| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
twilights 
Postmaster
Joined: 21 May 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 915
|
 Posted: 07 Jun 2015 at 20:11 |
|
i make baked goods all the time, i raise plants and animals for food, i play games, yes i am human but as i said we are playing a game. when they gone we continue and even when we humans are gone we continue...i suggest u make dinner for your family tonight and garnish it to make it look wonderful..omg i hope its eaten and then its gone....try playing the game competitively....u might enjoy even losing as long as u are playing....there are outs in baseball!
|
 |
ajqtrz
Postmaster
Joined: 24 May 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 500
|
Posted: 07 Jun 2015 at 19:54 |
|
The following was in a separate thread which Rikoo thought too redundant. I think not, but he has the ability to do what he thinks best, so I've moved it to here. Sorry if it clutters this discussion somewhat. AJ
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A definition is not a sacred thing. It is, though, a touchstone upon
which disagreements can be adjudicated. There are those who would like
me to quit quoting definitions. They somehow seem to think that a word
can mean whatever they want it to mean and if it doesn't exactly fit,
well, too bad.
Let us imagine a world where that is the norm.
Where if I call you a "racist pig" I don't have to mean what you think
the term means. In that world the phrase, "racist pig" can mean "nice
guy" to me and something else to you. In which case the defense for
slander would be "when I called you a 'racist pig' I meant "nice guy."
After which everybody breaths better because obviously "racist pig'
could mean exactly whatever I want it to mean.
Or perhaps, you
call me a "racist pig" and you believe that it means "nice guy." How
clever. Now I can't legally declare that you have slandered me because a
word can mean whatever you want...right? But I can send my armies.
And if I destroy all your cities and run you out of the game have I
proved that the phrase "racist pig" cannot mean "nice guy?" Of course
not. Silencing the debate ends the debate and no conclusions can be
drawn.
So how do we avoid the scenarios described here? How do
we decide what a word means when it's in dispute. Ahhh...you got it!
We use the dictionary. In formal debate a debater who does not have
reasonable support for key terms -- reasonable support meaning
authoritative definitions -- is usually at a great disadvantage.
In
the end then, I will continue to quote and use definitions from
authoritative sources. If you are wise you too will stop denigrating
their use as it seems pretty silly to me for you to be arguing with
Webster. I think he has more clout in the realm definitions than you.
|
|
ajqtrz
Postmaster
Joined: 24 May 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 500
|
Posted: 06 Jun 2015 at 03:07 |
|
What if this is what I enjoy? What if I like to play the game as I do and all the negative responses to my comments are enjoyable to me?
What if I like to crusade in the world of ideas and try to get game players everywhere to remember that behind each avatar is a real person?
You see, I don't think the discussions I'm having are with imaginary beings. I think the thoughts expressed are real people thinking and real people writing. Thus, if I change their mind about one thing or another, I'm doing what I like to do and having fun doing it.
My problem is when people choose to bring weapons to the discussion that are inappropriate to the discussion.
Suppose you and I are having a debate and I am "losing"...meaning I'm seeing that I'm not putting up an argument good enough to "defeat" your argument. Does that mean I'm not right? Maybe, maybe not. In any case, there is one way I can respond that is civil. I can do a better job of arguing by gathering more information, more evidence, and more reasonable arguments. And there is one way I can respond that is uncivil: I can simply go over to the game and take out a few of your cities.
Which course of action is appropriate? Which course has a chance of actually showing you that you are wrong and that I am right? Will you be persuaded once all your cities are destroyed and you've left the game for other lands? Will that help the game be better? Will it mean other players will engage me in debates? Will it encourage anything but silence and fear?
You cannot have civil debate when debaters are allowed to threaten each other. You cannot have reasonable discourse if you use other weapons than reason. I enjoy reasonable debate and learn much from it. Do you?
AJ
Edited by ajqtrz - 06 Jun 2015 at 03:09
|
|
ajqtrz
Postmaster
Joined: 24 May 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 500
|
Posted: 05 Jun 2015 at 22:54 |
|
Brids1,
I can answer what happens as that is a matter of history. But whether it should or should not happen, that is a matter of ethics. So what do you think?
AJ
|
|
ajqtrz
Postmaster
Joined: 24 May 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 500
|
Posted: 05 Jun 2015 at 22:51 |
|
Twi, are you a pretend person? Are the emotions, good and bad, you experience in playing the game imaginary? Do magical fingers type and click the mouse? The game is an imaginary journey but it is a human one too. A long time ago Aristotle discussed the importance of the imagination and our enjoyment of stories. In his discussion he suggested that stories are "cathartic" and that we draw our enjoyment from them. Thus, while many would like to pretend that there is a giant wall between their character on line and their actual person sitting in the seat before the computer (or whatever device you use), that wall is what is mostly a pretense.
Try this experiment. Try building in whatever game you like, something that takes a long time, a lot of personal creativity, and is something admired by other players. Then don't defend it against any attacks. Just let people walk all over it, totally destroying it against you will. Now I ask you two questions: why did you care? and why did you want it protected? It's just an imaginary thing for heavens sake. The hours you put into it were not imaginary hours, of course. And the skills you learned are not imaginary. So why would you be frustrated if somebody just destroyed it?
My argument is simple. It's YOU, not your imaginary character in an imaginary world, who decides to spend the time and energy building things up, and it's YOU who experience the thrill of being well respected, not your imaginary character. Thus, as much as you would like to call it, "just a game" it's probably not, otherwise you wouldn't feel proud of what you had accomplished.
You may understand that the world of play is imaginary, but remember you carry your real self into that world.
AJ
|
|
Brids17
Postmaster General
Joined: 30 Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1483
|
Posted: 05 Jun 2015 at 05:02 |
 ajqtrz wrote:
4) In what ways does a discussion become a war? And if it does, should it spill over into the game? Should people be punished in the game for what they say in the forums? If so, does that not give control of the forums to the larger players and alliances? Can they not censor a speaker who does not say what they say that speaker should say? |
You should be able to answer that one yourself.
Dungshoveleux wrote:
Rule 7?
That's rule 1 surely 
Rule 1: There are no rules. Rule 2: Please refer to rule 1. |
I thought rule 1 and 2 was that you don't talk about the rules?
Edited by Brids17 - 05 Jun 2015 at 05:09
|
|
|
|
Dungshoveleux
Postmaster
Joined: 09 Nov 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 935
|
Posted: 04 Jun 2015 at 08:28 |
Rule 7?
That's rule 1 surely 
Rule 1: There are no rules. Rule 2: Please refer to rule 1.
|
|
Artefore
Forum Warrior
Player Council - Biographer
Joined: 21 Feb 2014
Location: Earf
Status: Offline
Points: 312
|
Posted: 04 Jun 2015 at 07:07 |
|
Rule 7: There is no rule 7.
|
|
"don't quote me on that" -Artefore
|
|
twilights
Postmaster
Joined: 21 May 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 915
|
Posted: 04 Jun 2015 at 02:09 |
|
its a pretend mmo game, really aj use should try playing it and maybe you would enjoy it...but play as you want, just have fun! when it ends your real life will go on.
|
|
ajqtrz
Postmaster
Joined: 24 May 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 500
|
Posted: 04 Jun 2015 at 00:10 |
|
I guess I'm more interested in civil discussions since I don't believe it's really possible to separate the real person behind the character from the character and thus, what I do to or in response to others here reflects my character in RL. The idea that "it's just a game" is pretty much too often an excuse to engage in behaviors the person would never do in RL.. but because they can pretend that it's not a real person they are addressing in Illy, their are only the strictly defined "don'ts" of the user agreement. This seems rather odd to me. I don't think when a player gets upset it's a pretend character but a real person at the keyboard and I do think one must take that into account.
As for feelings not being evidence, of course feelings are evidence, especially to the one who is doing the feeling. But what causes feelings anyway? If I feel strongly about this or that reference point if I expect you to feel the same way and you don't should I be surprised? And if I don't should you feeling about the matter be persuasive to me? Somehow I think many quesitons must be discussed beyond the state of our current emotions. To stay with feelings alone is to forget that we are also rational creatures and that there is a reality outside of our feelings that may be different from the perceptions upon which we may be basing our feelings.
It's interesting to me that several posts seem to think I'm asking about this sandbox. A sandbox it may be, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't have some level of civility for the very reasons just given: there are real people hitting the keys and whatever emotions they display in their words and actions those emotions are just as real as the player experiencing them.
Thus, to my way of thinking, one ought to "consider also the things of others" in this cyberspace we share and remember you aren't really speaking to an Orc, Dwarf or Elf, or "human character" but to a real person.
A study was done where a large group of persons were given an online game and a "role" to play. Many of the participants knew each other in RL. They remained separate for the entire 48 hours of the game and at the end were asked to identify which character was being played by which person. Almost all the players were identifiable by their friends even though they tried to play the character they were assigned and to hide their true identity. From this the researchers conclude that we give all kinds of clues about who we really are in these games, an observation with which I concur as I've experienced it myself.
Thus, in the forums when we discuss we generally use the same approach to communication as we do in RL...meaning if we are unpleasant or vindictive in the forums we are probably so in RL at least to some degree. It's food for thought, itsn't it?
AJ
|
|
Tweet
Meta Discussion
