Ethics

[iain]

imho ethics cannot be defined untill we approach a situation that produces an ethical dilema. pop. rushing an essential improvement could be vital at a future point in time, yet those who disagree with it on moral grounds could voice there opposition to it. Those who disagree with ethics would present there arguments, discussion would occur and eventually a decision would be made by unanimous vote.

[iain]

i forgot to add that this is the best thread i have yet read, interesting discussion, it adds a whole new dimension to the proceedings. in some instances, ethical decisions could come down to the good of the few vs the good of the many, always a difficult path to tread either way.

[ManicStarSeed]

Reading my earlier posts to the thread, It seems that I am sending mixed messages. I support it, but argue against it. The concept that "we can't afford morals" applies for now, but we can (and should) build up our moral currency. This thread is a good start. This is a great thread. We need more of it. I hope it continues as time goes on.

I support a code of ethics.

I think we need to phase our ethics in as situations demand. Our currrent ethical issues seem to surround slave workers, pop rushing and war.

Bombing population, Nukes, Target win conditions are not our immediate concerns. We have not the technology. The ethics for those should follow.

I like the idea of each administration can either set the ethics or call a vote on policy ethics.


This is our chance to set precedent by looking at and considering the ethically questionable actions. We can make the game more than CIV3 which we already play. This is an oppurtunity to be different.

I am willing to step up and fight an honorable battle.

Death before dishonor!!

Mss

[Jon Shafer]

However, slavery, razing and pop-rushing are certainly concerns now. I am always willing to fight for honor, or to be defeated for it as well.

[Adc]

you guys are stupid it's just a game

[GePap]

Next admin

What about having the political parties out there write their own codes, since I assume Hawk and DIA positions will be very different (they better be....)and have those codes up for an election so that the next government can begin to implement them? If we want to limit them to only the current technology issues, then we that' fine.

Since this is a democracy game, the voters hould decide whether we fight and die with honor, or do all we 'need' to do to come out on top.

[UnOrthOdOx]

If we are talking of a code of ethics for the nation, the parties need to be left out of it. There are those not aligned with parties that would be bound to follow what was put forth by such parties.

I think that before we go about writing a code, we should vote on whether or not we even want one in the first place. Or if we would rather just make a debate each time these moral issues come up. Or if we 'just' play the game.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by Adc
you guys are stupid it's just a game

I knew that was coming eventually.

[Sheik]

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
I think that before we go about writing a code, we should vote on whether or not we even want one in the first place. Or if we would rather just make a debate each time these moral issues come up. Or if we 'just' play the game.

Yes. Trip could you post an official poll on this?

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by Sheik
Yes. Trip could you post an official poll on this?

Alrighty then.

[Panag]

Originally posted by Trip

Alrighty then.

hi ,

, should we not talk about what goes in the poll first , ....

have a nice day

[Jon Shafer]

Nope, it's just to determine whether or not to have one at all, not what's in it.

[Guardian]

Originally posted by OPD

IMO, all the morality in this thread is just for show.

That's the closest thing to an insult I've seen so far...

[OPD]

Apologies to all offended

[disorganizer]

the morale-rules should only be very general. each department can then post his own guidelines...