

In fact I dare you to show me a place where anything non-human is mentioned.

The mechanics don't say jack-shit about "humanity". YOU, the player, imply and/or assume it. I as another player assume otherwise. They also DON'T say anything about beasts, non-humans, etc.

And I can't show you as its written down in those imaginary rules the PD likes to enforce. If PD allows "cat people" or "lizard people" then Cantr mechanics DO NOT state "Human" or "Homosapian".

This was covered within that thread I linked, already.

Cantrinians ARE NOT, WILL NEVER BE and forever shall be stuck as NOT HUMAN. This means they are possibly beast, however there is not a single statement (AS I'VE ACTUALLY SAID) that they are... meaning Cantrinians are neither man nor beast but clearly must be one... so are neither and both.

Cantrinians are only Cantrininans... thus they aren't human and your "logic" regarding their features does not apply to them. Story end.

Cantr mechanics do NOT apply to touch, taste, smell, a sense of time, a sense of weather, an understanding of the "moon and stars" or a concept "humanity". Cantrmecanics and the CR loosely imply human like people who appear to be male and/or female. Time is an OOC concept and without mention of sky, stars, sun and moon they simply are not there.

[Ryaga]

So now we're taking what players emote over what's in the interface? I thought you were explicit about everything. Cantr only explicitly talks about humanity.

In fact I dare you to show me a place where anything non-human is mentioned.

The mechanics don't say jack-shit about "humanity". YOU, the player, imply and/or assume it. I as another player assume otherwise. They also DON'T say anything about beasts, non-humans, etc.

And I can't show you as its written down in those imaginary rules the PD likes to enforce. If PD allows "cat people" or "lizard people" then Cantr mechanics DO NOT state "Human" or "Homosapian".

This was covered within that thread I linked, already.

Cantrinians ARE NOT, WILL NEVER BE and forever shall be stuck as NOT HUMAN. This means they are possibly beast, however there is not a single statement (AS I'VE ACTUALLY SAID) that they are... meaning Cantrinians are neither man nor beast but clearly must be one... so are neither and both.

Cantrinians are only Cantrininans... thus they aren't human and your "logic" regarding their features does not apply to them. Story end.

So wait wait now you're arguing with nearly every English dictionary ever written Dudel?

Man - A male member of the species Homo sapiens.
Woman - A female member of the species Homo sapiens.

I don't care what PD says, Cantr says human. I don't say human. Cantr does. If you want to assume the have fingers growing out of their lungs on their inside because I only SEE a man that's fine but for all intents and purposes their outside is that of a human.

http://www.onelook.com/?w=man&ls=a Don't mess with the dictionary man.

Even found this:

# (n.) A human being; -- opposed tobeast.

[EchoMan]

Cantrinians ARE NOT, WILL NEVER BE and forever shall be stuck as NOT HUMAN.

I'll just quote the goodies (and save it in my Dudel quote-book), and keep laughing. So many characters you spend in this crusade.

[Doug R.]

The PD, to my knowledge, has never "allowed" non-humans into the game. The only instance I can think of where I've even seen this was the octo-arm portal man, and the player was contacted. I know of a dog and a cat-person, but they're delusional humans. Also know of reptilians, but they started out human and changed over time in a role-played process unique to their town. As usual, you're arguments are on based on very thin foundations, Dudel.

[Piscator]

Well, strictly speaking Cantrians are not completely human with their odd sleeping behavior, mode of reproduction etc., but these are all modifications made to the human base model, so they are human except in those instances where they clearly aren't.

[SekoETC]

I was reading some descriptions the other day for statistics and there was somebody with a four foot tongue, which did make me laugh but at the same time I thought that's very wrong. Also there was somebody with pointed ears, which is a bit on the edge - in real life it can happen with Williams syndrome but there are developmental problems connected with that. I don't know the character so I don't know if they want to suggest they are an elf, that they just happen to have unusual ears or have Williams syndrome. Also there is somebody describing themselves as a bear. I think it's a Spanish character. I didn't want to report it because it sounds like they have been doing it before descriptions were implemented and others have played along. Also there are people with unusual eye and hair colors, but that was handled in a poll earlier and quite a large percentage of people wanted to stretch the palette a bit, so if somebody wants to have pitch black eyes with no visible iris, or neon green eyes or what ever, I can live with that.

[trojo]

The evidence that Cantrians are human, or at least humanoid, is pretty substantial. You can only wear one pair of gloves at a time, which pretty well establishes that you only have one pair of hands. If you had six hands, you'd be able to wear three pairs of gloves. Similarly with shoes-- can only wear one pair because you've only got the one pair of feet to wear them on. There's no other logical explanation for being able to wear only one pair each of shoes and gloves.

Clothing descriptions also directly reference the wearer's ankles, shins, calves, knees, thighs, hips, waist, torso, shoulders, elbows, wrists, neck, head, face, eyes, ears, nose. Even if a character doesn't wear clothing, they nonetheless could wear clothing, so as far as the game is concerned, they explicitly have all such body parts in the customary quantities.

To deny the obvious humanity of Cantrians is not an "explicit" approach to the game world; it is a refusal to accept aspects of the game world that are in fact explicitly described.

[EchoMan]

I was reading some descriptions the other day for statistics and there was somebody with a four foot tongue, which did make me laugh but at the same time I thought that's very wrong. Also there was somebody with pointed ears, which is a bit on the edge - in real life it can happen with Williams syndrome but there are developmental problems connected with that. I don't know the character so I don't know if they want to suggest they are an elf, that they just happen to have unusual ears or have Williams syndrome. Also there is somebody describing themselves as a bear. I think it's a Spanish character. I didn't want to report it because it sounds like they have been doing it before descriptions were implemented and others have played along. Also there are people with unusual eye and hair colors, but that was handled in a poll earlier and quite a large percentage of people wanted to stretch the palette a bit, so if somebody wants to have pitch black eyes with no visible iris, or neon green eyes or what ever, I can live with that.

The player of that char (assuming there's only one with pointed ears) stated in IRC that she wanted to play an elf. Clearly some pollution coming our way from FTO.

[Dudel]

So wait wait now you're arguing with nearly every English dictionary ever written Dudel?

Man - A male member of the species Homo sapiens.
Woman - A female member of the species Homo sapiens.

I don't care what PD says, Cantr says human. I don't say human. Cantr does. If you want to assume the have fingers growing out of their lungs on their inside because I only SEE a man that's fine but for all intents and purposes their outside is that of a human.

http://www.onelook.com/?w=man&ls=a Don't mess with the dictionary man.

Even found this:

# (n.) A human being; -- opposed tobeast.

Sadly, that logic STILL doesn't apply to Cantr. Cantr IS NOT "our earth" and a "Cantr man" is NOT the same as an "earth man". Seko pointed out, there are "issues" with your logic by the very fact.

Dough, even your listing doesn't disprove my notion in the slightest bit. You say there are, IN FACT, dogs, cats and reptiles within Cantr. That ALONE, disproves that Cantrinians ARE human. They are Cantrinians and as such our understanding of "humans" doesn't apply.... because they CLEARLY can also be beast.

With custom descriptions in effect the argument of "two gloves/boots/whatever/etc" doesn't technically apply anymore (as you are at least allowed a third or forth arm via the CR), provided the characters made enough gloves and keep the items in their inventory. Not to mention that Cantr mechanics state you can't wear pants over pants, when the RL world states you can (and depending on the weather you've got no choice in that matter). Cantr also doesn't let you wear more than one pair of socks, which RL states you can provided your shoes are big enough.

So.... not human, again. Cause humans CAN actually wear multiple pairs of gloves as well as multiple pairs of socks and other items. You can only wear two rings and one pair of earrings in Cantr as well. Humans can wear a LOT more than that. So.... don't use realistic arguments, they just do NOT apply to Cantr and NEVER will.

Cantrinians are both human and beast but at the same time they are neither. Cantrinians are just Cantrinians and as such, EVERY "earth assumption" doesn't apply to them and can be quickly discredited by another player. Cantr mechanics only loosely imply sex (male/female) while showing Cantrinains MIGHT look similar to humans while at the same time that Cantrinians can see. That's the honest extent of it. It could be argued that a Cantrinian has no shape until he wears clothes, which was stated elsewhere in a joking matter by someone else.

The GAB has discussed it and concluded that Cantr characters are human, or as human as they can be as dictated by the game mechanics. That still leaves a great deal open to interpretation by the players.

And Cantr mechanics don't actually say human at all.

This Cantr purity behavior needs to be left in game but it is one of the many aspects that drive away new players. I know because I hear the bitching 2nd hand.

Repeat, I'm a VERY explicit player... and I can't be proved wrong in any notion simply because Cantr mechanics don't support 99% of other player assumptions. Hell not even the PD can agree on most things that aren't otherwise already stated.

[returner]

Dudel, it seems your assumptions are based on the idea that you cannot assume anything.. but you realise you assume that yourself, thus creating an internal hypocricy of yourself?

It reminds me of some philosophical ideology which used to guide my life. It was the idea that you can't assume anything as every piece of knowledge is subjective, or opinionated - even something objective is very human and very subjective to humans overall.
I spoke with someone who had a PhD and wrote a book or article on metaphysics. He explained how we have to forego fear of subjectiveness in relation to knowledge until we have a better way of explaining things that is completely objective, and not human.

It relates to your argument, Dudel. You seem to boil things down to the most basic of basic, which is where the problem lies.

One must assume the Cantr world is the Human world in every way, and the 'game mechanics' are simply restrictions that are not programmed in yet; that is all they are and nothing more.

Dudel, if we assume the Cantr world is not the Human world and we cannot use realistic arguments, then you are determined to fail in every single aspect possible.

If you use the Dudel argument, Cantr is not even a fairy tale story. It has no explanation for beingness, no explanation for environment and no explanation for cause/effect. Every possible explanation contradicts the other. It becomes a false reality, Cantr quickly becomes a 'Chatroom' with a few fun things to do here and there.

You said it could be argued Cantrians have no shape until they wear clothes.

I absolutely see where you're coming from, and appreciate it, but please remember that Jos has already set out the guidelines and explanations to the world of Cantr. It is a simulator of society. Society is a real-world thing from our Human world. Therefore, Cantr is Human. Cantr world is Human world. Cantrians are Humans. This is final and definite.

Otherwise, there is no ground. All buildings are theoretical; they do not exist, but they do, and in order from 1 to 10, in no physical sense but an ideological sense. All objects exist and do not. They are listed in order - but not physical.
There is no physical, because of a lack of programming and a lack of visual elements.

Therefore, all Cantrians are no human, they are 'ideas' floating around in an 'idea' land, according to Dudel.

Cantr is one big 'idea', with no concrete explanation for existence. As mentioned earlier, it could not even be a book, as it has no firm groundings (literally) for existance.
^ according to Dudel.

[returner]

Perhaps I'll pose my response to Dudel in the form of questions for him, so we can all clearly understand his point of view and so I can summarise my huge post.

1) What are Cantrians? If not human, are they some kind of 'general idea' based upon the sum of all players?

2) What are physical objects in the world, and how do they exist? Buildings, objects on the ground, resources being harvested.. Do they follow any laws we see in the real world? Or do they have their own?

3) Have you considered the reasons for game mechanics existing? Have you considered that game mechanics which INHIBIT or stop certain things being done (which could be done in real life) are just programming flaws/inadequacies?

Cantr mechanics do NOT apply to touch, taste, smell, a sense of time, a sense of weather, an understanding of the "moon and stars" or a concept "humanity". Cantrmecanics and the CR loosely imply human like people who appear to be male and/or female. Time is an OOC concept and without mention of sky, stars, sun and moon they simply are not there.

4) Do you realise that the only reason Cantr is not explicit is due to the complexity of the REAL WORLD and the limitations of PROGRAMMING? If so, you must also realise that your argument is moot/pointless?

[cantrfan]

I always pictured Cantrians as Lego people o_O lol... jk... maybe.

To contribute to the topic; Because I have no knowledge of a planet that functions like Cantr in real life, I've always seen Cantr as an "earth-like" planet with "human-like" people. I think it's easier to relate to if we think of it as an "earth-like" planet rather than some skyless, blob-like people, where crops can grow endlessly with no sun or anything.

I think it is perfectly acceptable that a lot of the implied stuff is reasonable to view Cantr having ( a sky, wind, a sun etc ). But having said that and to go off the original question, I will always lean towards explicit first and then build around that, reasonable implied views of Cantr as long as it does not disrupt the game mechanics. By reasonable implied views I mean that in one example; Cantrians are human-like. But of course because of game mechanics (one mechanic being that Cantrians do not 'poo' lol) they are not like you or I.

No idea if I made any sense because it is really late and I'm super tired, rofl.

Interesting topic though.

[cantrfan]

4) Do you realise that the only reason Cantr is not explicit is due to the complexity of the REAL WORLD and the limitations of PROGRAMMING?

Also, have to agree with this statement and the fact that Cantr II as a game, is changing (and has changed game mechanics since coming back I found many new things that use to never be). Which just goes back to my other statement about it being within reason to assume that Cantr is "earth-like". Only so much programming can do. As a game, the game is not really finished and always improving. So unless it actually says "there is no sky, only nothingness) than I still think assuming that (along with the other reasonable stuff) is OK.

[AlchemicRaker]

Cantr mechanics do NOT apply to touch, taste, smell, a sense of time, a sense of weather, an understanding of the "moon and stars" or a concept "humanity". Cantrmecanics and the CR loosely imply human like people who appear to be male and/or female. Time is an OOC concept and without mention of sky, stars, sun and moon they simply are not there.

4) Do you realise that the only reason Cantr is not explicit is due to the complexity of the REAL WORLD and the limitations of PROGRAMMING? If so, you must also realise that your argument is moot/pointless?

I think what Doug was trying to state, in the perfect logical sense, was: Staff decided Cantrians are Humans, except where game mechanics specifically cause conflict with the definition of "human".

It's just like the note in the description rules... the game mechanics trump RP, but they don't define RP.

- Natso

[Dudel]

You want to roll this dice? Alright, let's roll this dice.

Therefore, all Cantrians are no human, they are 'ideas' floating around in an 'idea' land, according to Dudel.

Cantr is one big 'idea', with no concrete explanation for existence. As mentioned earlier, it could not even be a book, as it has no firm groundings (literally) for existance.
^ according to Dudel.

I suppose I could have gone with the whole "Cantrinians are Figments" aspect but then I'll get the thought of "You could be someone else's figment, too." Which gets annoying, fast.... boiling down to perception which only counts from the first person... which Cantrinians don't witness, anyway. As you witness events for them.

1) What are Cantrians? If not human, are they some kind of 'general idea' based upon the sum of all players?

On a purely technical level they don't exist at all. Cantrinians are as real as the Easter bunny, Santa Clause and other such figments. Which, according to whom you talk too... all look different and react differently.

2) What are physical objects in the world, and how do they exist? Buildings, objects on the ground, resources being harvested.. Do they follow any laws we see in the real world? Or do they have their own?

The objects in Cantr that are actually stated by the mechanics just exist as they are. There isn't anything attached to them and no extra qualifications to be had.

A "stone hammer" is a piece of wood with a hunk of stone attached to it. Stone and wood being the resources within Cantr as they are.

As resources are infinite, stuff just appears from nothing and keeps coming. An endless source of intangible matter.

3) Have you considered the reasons for game mechanics existing? Have you considered that game mechanics which INHIBIT or stop certain things being done (which could be done in real life) are just programming flaws/inadequacies?

Cantr mechanics, even those which inhibit "real life" existences within the interface make Cantr a unique world compared to everything we know. There are special physics within the Cantr world that somehow prevent you from striking someone twice within the same day. Things that don't exist within our own world. They are not a flaw/inadequacy in the system until deemed as such AND REMOVED for something better. At which point the Cantr world physics simply change to fit a new "Cantrinian reality".

Cantr mechanics do NOT apply to touch, taste, smell, a sense of time, a sense of weather, an understanding of the "moon and stars" or a concept "humanity". [Cantr mechanics] and the CR loosely imply human like people who appear to be male and/or female. Time is an OOC concept and without mention of sky, stars, sun and moon they simply are not there.

4) Do you realise that the only reason Cantr is not explicit is due to the complexity of the REAL WORLD and the limitations of PROGRAMMING? If so, you must also realise that your argument is moot/pointless?

Do you realize that the reason Cantr is explicit is due to the limitations of the mechanics itself? Do you realize that every time an explicit player "does something" he/she can not be at fault as there is no statement which claims them wrong or another one correct? Do you realize that being an implied player makes you susceptible to CRB infractions of the most asinine reports? Do YOU realize that the explicit player CAN NOT and forever WILL NOT be proven wrong with any thought he/she has about the Cantr world simply because mechanics of the world forever trump the RP of said world? You, the Implied player "RP" that something exists and the mechanics say neither for nor against... it could be argued ANY mention of any concepts I have set forth is a breach of the CR. It is ONLY because of majority mentality that players are not punished for this. Not that I think they should be punished for it, it is simply a fact of the matter. It is, technically, a breach of the CR.


The complexity of the "real world" has no relevance on a game which VAGUELY resembles it. Do rag doll physics have any relevance within the real world? Do people's spines snap when you shoot them in the foot with a small caliber pistol? Does fire spread in a chaotic pattern not resembling anything other than "square-to-square" not being influenced by wind or rain in any manner? In any other game I have EVER played, if there is no sky or mention of sky... there is no sky. Cantr is this retarded exception? No, I am sorry. Cantr is not an exception simply because the players want it to be.

Game mechanics don't have semblance to the real world. Cantr is forever a game (an idea or figment if you want to be a prick and pretend you're a philosophy major). There is no "Simulation of Cantr", there might HAVE BEEN but there isn't now and the less Cantr states about it's world, the less of it's world actually exists. Jos HIMSELF could come in here and say "Cantr has a sky, moon, etc," and there still wouldn't be such things within the Cantr world until he put the mechanics in for them.

You add more mechanics (or alter current ones) and make the game world "more real" and THEN come talk to me about real world arguments in reference to Cantr.... but they still wont apply.



Oh, how about this Mr. I-Think-Therefore-I-Am. "Nothing exists until we, as humans, perceive it." Let us apply it to Cantr. Oh wait... Cantrinians only see a few things, don't they? Oh snap, there isn't a sky, moon, time, etc again. Not to mention that the annoying phrase "I think, therefore I am." discredits Cantrinian existence as we think FOR THEM... meaning if they don't exist how in THE FUCK could their world?

I don't like rolling this dice, can we roll a different one? One with less philosophical bullshit and more facts? I don't like philosophical bullshit.


Again, I don't care if people RP anything about the sun, etc.. I'm just saying that they don't technically exist and I make no mention of them, myself. I'm not going to go "What sky? Durr durr durr" In game simply because that breaks what little immersion Cantr has and there isn't any harm in thinking it. But it's still not there, the sky.