Ethics

[eewolf]

Originally posted by 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

wonderful. here is the first volley of the power dtructure. the word "maniac" has been loosed because someone asked for a code of ethics. i didn't tell you what your code would be. i just said you didn't have one.

thanks for making it more realistic. look deep into this post above and see the roots of terrorism.

[Duddha]

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?

I don't understand where you're coming from. What do you want? In terms of game play morals don't matter. If we're not role playing than what are we doing? Role playing is the only way to do it because it just doesn't matter.

[eewolf]

Originally posted by 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

actually, i don't have to face that. you have not prooved your case for being practical. if you play the game as you are all used to, what have you done? i am asking the citizens of this "game" if they might want a little more out of it. maybe they will answer "no."

i have read through many of the threads here and there is a lot of great things happening. a lot of thought went into this. great. but there is a lot of patriotic fervor and flag waving for your nation... and no ethical reason for anyone to follow it.

you have answered all of the questions i put to you... practically. not ethically. do the ends justify the means?

here is one to ponder? why do we still answer these questions "practically"? could it be because each new generation settles for practical? especially those who benefit?

[Togas]

Re: Ethics

Originally posted by eewolf
what is your goal(s)? to win? to win at any cost? you can each do that on your own. should you have larger goals in a game of this size? what about ethical guidelines? you have a constitution but it is long on structure and short on depth of character.

if you achieve a "game win" with no higher standards, what have you achieved?

Fascinating discussion topic ... I just don't see how it really applies.

I suppose if we, the players, were actually doing some sort of immoral acts as a result of this game, then we'd have to seriously consider the consequences of our actions and our desire to win above all else, but this is a game, not unlike a game of Chess or Risk or Monopoly. Nothing unethical is actually going on.

No actual people are being harmed, just like no real pawns are harmed during the playing of Chess. One does not contemplate the ethics of sacrificing one's own units or killing your opponents units to win a game. One only considers how best to win.

This "Democratic" Civ game is really all of us working together or arguing about how to best play a single game within the rules allowed by the game. We are not discussing about how to best run an actual civilization ... no actual atrocities are being commited by anyone.

We're playing to see if we, collectively, can win this game given the currently difficulties present.

I don't think there are many who are interested in role-playing history and trying to be more ethically minded than those who came before us. We're not playing this game as an example to society (no one is watching) of how a "just" civilization runs itself, nor as a challange to see if we can win the game being "just".

We are not attempting to simulate a civilization or create a model civilization. We are all playing one computer game together. Some may get into their roles a bit much, others may write some great fiction about the events of the game, but in the end when the computer is turned off, we carry away no sins from the virtual actions and decisions made.

This is a game, and games are played to win. With good planning and cooperation we all may share in a grand win at the summation of this game.

--Togas

[Panag]

Originally posted by eewolf



wonderful. here is the first volley of the power dtructure. the word "maniac" has been loosed because someone asked for a code of ethics. i didn't tell you what your code would be. i just said you didn't have one.

thanks for making it more realistic. look deep into this post above and see the roots of terrorism.

hi ,

,

look you , if you dont stop with that ethic stuff you shall be banana-ed to death , are we clear , .....

now , we are in an age where the AI does not use your ethics , so why should we start to do so , ....

obviosly you have to be "educated" , so we ought to build those library's soon , ...

there is only one way we can stand against those evil species out there , and that is to absorb them in our culture , so we can educate them , only then shall we be able to uphold a standard of ethics , ....

PEACE TRUE POWER

Uber , if this guy use's the word ethics again , we should put him at the jungle , so he can see for himsalf the horror of those two species we have found so far , ...

have a nice day

[ManicStarSeed]

Originally posted by eewolf

thanks for making it more realistic. look deep into this post above and see the roots of terrorism.

Ouch... don't go there please.

I now have to ask you....

What do you do when a bombardment inadvertantly ends in pop reduction?

What is your stance when you take a town, it auto razes and you get 5 or 6 workers out of it?

Do you even fight aggresive wars?

The game is the context. Without it, ther is nothing. You can argue that whole "adjust the paradime" point..."step outside of the game structure and create alternatives" There is something there but not really enough to change the fact that we are playing defined game with defined rules that will qualify and quantify our sucess without concern for our extracurricular successes.

It is like telling a fundamentalist that you are going to heavan/nirvana/paradise because you are a good, chariatable, honest, compassionate person, but they reject it all because you do not worship the same gods. The fundamentalist is the game, you can not win the game (a chance to go to paradise) outside the the rules (fundamentalist dogma). The game does not care.

I understand that you are saying that we should. We can, and likey will, but this is, at its core, a strategy game and we want to win.

I would love to see a multi democracy Civ III (PTW) game with the machiavellians vs the humanists That woould be a battle royale.

eewolf, I like what you are saying, but to me this is just a game and I want to have fun. I walk around in a sea of ethical and moral dilemmas every single day. I relish the ability to have an outlet to exercise power-over as opposed to power-with. It is refreshing to dispose of 1000s people at my will, enslave nations and nuke the world at whim. why... because it does not really matter. It is about fun.

Mss

[eewolf]

Originally posted by Duddha


I don't understand where you're coming from. What do you want? In terms of game play morals don't matter. If we're not role playing than what are we doing? Role playing is the only way to do it because it just doesn't matter.

you may be just playing a role, but you get to choose your role. i am merely suggesting an expansion of those role possibilities. the "game play" is a small part of this entire "democracy game". you have held elections and put together documents and charters, started parties and coalitions, etc. that goes way beyond pushing pixels around a screen.

it is true that the game is a vital part of this. it provides the canvas on which you will paint. and the canvas creates limitations for the final painting. i merely suggest that you were not using the full range of possibilities.

and i believe that is has more importance than a mere game, also. everyone here should be proud of participating and should use their own judgment in how it is played.

[eewolf]

Re: Re: Ethics

Originally posted by Togas
This is a game, and games are played to win. With good planning and cooperation we all may share in a grand win at the summation of this game.

--Togas

sorry to cut your message short in my reply. it is an excellent post. you have summed up what you see in the game. and others no doubt share your view.

but others may not. my thought is that much more can be brought to the game by applying rules in the "outer" context of the game. that context has been created and it is just as real as the game context. it is, however, more flexible.

can you win a game without slaves? i don't know. (i have won games in regent without slaves). can you win without pop-rushing? don't know... done it in regent.

i am not here to break things. i am actually fascinated by the interaction that is taking place. it is more real than you might think.

[civman2000]

I've won without poprushhing, though never without slaves. But that's not the point. It's just a game.

Actually, i think humanists would beat machiavellians (especially if all of the civs were human-controlled) because the machiavellioans would ruin their reputations...many humanists working together can overthrow a large number of noncooperating machiavellians, but one human-controlled humanist civ can gain nothing by being humanist, though they still might be able to win (for more on this read stuff about some AI experiments done by a guy last name Axelrod in the late 70s/early 80s concerning the prisoners dilemma, especially Douglas Hofstadter's article about it in Metamagical Themas).

[eewolf]

Originally posted by ManicStarSeed
Ouch... don't go there please.

to not go there is a recipe for disaster and we become sheep to the slaughter. however, it is off-topic and so i will let it lie here.

Originally posted by ManicStarSeed
I now have to ask you....

What do you do when a bombardment inadvertantly ends in pop reduction?

inadvertantly? it never ends in civilian deaths if it isn't used. how far apart is "didn't mean to" from "didn't care"?

Originally posted by ManicStarSeed What is your stance when you take a town, it auto razes and you get 5 or 6 workers out of it?

Do you even fight aggresive wars?

i have been many things playing this game myself. i have been blood-thirsty and i have been a meek.

Originally posted by ManicStarSeed
The game is the context. Without it, ther is nothing. You can argue that whole "adjust the paradime" point..."step outside of the game structure and create alternatives" There is something there but not really enough to change the fact that we are playing defined game with defined rules that will qualify and quantify our sucess without concern for our extracurricular successes.

the game is only one context. you have created the other yourselves. you now flinch when it might make the other more difficult to deal with.

Originally posted by ManicStarSeed
It is like telling a fundamentalist that you are going to heavan/nirvana/paradise because you are a good, chariatable, honest, compassionate person, but they reject it all because you do not worship the same gods. The fundamentalist is the game, you can not win the game (a chance to go to paradise) outside the the rules (fundamentalist dogma). The game does not care.

i did not expect the game to care. i expect it will do what it already does. but on the thinking end of things, possibilities arise.

Originally posted by ManicStarSeed
eewolf, I like what you are saying, but to me this is just a game and I want to have fun. I walk around in a sea of ethical and moral dilemmas every single day. I relish the ability to have an outlet to exercise power-over as opposed to power-with. It is refreshing to dispose of 1000s people at my will, enslave nations and nuke the world at whim. why... because it does not really matter. It is about fun.

Mss

ah, the best point so far. but, as a democracy game, you invite other peoples ideas into the mix. i am sorry if mine have disturbed you. as you could guess, there is a long line of irritated people in my past (and present). i fully understand wanting to get away from "life" and just get down to it. i do that by playing civ myself. i just think this larger democracy game is more than that.

[civman2000]

SO you're saying we should play a game without ever bombarding/bombing cities??? WE don't have a chance!

[eewolf]

Originally posted by civman2000
It's just a game.

maybe so.

Originally posted by civman2000
Actually, i think humanists would beat machiavellians (especially if all of the civs were human-controlled) because the machiavellioans would ruin their reputations...many humanists working together can overthrow a large number of noncooperating machiavellians, but one human-controlled humanist civ can gain nothing by being humanist, though they still might be able to win (for more on this read stuff about some AI experiments done by a guy last name Axelrod in the late 70s/early 80s concerning the prisoners dilemma, especially Douglas Hofstadter's article about it in Metamagical Themas).

i don't know if humanists can beat machiavellians. but i never look to the final outcome to choose my road.

[eewolf]

Originally posted by civman2000
SO you're saying we should play a game without ever bombarding/bombing cities??? WE don't have a chance!

i have won in regent without bombarding cities. but that is not the point. maybe we have lost the point.

my original point was:

this democracy game has no outer rules of play for ethics. do the people who are playing want ethics to be considered? i think you will have to play harder, think more, plan more if you answer yes. and that should be more fun.

honor before victory, not after.

[eewolf]

Originally posted by panag


hi ,

,

look you , if you dont stop with that ethic stuff you shall be banana-ed to death , are we clear , .....

is that you, karl rove?

[Inverse Icarus]

panag is my hero