Author's Note: This was spurred by a few events, including the one under discussion on Drunsthol's forum, as well as dealing with a few especially miserable players regarding our rules. I don't like cluttering other people's 'turf', so I'm starting a thread here.

Quoth Nepenthe:
Simply put, there's enough work in maintaining/running CF for the players that try to respect the effort, play in the spirit of the game, and generally make things fun for us, too, that I'm just not inclined to take any amount of #### from someone who isn't.

More broadly:

You do not have a right to play Carrion Fields. (Neither do I.) Concepts like 'free speech' do not apply. If an Immortal notices you breaking a rule, they will explain matters as a courtesy, but it does not really matter if you agree with the validity of their decision (*). It is a game provided for free by a dedicated group of volunteers. When you first approach the game, you are effectively given an invitation to enjoy that game. It's like a house party, and they're opening the door for you.

However, if you convince that group that you detract from the game, they can ask you to leave. They can delete any of the space that your character occupies on their hard drives. Just like the house party example, you're invited by default, but that doesn't mean you cannot be uninvited. You don't have to break the law. They can just make that decision.

When you consider this, keep in mind that this same group of hosts has an incentive to keep you- they like having a lot of people enjoying their party. It's why they're throwing a party, after all. As a matter of fact, it's often more work for them to exclude you once you're there (**). And they certainly aren't wandering around uninviting people for no reason- that's bad for the life of the party. However, if you've ever hosted a party, you've probably run into at least a couple people who piss off other guests, break stuff, etc. If it happens once, maybe you figure they had too much to drink, or they're clumsy, or they had a bad day. If it happens a few times, you eventually decide your party is more fun for you and the rest of your guests if they were not invited.

This is why the huge majority of our players either never get busted over a rules problem, or break them once or twice then stop once they know how and why things are run the way they are.

It is also why I agree with Nepenthe that I do not feel any need to take #### from players who are not in that huge majority. As I think my fellow Immortals would attest, I'm more than willing to bust my ass to try to make CF a better place. I don't ask for money, public adulation, special treatment, etc. But I do expect a certain level of courtesy and cooperation. If the only reason I know your name is that you fill our inboxes with moronic ranting, write us pissy notes, falsely accuse us of conspiratorial cheating, or attempt to ruin the game for other players by slandering them on public forums, etc...

Don't expect a smile and a ####ing cookie if I have to spend time dealing with you.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

(*) People do make mistakes, of course, and we do have a system in place for appealing judgements that you do not feel are correct. However, CF Immortals only need to justify their decision to the satisfaction of the Implementors, and not necessarily to your satisfaction. It's nice if we can do both, but not mandatory.

(**) In CF, at the very least, it involves pulling aside some (usually hostile) person, explaining why you're doing what you're doing, doing it, and then preparing an internal explanation so other IMMs know why you did what you did. It's a pain, and while I (and others) appreciate that it is an important part of running a fair game, I don't think anyone enjoys Rules Duty.

Because it seems well-suited to the ever-expanding thread on the Battlefield, and because it was well-received by the staff of five years ago.

Again, the core of the issue is that we're happy to host a party, and we have every incentive to keep our door open to all guests.... until they take a dump on our couch.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

I had just gotten done with watching adventures in babysitting.
(Hey don't blame me my girl wanted to watch it. I DID laugh at
several parts though. hehe) After reading this thread what popped
into my head from the movie was an early part where and old man
is standing outside the phone booth at a bus station yelling at
a girl inside to "Get outta my house!"

I think much like the old man most of the players have grown
so familiar with the surroundings they really feel like it is
thier home, and the imms, in the way of the folk who run the
bus station tend to ignore most of the piddly behavior. "Yeah, let
the bum alone, we gotta look for the guys with the knives and guns
who are out to really hurt someone".
Some of the players are just those people who apparently go through
life thinking EVERYTHING is thiers. Generally kids get over that
around five or so. Back in the day you ended that when you wanted to,
like I just spanked my kids and they got the idea that maybe that
stuff wasn't theirs. Ya know?
The rest of us are just a bunch of bums who sometimes forget that
the phone booth isn't really our house, even though we keep our
slippers in there, and we don't know what to do when someone actually
needs to use the phone.
*rofl*

aaaaaand because I can never just stop talking and let something
go...

For the past few years, oh man have I really played so much that I
look at a few years as just a portion of the time I've played this
freakin' game??!?!?!? ouch. Okay, wait where was I? Yeaaaaah.
For the past few years I've always tried to keep in mind that the
people I encounter are actually humans sitting at a keyboard
somewhere. The good side is I think I help make it a little more fun
for everyone I encounter, the bad side is it affects my RP in terrible
ways. As in I am at best a bleh Roleplayer. I am that little step
above making people want to vomit. :) Anyway, making things a little
more fun comes out like being warned an assassin is waiting on you
knowing he's stalking and you are about to log out anyway, hell
he's missed the last 3 tries in a row, let's give him his shot and
then log out. Usually after gathering whatever they decide to leave
on my corpse. Heh. I mean really why sweat it, it's a game that you
can only win or lose by what you decide to make your goals this time
around. My goal has been (again for the past few years) Have fun,
and try to help others have fun. hehe. Give it a whirl yourselves,
you might find you like it. For those who can't bring themselves to
risk the set of shineys or their pk ratio or whatever... Try just
remembering that the person you feel like screaming at over whatever
is just someone sitting at a keyboard, sure maybe they really ARE
a total ####, but in the end does it matter to you if they are or not?

Okay time for the James to get his self to bed, Sorry I seem to only
get like this when I start getting the sleep dep thing going on. :)


**edited because I forgot one important thing**
GET OUTTA MY HOUUUUUSE!!!
'cause well... I had to.

With punishing cheaters and, thus, the majority of your post, the party analogy isn't correct in this case.

In a random party you have a ruler and you have guests that have no rights (as they are just guests).
In CF you have somewhat different situation, unless you insist that mortal players contributed nothing to this game (for 15 or so years).

More correct party analogy will be:
You prepare a party, guests participate in that process as well. Maybe buy some food, maybe prepare some show activity, etc.
Then you have some sort of disagrement and throw them away. While it is not always wrong thing to do, especially when the majority of guests agrees with that, sometimes that is not a case. And if you have only you and several other against him (and perhaps several others), he may be a bit disappointed being treated like as if you contribute all and everything is yours and he contributes nothing.

Hrm, I kinda like the new take there, except the folk being
thrown out tend to be the guys who brought little or nothing
and just came to mooch, and the other kind tend to be the guy
who says hey I brought all this beer, I want you to put on a
different cd. Dude it's my stereo my place so....
GET OUTTA MY HOUSE!!!

Okay okay, not all of them are like that, but a good chunk are.
:)
I still like the potluck party analogy. A better fit I think.

>In a random party you have a ruler and you have guests that
>have no rights (as they are just guests).
>In CF you have somewhat different situation, unless you insist
>that mortal players contributed nothing to this game (for 15
>or so years).

The analogy works perfectly, if you consider the implementors to be "room mates" in the house where the party's being held.

Maybe some of the guests have been coming to parties at this house for 15 years. And maybe they've always been good guests. But if they get drunk and puke on my bed, they're getting the boot. If they do the same thing again at the next party...I'm not letting them in the door from that point on.

>Maybe some of the guests have been coming to parties at this
>house for 15 years. And maybe they've always been good
>guests. But if they get drunk and puke on my bed, they're
>getting the boot. If they do the same thing again at the next
>party...I'm not letting them in the door from that point on.

To explain the situation in a few words:
You contribute 70% to a project, somebody else contributes 30%. Now if you are going to act like you have 100% of rights and he has nothing, I can see why he might be disappointed.

Players contribute to other players enjoyment by their mere presence. They don't do any "work" to make the party happen. We don't bring food. We don't bring music. We just show up and dance with one another.

Players contribute to other players enjoyment by their mere
presence. They don't do any "work" to make the party happen.
We don't bring food. We don't bring music.

We just show up and dance with one another.

We create the atmosphere for the game and support it (along with immortals). This is the biggest part of the game. If you take it away, you will just have obsolete ugly C code and 20-years old technology based text game. Keep in mind, some of immortals don't code or pay for servers, they contrubite only by RP as well.

And if you are looking for something material, we, mortals players, also test the code. In evil corporations testers usually get paid and we do that for free.

It hardly can be equal to a random guest on a party.

>We create the atmosphere for the game and support it (along
>with immortals).

Just like attendees at a party create the atmosphere there. Which they benefit from, along with the person (or people) hosting the party. So it's win-win. The host isn't in their debt just because they showed up. Should they start to act like "bad guests", he should feel no compunction about booting them from the party.

>This is the biggest part of the game. If you
>take it away, you will just have obsolete ugly C code and
>20-years old technology based text game.

Take away the staff and you'll have zero players quickly enough. Or you'll have players who "become" staff, and start booting other players, and we're right back where we started.

>And if you are looking for something material, we, mortals
>players, also test the code. In evil corporations testers
>usually get paid and we do that for free.

People who test code, even play testers, don't play those games in the same way we play CF. They have to execute specific test cases. I don't. They're also testing code for someone who's presumably going to make money off it, so it's not surprising that they're paid.

asdf

>And if you are looking for something material, we, mortals
>players, also test the code. In evil corporations testers
>usually get paid and we do that for free.

Out of curiousity, have you ever talked to any genuine software testers? Or game testers, specifically?

No, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. Sorry I couldn’t resist. :P

dsd

I did hear a rumor that on Russian Carrion Fields, code tests you.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

sf

all analogies have flaws. heh. that's why people say LIKE when X.
not WHEN X. :)

When you go to a restaurant, do you take 30% of the credit if the food is great? Which company gives 30% of their profits to their customers? Now, how much credit do they normally take? The staff, at this party, supply all of the food. You don't get to bring any food unless you become part of the staff. What you choose to do with it to enhance your enjoyment and others is up to you.

Everybody dodges the primary point/question of my post so far, so I pick you and ask you directly :)

Do you think that moral players don't contribute to CF? Yes or No?

Another question:
If you think they contribute: how they contribute?

Yes, the players contribute to the game.

They contribute in the exact same way that guests contribute to a party.

They don't bring anything tangible, necessary. But they provide the atmosphere, and a significant part of the entertainment for the OTHER guests.

It really is a pretty sound analogy. You people are trying to complicate it for no reason.

Just a semi-empty house with no cable.

nt

>Do you think that moral players don't contribute to CF? Yes or No?
>If you think they contribute: how they contribute?

Yes. They contribute to other players' enjoyment (which would include the staff) by participating in the game and not being douches. Presumably they also also derive some enjoyment of their own.

So?

This is where you can run into a problem.
They contribute but have no rights. So if you throw them away, they may be disappointed. Some of them may contribute for many years. Contribute their time, efforts and soul (which is actually huge contribution). They part this project, not just as random guests, but let's say, if you prefer a party analogy, as core guests. Does that mean they can do whatever they like? No. But probably they deserved to have their opinion considered.
They also sometimes contribute as staff (but not gain any staff rights). For example, if you find a bug and describe it, you've contributed to the project in a way the staff should do. And you do that for free. Some areas may be written by mortals, other areas were written by former immortals who are now mortals (and thus have no rights). Some players may contribute in RP aspect: running cabals, preparing events or even guide newbies in game or on forums (which is also supposed to be staff job).

And they do that for free. Don't confuse it with the job staff does. While imms also do great job, they don't actually do that for "free". They aren't paid in money, but they are "paid" through different means. They gain power in making decisions, rights to implement their ideas, advanced game knowledge and ruling power. Nothing of that sort mortal players would gain for their contribution.

>They contribute but have no rights. So if you throw them away,
>they may be disappointed.

If they're "thrown away", odds are the staff doesn't want them to come back anyway. So there's no issue there.

>Some of them may contribute for many
>years. They part this project, not just
>as random guests, but let's say, if you prefer a party
>analogy, as core guests.

Seniority doesn't confer special rights. You puke on the couch, you get thrown out of my party. I don't care whether you've been coming to my parties for years. Maybe if you've always been a good guest in the past, I let you come to the next one. But when you demonstrate on a regular basis that you can't hold your liquor and are the sort of person who's likely to ruin my furniture, I stop inviting you altogether.

>They also sometimes contribute as staff (but not gain any
>staff rights). For example, if you find a bug and describe it,
>you've contributed to the project in a way the staff should
>do.

I report bugs for my own benefit because I dislike playing a buggy game.

I run cabals (on occasion) because it's in keeping with my character's role-play, and because there are concrete in-game advantages.

>And they do that for free. Don't confuse it with the job staff
>does. While imms also do great job, they don't actually do
>that for "free". They aren't paid in money, but they are
>"paid" through different means.

Dude. What the staff does *so* doesn't compare to what a player does. Even if they're just sitting in the Gathering Room doing nothing, that means they're *not playing a mortal and doing fun stuff like killing people*. All that so they can answer people's assy prayers and empower people just to see them delete the next day.

>>they may be disappointed.
>
>If they're "thrown away", odds are the staff doesn't want them
>to come back anyway. So there's no issue there.

No issue for the staff, yes (aside from playerbase reduce). The issue is for the thrown person.

>Seniority doesn't confer special rights. You puke on the
>couch, you get thrown out of my party. I don't care whether
>you've been coming to my parties for years.

That's why I don't think the party analogy is good in this case. This is not your personal house. Immortals aren't born, they are promoted (from mortals). Sometimes a wierd man gets promoted and the playerbase suffers from it, but have no actual rights to fix the situation and can only hope that other imms will handle it properly.
If a mortal pukes you throw him away and if imms pukes what you do? Keep in mind, it's possible that he didn't even know about CF the day you started to play it and contribute the atmosphere. Then he comes, gets promoted (sleeps with somebody or something), ruins your atmoshepere and throw you away.

>I report bugs for my own benefit because I dislike playing a
>buggy game.

Immortals also code for personal enjoyment from the game. The fact it benefits you doesn't deny the fact it's a contribution.

>I run cabals (on occasion) because it's in keeping with my
>character's role-play, and because there are concrete in-game
>advantages.

Again, if it benefits you it is still a contribution (hopefully positive).

>Dude. What the staff does *so* doesn't compare to what a
>player does. Even if they're just sitting in the Gathering
>Room doing nothing, that means they're *not playing a mortal
>and doing fun stuff like killing people*. All that so they
>can answer people's assy prayers and empower people just to
>see them delete the next day.

I don't say that they do nothing, I say that they do that not for "free". For example, if you are an immortal who doesn't even know about CF but asked to code something for it for free (let's say build a web-page) then you contribution will be actually for free as you just commit your time/efforts and gain nothing.

>No issue for the staff, yes (aside from playerbase reduce).
>The issue is for the thrown person.

Too bad? There is no inalienable right to attend any party you want.

>That's why I don't think the party analogy is good in this
>case. This is not your personal house. Immortals aren't born,
>they are promoted (from mortals).

In the context of the analogy, the staff are like room mates living in a rented house. They all have a vested interest in not seeing the house get harmed. One, because they live there, but also because they've made various improvements over the years. And, of course, they like to throw parties. Implementors are those particular room mates whose names are actually on the rental agreement. The others just sublease, and so can be booted by the Imps if it becomes necessary to do so. ShaidarHaran is the land lord. He could, if he wanted, kick everybody out, including the Implementors, and tear down the house.

>Sometimes a wierd man gets
>promoted and the playerbase suffers from it, but have no
>actual rights to fix the situation and can only hope that
>other imms will handle it properly.

Like players, the staff has a vested interest in booting bad staff members. They've done so in the past. The issue for you, I think, is that you disagree with the staff about whether certain staff members are "bad" for the game.

>Then he comes, gets promoted (sleeps with somebody
>or something), ruins your atmoshepere and throw you away.

Bans don't happen in isolation. If you get banned, then you appeal and it's not reversed, you can assume that you were banned with the consent of at least a majority of Implementors.

>Immortals also code for personal enjoyment from the game. The
>fact it benefits you doesn't deny the fact it's a
>contribution.

It's a contribution, but it's a contribution they don't "owe" me for, since I get something in return that's equal to what I put in. In other words, the fact that I report bugs doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to deny my character as soon as I do something stupid, or, if I do lots of stupid things, ban me.

You are welcome to join the party. You don't have a right or a say to stay at the party.

*Edited part. I didn't want to go into the numbers, but, you seem to be looking for one, so here it is. From the say and rights part of the party, you have a 0% contribution unless you are part of the staff. What you contribute to the atmosphere, is completely up to you. The atmosphere of playing is not a right. It's a choice for your own enjoyment as well as others.

For example, if you invite a friend who is a chef to your party, let them cook the food using your kitchen, and then immediately kick them out (because they curse too much), a small-claims court may require you to pay the chef's normal rate for their services. That doesn't mean the chef gets back into the party, but it does uphold an expectation that people mitigate inequities between value contributed and value received, where such value can be reasonably determined.

Of course, that particular example may be rather difficult to apply in practice, since the economics of mud interactions is hardly a robust science. But it serves to show a party host's authority may be limited by obligations created within the party but extending past the front door. From an ethical standpoint, mining the party analogy for positive authority is a nearly worthless act -- you have predefined de facto powers regardless of your claims. On the other hand, if you think the analogy really is applicable, then mining it for responsibilities would be worthwhile and a duty in itself.

I can't imagine that being true at all.

I mean, if you said "If you'll cook for us, you can come to the party", then maybe. But if you invite them, then LET them cook... No.

And that's pretty much the place the players are in. We're invited to the party, as long as we behave ourselves. And we're permitted to contribute significantly, but it's all voluntary on our end. They don't necessarily owe us anything.

>For example, if you invite a friend who is a chef to your
>party, let them cook the food using your kitchen, and then
>immediately kick them out (because they curse too much), a
>small-claims court may require you to pay the chef's normal
>rate for their services. That doesn't mean the chef gets back
>into the party, but it does uphold an expectation that people
>mitigate inequities between value contributed and value
>received, where such value can be reasonably determined.
>

That's my point. The imms are the chefs. Players aren't allowed to cook the food.


>Of course, that particular example may be rather difficult to
>apply in practice, since the economics of mud interactions is
>hardly a robust science. But it serves to show a party host's
>authority may be limited by obligations created within the
>party but extending past the front door. From an ethical
>standpoint, mining the party analogy for positive authority is
>a nearly worthless act -- you have predefined de facto powers
>regardless of your claims. On the other hand, if you think
>the analogy really is applicable, then mining it for
>responsibilities would be worthwhile and a duty in itself.

If a player wants the duties of an imm, we have a process in place to allow that.

asdf

All parties end. When it does, it's the guests that go home.

c'mon guys.


More players is universally good.

This is not just a party, but a party with rules, mostly described in the MOTD. Which at one of the listed requirements demands fom the each player to RP. What can you call a party where you oblidged to wear a specific masquerade dress, or sing a certain psalms, or... Well, i'll let you think of your best example for it. Now where comes the problem, as far as i see it. Everyone come to the party and literally follow all announced requements, but at some point the party owner gets pissd off on one of the guests, and tosses him out. Without being able to mention what exactly that one did wrong.

Well, this is only problem i can see about it so far. Disregarding the obvious rule breakers, of course.

And hey, thanks for buying my pretty worthless PBF! :P :) :) :)

I think the party analogy works perfectly, and you just can't seem to get it. If I throw a party, I'm providing the location & some basic ground rules (stay out of my sisters bedroom, don't touch my parents liquor cabinet, etc). I invite a bunch of guests over. The combination of my location, my groundrules, and the guests make a party.

Me offering my house = The Immortals, the Game and the Rules
Guests = The Players

You need both to have a successful party (and in our case a successful game). Nobody is arguing that but you, because we all know that it takes both of us for this to be successful.

If my guests start breaking my rules (like breaking into my parents liquor cabinet) you sure as #### I'm kicking them out of the party, even if they are my best friend on the whole world, because it's going to be my ass that gets busted by my parents.

If players start breaking rules (and consistently, repeatedly break rules), they are getting the boot. Period.

What seems to be the strongest motivator for people to cheat in this game?

I am guessing it is to make something hard easier to accomplish (gathering gear, killing a tough opponent, etc). Douchebaggery is always something to consider, but I would bet it's the former.

If there is enough cheating by seemingly unrelated parties, aimed at a particular goal, do you guys ever think, "Hmmm, maybe this is a tad too difficult if this many people will cheat to accomplish it."

I'm not swinging in any direction on this. I am just wondering if you all make an attempt at being constructive with something as annoying as cheating.


The examples I'd cite are: the difficulty of the Inferno in conjunction with the difficulty of getting a group that can handle it. This is probably why I've only ever been just a little ways into the area, even after all these years. I've never put together an OOC group to do it, but believe me I've been sorely tempted. The silent tower is there simply because it is so god damned cryptic and unforgiving. Figuring that area out is like taking a math test while having a car battery wired to your nuts, and every time you make a mistake not only can you not erase it, but the professor flips the switch and fries your sack.

>What seems to be the strongest motivator for people to cheat
>in this game?

To get an edge over everyone else. The majority of things that I see as far as cheating are one of two things. Swapping gear through characters, or leveraging OOC relationships (typically to gang people down).

I see both of these as basically douchebaggery. Your thoughts may be different, but I've seen more than enough examples that there is little to change my mind.

>Figuring
>that area out is like taking a math test while having a car
>battery wired to your nuts, and every time you make a mistake
>not only can you not erase it, but the professor flips the
>switch and fries your sack.

I might quote you on my resume.

asfsaf

Seriously. That shaman's robe is just too hard to get at level one.

If we're going to include all rules violations, the #1 motivator by a wide margin is an attempt to screw over one or more other players.

Ganking permas, dropping link to avoid PK, OOC tirades including spam, bug exploitation, the annual jerk who tries to make the whole MUD (WANTED), that one jackass who serially follows heroes around and tries to take and sac their stuff, etc.

If there is enough cheating by seemingly unrelated parties, aimed at a particular goal, do you guys ever think, "Hmmm, maybe this is a tad too difficult if this many people will cheat to accomplish it."


The #2 motivator is ego. It's the same reason people cheat at pickup basketball by grabbing shirts, or why people on online games go bonkers if you beat them and screw up their 'rating'. They want to 'win' however they define winning, whether or not they're good enough to do it.

Multi-ing gear is an example here-- and a lot of gear movement is for fairly mundane stuff. Ditto people who try to arrange cabal inductions OOC, etc.

I think you're proposing the answers you want to hear, and not anything based on the experiences of the staff who handle these cases.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

>The #2 motivator is ego. It's the same reason people cheat at
>pickup basketball by grabbing shirts, or why people on online
>games go bonkers if you beat them and screw up their 'rating'.
> They want to 'win' however they define winning, whether or
>not they're good enough to do it.
>
>Multi-ing gear is an example here-- and a lot of gear movement
>is for fairly mundane stuff. Ditto people who try to arrange
>cabal inductions OOC, etc.


On getting my newbie the shaman's robe, arranging OCC inductions or making OOC Hell trip:
If I'm going to cheat that way I would do it to avoid hassle not because of ego. I don't think that having the shaman's robe or be inducted without a hassle will boost my ego, but it surely will save my time and efforts in something I don't really enjoy doing. I can't speak for all, but I personally don't enjoy spending 60-70 hours as a battle applicant because a leader is never on or something like that. Especially seeing when much worse ragers (IMHO) get inducted under 20 hours. I don't break rules if I can avoid it, so I follow the default procedure knowing that sooner or later I will get inducted, but again, I don't enjoy the waiting time.

I'd say we see a lot less 'hey getting a shaman's robe sure is hard' and more 'oooh my level 15 warrior just full looted a hero mage set -- and my other character is a mage!'

To deny every 15 level char with a hero set. Really, that's annoying }(
It really is.
Really.

...I don't even think Hell trips are possible without OOC connections anymore (or another godly AP). Groups that could accomplish a lot (I don't consider earlier circles accomplishing much) used to be 8 or more - you'd be lucky to even see 8 heroes that WILL kill each other, let alone group. Most of the prominent Hell groups were made of 75% or more Immortals anyways.

*sigh*

>Most of the prominent Hell groups were made of 75% or more
>Immortals anyways.

That's either very untrue, or we define prominent differently -- probably the latter.

....I guess I should say successful over prominent - you can usually take a group of pure Inferno newbies to Dis pretty easily, but accomplishing kills of Archdevils or making Satan usually involved either hardcore veteran OOC groups or Immortals or just pure numbers.

And didn't Sacer have a website of archdevil kills, where most of those players were Immortals?

The link to the website you are referring to is:

http://www.andysmithmusic.com/guide.html

I think you're proposing the answers you want to hear, and not anything based on the experiences of the staff who handle these cases.


I'm just seeing how you guys look at it. It wasn't an attempt to stir any crap.

Thanks for the response, other than the last line.

When I play soccer at a competitive level, I do what would be considered cheating at other levels. If someone jumps for a cross, I'll probably shove them so they aren't in the right place when the ball arrives etc.

However, when I play at a level where that is not the norm, I don't do it.

Basically, it has become part of the competitive game, and isn't viewed as cheating at that level any more.

Would have swore I posted something on this thread. Wasn't even inflammatory. Or at least, we should drop the facade that this is about cheating versus non-cheating and get to the real heart of the matter. Unless I'm missing something this was a response to criticism.

Which gets to the core of my point, in the least inflammatory way that I can say this, which is -

"If you have a problem, the door is that way" response is not going to yield good results. The fact that you aren't being paid isn't a free ticket to treat people in whatever manner you wish and expect no criticism in return. I'd seriously rather pay $15/month or more than have someone beat me over the head with how they're doing me such a huge favor. If you feel like if you charged that much no one would show up maybe that should tell you that it doesn't take a lot to get people to leave and its something of a fragile ecosystem you have going on here.

While your analogy is looking obvious, try to look deeper.

You just described classical despotism.
Many barbarians use such relationships inside their clans and villages.
If the king doesn't like you he can throw you away.
( Even if you don't break any of laws. )

However, many years passed since then...
People became mature and wiser.
People invented democracy, and they did it for purpose.
They passed rights ( *gasp* ) to everybody, not only to rulers.
Try to analyse why it was done. :P

Are you trying to propose that Cf should be run as a democracy? Put everything to a vote by the playerbase before doing anything?

Never mind the fact that running a game is a tad bit different than running a government. I'm not really following where you were trying to go with your reply to Valg.

Rog

But this post made me all teary eyed!

Cheers.
Jhyrb.

It's the drugs. It was supposed to be a reply to Valguarnera.


Cheers.
Jhyrbs.

Go ahead and throw a big party at your house and invite all the CFers.

While you're trying to gerrymander together the votes and support to throw me out, I'll be pissing on your couch. Also, your housepets may suffer a most gruesome violation.

Just because in our modern times we think democracy is a pretty good way to run a country doesn't mean it's the best way to run everything.

Even ignoring the restrictions on who can vote, there isn't a referendum held on each issue, so it isn't truly a democracy.

That in my opinion, is a good thing. Without such a restriction we'd probably get a lot more oppressed minorities.

The "leaders" of a democracy are extremely well paid, not to mention that those barbarian kings were doing what they did in order to milk as much money out of the surrounding countryside as they could. The immortals are VOLUNTEERS and not only do not receive any money for their efforts but are often the biggest donators to cover game costs. How that changes your own shallow analogy.

The people who are in a "democracy" (not that I'm convinced there are any true democracies around, let alone that they would necessarily be more desirable than a republic) have many more RESPONSIBILITIES to go along with those rights. We're interested in running a game, where you can have fun and have only the mandatory responsibilities of following the rules and roleplaying, plus what minimal responsibilities as you want to take on through joining a cabal or becoming a cabal leader, etc. We already have enough trouble with tribunals policing the "laws" in the cities and being corrupt, etc. I'd hate to see what the playerbase would accomplish if they were trying to create and enforce rules for each other to follow.

If you break the rules/laws in a democratic society, you lose some of your rights, too. You can be incarcerated or even killed. I know I haven't had the oppportunity to vote on whether or not murder should be a punishable crime. So there are many set rules in a democratic society that you have no choice about, either.

post was not deserving of more than a few lines to clear up his distorted version of reality. Its stupid, idiotic, missinformed, and all around moronic.

They key is Taxation = Power to vote. (unless a totalitarian/authoritarian/communist government) CF = no tax, hence NO vote short of common sense.

You just described classical despotism.

No. See, we don't force you to play. We don't collect taxes. We don't draft you into service. You are here because you want to be.

I guess you could claim that I run my home like a classical despot and I don't allow strangers to vote on how I should run it. I might ask my guests what they think of the place, but I'm not letting them throw out my TV because they don't like it.

People invented democracy, and they did it for purpose.

And yet, within every democracy, citizens retain property rights. Carrion Fields is private property, and thus the owners can decide all policy within, consistent with the laws of the country it resides in. They also accept all of the responsibility for things like funding, fixing bugs and typos, providing answers to questions, and keeping the game fair.

What do you do, Rooqie dear?

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

>You just described classical despotism.
>
>No. See, we don't force you to play. We don't collect taxes.
> We don't draft you into service. You are here because you
>want to be.

This argument seems to obvious, but many people fall into this trap.
People can't always control their wishes.

One simple example: drugdealers.
They don't force you to buy drugs, you are allowed to stop your drug-run anytime you wish, however the problem with drugs still exists and these dealers get punished. :)

Are you comparing Carrion Fields to crack-cocaine? I mean that is just ridiculous!!!

*note sarcasm*

Well, no, I can't just quit any time. Like many others I am severely addicted to CF. I've tried to break the addiction, but failed every time.

I did finally break the tobacco habit, so maybe I can break this one some day, but this one isn't killing me, it's just sucking away the time I could be using on things like gainful employment.

It's too attractive an addiction, with a negative side too easily ignored.

Or maybe, just maybe I should take more responsibility for my own actions... nah...

fgsddbgdf

This argument seems to obvious, but many people fall into this trap. People can't always control their wishes.

No. Really. You are here because you want to be.

That's so fundamental to the point of what I was saying that if you miss it, you shouldn't have read anything else in the thread.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

Does the ref put every call made up to a vote from the players? No way. Even the governing bodies of the NFL don't do that. Decision are made by the rule makers, and the players either roll with it, or roll out.

In CF you have no rights except those dictated by common sense and a sense of fair play, enough to make people enjoy it. Its free, its enjoyable and most of all its NOT yours. Also this is a game. Here you play in their house, and you play by the house rules or you dont play. Nobody is forcing you to play. End of Story.

Yes, people in general become more mature and wiser, you don't.

I don't even know why I read your posts, much less respond to them.

If this is a game, then there are only 2 things that the imm's owe us.
1. Honesty
2. Decency

Immortals are also entitled to both from the players. Players who are
not honest and/or decent are not entitled to anything.

You are right, I agree with everything your saying, and I am in that huge majority that has never cheated or has cheated very few times. I've been thinking over what exactly bothered me about that situation, and I can't come up with a logical explanation, so I'll just say this: You're a frat, and this is a frat party we're at. I heard something about one of your brothers that really pissed me off, but I'm not sure why. I told him I though was he did was ####, and now the whole frat seems to be upset about it. I didn't talk behind his back, or tell everyone at the party who wasn't in the frat that he was an asshole, I went to him, expressed my opinion, and more or less dropped it.

The closest thing that I can come up with that might explain what bothered me about that situation is that it felt like a backhanded insult from the player to the immortal (which the immortals throw at players all the time whether you realize it or not) and he got punished for it. This is not I REPEAT not what bothers me most about the situation, but it is the closest thing I can come up with. Perhaps it was irrational all along, but I'm willing to be irrational every once in a while.

Apparently this person that was busted wasn't in the majority, but there isn't a way for me to know that. I'm not going to apologize for expressing my opinion, nor will I retract it, but I do appreciate what you do, and I haven't been trying to be a hassle. If you'll notice I dropped the thread after I failed twice to properly explain myself, and likely someone won't like my explanation here, but I'll probably not respond to that either.

Laearrist

p.s. I realize that this thread probably wasn't directed at me or was meant to be about me, but I can't help but feel that way (cause the world revolves around me, ya know). Anyway thanks for all you do.

...