Ethics

[Inverse Icarus]

Re: Ethics

slavery: who decided you should use captured workers as slaves? did you vote on it? if your empire is built on the backs of slaves, what does that say for your character as a people?

i am pro slavery.

pop rushing: i have seen no talk of this so perhaps this has been banned. if not, why not? a democracy that votes for torture and slavery must have a serious class structure. does apolytonia?

i am pro pop rushing

city razing: should cities ever be razed? should there be a city size limit here? who decides?

i am pro razing (abandoning after capture)

civilian deaths: should bombardment of cities be allowed at all? this is a moral question. should there be limits for bombardment units? military unit and strategic resources only? is it ok to pillage and thus starve populations?

i am pro bombardment of pop points

reputation: should your keep your word? even if it means a lost opportunity? if you are always opportunistic, what does being an apolytonian mean?

i am pro a good reputation.

so, is winning everything? shouldn't you be striving for something larger here?

it's really for fun, but i'd like to win

[eewolf]

Originally posted by UberKruX
i'm very pro pop rushing.

excellent. i assume you have one vote like everyone else in this democracy.

my point was that a code of ethics should have been created from the start. and voted on. and then lived by. it is not too late.

btw, i disagree with you on the pop rushing. democracy. so it goes.

[Sheik]

This is only a game and for now I agree with UberKrux. Unless someone has another goal for this game then we should do everything to win after all we are not playing the game to lose and then say, well at least we didn't hurt any citizens or use slaves.

Though I do think that a moral code would be interesting. Perhaps it would make the game more realistic.

[Duddha]

eewolf, welcome to Unified Front Coalition politics.

[eewolf]

Re: Re: Ethics

Originally posted by UberKruX
i am pro slavery.
i am pro pop rushing
i am pro razing (abandoning after capture)
i am pro bombardment of pop points
i am pro a good reputation.

it's really for fun, but i'd like to win

even better. this citizen has answered all of my example questions on ethics. and he has given his reasons, i think.

i believe he is part of the elected power structure, too. is he a servant of the people in this democracy or does he speak for all? at least he has made his views clear.

but, is winning all there is here?

[eewolf]

Originally posted by Sheik
This is only a game

is it? what a shame.

Originally posted by Sheik
Unless someone has another goal for this game then we should do everything to win after all we are not playing the game to lose and then say, well at least we didn't hurt any citizens or use slaves.

this is how people are controlled. they are given two choices when there are many others. it is not "play to win" vs. "play to lose". how about "play to win with a code of standards". and there are doubtless many other reasons people are participating.

Originally posted by Sheik
Though I do think that a moral code would be interesting. Perhaps it would make the game more realistic.

ah, "interesting" and "realistic". maybe. could be worth exploring?

[ManicStarSeed]

I like this thread... It is outside of "the box...."

Ethics... what a concept.

Truth is that there is not a culture in this world without a dark past. Slavery was acceptable to many cultures through time. Most used slaves at some point, most banned it eventually. Only with the development of understanding and learning did the perception change to that of overwhealmingly negative. If in the ADs, we are in the position for abolishing slaves without maiming ourselves, I say do it. They can join our cities and our culture. Hooray there are more of "us"!!


When I play my own games, I enjoy the ethical play that transpires during play. Sometimes I have entire slave armies of workers sometimes only a few. I enjoy the ethic play as it unfolds. If I am in the position, I will rarely ever build the manhattan project for ethical reasons, I leave it to the AI who has no problems with polluting an entire planet with nukes.

If you want ethics, that is outside the scope of the game, but not outside of our Civ 3 Democracy. We do have the power to decide for it or not. It puts more of role-playing aspect to it. I support it.

Ethics can and should be a part of it, but as a civ, we have not even begun to ponder philisophy and the nature of exisiance. Ethics are a long way off.


We as Apolytoinans are little more than apes right now. We just got the idea of stringing sinew to a yew stick to shoot another stick with a point in order to protect ourselves and call itr archery. Ethics can not come before philisophy.

If you are going to Role play, then role play and wait untill the right time before raising ethical questions. Ethics will be an issue as long as there is corruption in any of our cities. Corruption is an ethical problem is it not? So lets have ethical problems, after all we are led by a despot. Can you say "Machiavellian Ethics"? Who are you to judge that they are not correct with out creating another moral qurestion?

I say play by ethics but keep it in context.

Peace ...err I mean

WAR!!!
kill the french take them all as slaves build us up! down with them

Mss

[Sheik]

Maybe we should get a code of standards. But what would be the penalty if a ruler doesn't follow the code? Anyone have any ideas?

[eewolf]

Originally posted by Duddha
eewolf, welcome to Unified Front Coalition politics.

thanks for the welcome, but your civilization is foundering, not just because you are in a jungle, but because you have no ethical rudder. all of the fronts, coalitions and parties won't change that.

[OPD]

Centuarys later as archiologists discover the scattered and beaten down remnants of the once vibrant and flourishing civilization of apolytonia they will find a small plaque which reads

"at least we didnt raze or pop rush."

we cant afford morals

[civman2000]

slavery ...easy workers
I don't like poprushing, but if not used to the extreme it is good
I don't like razing
Pop bombardment is ok, though that should never be top priority in bombarding.
Pro good reputation

Face it, civ is a realpolitik game

[ManicStarSeed]

Originally posted by civman2000

Face it, civ is a realpolitik game

I am not sure I understand? What do you mean by realpolitik?

[Panag]

hi ,

it looks that UberKruX and some others are going to a nightmare , ......

, some people are maniacs , but then only for the "good" side , ...

panag > starts to give banana's to the secret police , call's uber , evacuates the president , and starts to use banana's on anayoe who is not agreeing , ....

this type of revolt is unacceptable , ....

uber > starts to load banana's in the big banana gun , just in case , ...

the AI is not using ethics on us , so , lets teach him for his evil crime , ...

have a nice day

[eewolf]

Originally posted by ManicStarSeed
I like this thread... It is outside of "the box...."

Ethics... what a concept.

Truth is that there is not a culture in this world without a dark past. Slavery was acceptable to many cultures through time. Most used slaves at some point, most banned it eventually. Only with the development of understanding and learning did the perception change to that of overwhealmingly negative. If in the ADs, we are in the position for abolishing slaves without maiming ourselves, I say do it. They can join our cities and our culture. Hooray there are more of "us"!!

why wait. to use the "game" is just a crutch. everyone playing this game is 21st century (well, most i hope). you are not restricted to the historical record. you can achieve more. which is a better goal: to win? or win with honor?

Originally posted by ManicStarSeed
If you want ethics, that is outside the scope of the game, but not outside of our Civ 3 Democracy. We do have the power to decide for it or not. It puts more of role-playing aspect to it. I support it.

Ethics can and should be a part of it, but as a civ, we have not even begun to ponder philisophy and the nature of exisiance. Ethics are a long way off.

it is only as far off as you want it. and you are wrong about history. there have been voices since the beginning shouting against tyranny. they have mostly gone unheeded (and that continues). here you can listen and make a choice. in fact, since the issue has been raised, you must choose. and live with the answer.

Originally posted by ManicStarSeed
We as Apolytoinans are little more than apes right now. We just got the idea of stringing sinew to a yew stick to shoot another stick with a point in order to protect ourselves and call itr archery. Ethics can not come before philisophy.

again, no such luck in history. in 4000bc, people were not much different than today. they were not close to being apes. their brains were the same writings indicate that their thinking was the same. however, even if this is so in the "civ game" it is not so in the apolytonia population here. you have philosophy. you have ideas, you have set yourselves above it.

Originally posted by ManicStarSeed
Can you say "Machiavellian Ethics"? Who are you to judge that they are not correct with out creating another moral qurestion?

i am not judging. i am pointing out a missing rudder on your ship of state.

Originally posted by ManicStarSeed
I say play by ethics but keep it in context.

letting the context be decided by the game is: easy and convenient. what happened to courageous?

[eewolf]

Originally posted by OPD
we cant afford morals

is this the your national motto?