Oh please. Spare me your teenage angst.
Last edited:
Griefers and Elite's Emerging Karma System
- Thread starter Delilah
- Start date
Oh please. Spare me your teenage angst.
I'm not sure how you got either teenage, or angst, from my post. Pedantry maybe, but you want to be spared that you could try being less blatantly incorrect.
Maybe one day you'll figure it out. In the meantime go ahead an espouse social Darwinism all you want. Just know that Darwin would be horrified to hear his ideas so misused.
I'm not espousing social Darwinism, and you evidently don't have the slightest idea what fitness is in context you're trying to use it in. Survival of the fittest is alive and well, but again, fitness is subjective to the environment.
The actually beautiful part is that griefers can no longer weasel out of being called griefers because we now have an official definition of griefing. And targeting new players for destruction definitely falls under griefing within that definition.
Minonian
Banned
In the asylum you meant? And as he / she unlocking achievements (his symptoms getting worst) he can get greater and greater dose of drugs and can have more and more cozy rubber room.
Career this career that.
I've gone to great lengths to avoid being suckered into working for a living in the real world, why the hell would I want a career in Elite: Dangerous? I really don't like the idea of shoehorning my playstyle or my CMDR into any 'career'.
The 'official' definition is pretty silly as it seems to be contingent on a ship power differential in favor of the attacker.
I've gone to great lengths to avoid being suckered into working for a living in the real world, why the hell would I want a career in Elite: Dangerous? I really don't like the idea of shoehorning my playstyle or my CMDR into any 'career'.
The 'official' definition is pretty silly as it seems to be contingent on a ship power differential in favor of the attacker.
I don't expect everyone to like it. It's there, and it can't be denied.
But we must keep in mind that empathy has not been proven to be inherent in humans. Some simply do not have it and try to emulate it or make the appearance of possessing it in order to live in society.
To use values like empathy to justify social values would be similar to saying that the evolution of humans is "correct" because we are currently apex predators, or that Java as a programming language is "correct" because of its portability.
I think there's a a confusion of the status quo/merits of a subject or item and its justification with absolute values, which are very arbitrary.
Put it simply, sure, things like "empathy" is convenient to have in a civilization since it requires reciprocation to operate efficiently as Rousseau pointed out, but to say that these "morals" are "correct" is entirely falsifying and conclusion jumping.
We haven't even figured out the conditions necessary to be "correct", nor will people ever agree on that. Establishing a condition of "correctness" then enforcing it upon others really has to bring me back to Kant and I chuckle at the thought of such a thing.
- - - Updated - - -
Haven't read a single argument that sounded convincing to me, on debunking moral relativism, that is.
Last edited:
Minonian
Banned
All morals and morality standards are relative, hence we want to feel we morally superior want to convince ourselves and the others we are good, and the ones opposing to us, are bad.
What you written? Empathy in a level hardcoded into us, especially womans. Since we need it to raise kids, and keep the society, / tribe / pack / horde (pick your choice!) together. The problem is? Sometimes it's just screwed up in the level of genetic code, or other conditions.
What you written? Empathy in a level hardcoded into us, especially womans. Since we need it to raise kids, and keep the society, / tribe / pack / horde (pick your choice!) together. The problem is? Sometimes it's just screwed up in the level of genetic code, or other conditions.
Last edited:
I disagree since we do have APD around.
When we discuss disorders, they are often times considered "disorders" simply for after evaluating the traits of the "disorder" as statistical outlier. Which is a poor argument to then claim that the "disorder" is not inherent to the individual.
That part was sticking in my craw, too.
Minonian
Banned
Wrong! The real question is, what's the real order? What are the base standards?
Is there any base standards? Especially if we consider how easily overriden by upbringing?
So glad that Fdev are finally making this much needed area of the game a reality.
I'd like to thank all the trolls and griefers for helping Fdev iron out this system.
I'd like to thank all the trolls and griefers for helping Fdev iron out this system.
Last edited:
Don't get your hopes up. Sandro has simply opened up a bit of discourse on the topic. Judging from the development speed we've seen up to this point I'm guessing we might see a karma system that is universally hated by everybody a year or two after Star Citizen is officially released.
Yeh thats true. But im going to practice my well oiled Elite Dangerous sense of optimism.
Still a little bit of oil left in the can. Not much, but some.
Last edited:
Minonian
Banned
Thank them? it's born against them, not because of them. They are not helped, just made visible by their actions where are the problems?
Last edited:
I was being ironic, because it is ironic. They trolled the game and made excuses, now their actions over the years have provided a spot light to Fdev on what needs fixing and maybe how to go about that.
Their continued insistence on being ats has drove the situation clear under the noses of Fdev and Fdev now FINALLY step up and say that work towards fixing the issues of griefing is underway.
The griefers have laid the table for their own control and punishment.
Cheats and exploiters will hopefully fall under the umbrella of this development direction.
Last edited:
2 more words that are flippantly thrown around to suit moral values.
Wrong! The real question is, what's the real order? What are the base standards?
...
You do realize you just repeated my argument right? Please read my post again...