[busyrobot]

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

No, it's an explanation of the nature of the universe. Billions of variables, too many for you or I to process. When dealing with collective consciousness, it's utterly impossible to reliably track causality.

Everything is part of a system and some systems are simplier than others.

This community is simple enough for it to self manage the issue of races. It has not had trouble with races for this exact reason.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Yes.

Butterfly flaps wings, hurricane brews in south Atlantic. Can you track cause and effect in that case?

And yet I would find it difficult to believe you could devise a rule system to manage South Atlantic hurricanes. Lets keep the examples relevant maybe?

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Believe it or not, giving one example of a possible thing does not mean that all similar things are possible.

Of course, simular does not mean identical, thus its an issue of probability.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Which is where the inductive logic comes in. If it is sound, there is no need for direct observations.

Inductive logic needs at least limited observations, and you have to demonstrate that the 'sound logic' is sound and fits the situtation.
I have already said your logic is 'generally sound' in my opinion but fails to account for local factors, which I already outlined.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Right. So a simple 'yes' would have sufficed.

'Both' would be more accurate.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

You intentionally misrepresent my position. I say that you have no reason to believe ¬X. You say that I'm accusing you of being "out of line" for not assuming X. These are completely different things.

I don't think that analogy fits - care to fill in the blanks with the actual case in point that you are referring to?

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Already tackled this, man. Induction. The only reasonable way for you to argue is to analyse the logic.

I already did that, and whereas your logic fails to describe the environment (you add a 'constant' of sorts for us being lucky and not yet having the problems you warn of) I have proposed an augmentation to your logic (the self regulation elements) that accounts for both your concerns and describes the environment accurately without relying on luck or other modifying constants.

Your only recourse, is to attempt to challange the logic of my countering argument as unsound or provide some missing evidence that supports the idea that your logic represents the environment more accurately than mine.

If you are just catching up that is why environmental observations have come into play.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

You make assertions about the game world. Their relation to my predictions does not define them. You say that the world is in a certain state, but you don't offer to prove it. What value can I give this claim, then? If you base your argument on it then your argument is void.

Other than Shawn and Gryf and 'the demon' (all of which I have already explained) there are no other examples to even reference of these problems. My assertion is to that of an absense of something. The absense of something can never be effectively proven - you should know that - it can only be disproven by showing that such is not in fact absent.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

I, meanwhile, base my argument on generalised reasoning about human nature. It is not specific to any single gameworld.

Yet it does not accurately reflect the shape of the game world, and does not take into account specific local factors, such as the ones I outlined.
I can make a generalized argument about human nature that 'humans are violent' and assume that it is safer to walk empty dark alleys than in a crowded church. That does not mean it reflects all the local factors accurately to have any relevance.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

I have seen him create an egocentric backstory. Does this not qualify as roleplaying?

We've all had the experience of reading (not seeing him create it) his backstory, but many of us have also had many hours of playing with the fellow to add to our experience. Can you say the same?

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

I don't think that sentence makes sense. In any case, it is certainly not a proof of your claim about the events on GK.

Let me add quotes:
I support "that just because people can does not mean they do", and that in this regard the community is self managing
By which I mean, just because something can happen does not mean it will, as there can be and actually are other factors, such as the self regulating ones I already mentioned.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

You argued that ¬praised(x) -> ¬encouraged(x).

Huh? Clarify?

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

We saw an example of one person with a ridiculously egocentric story, and only one GK player reprimanded him for it. How many GK players posted in that thread without doing the same? And would he have been reprimanded if his story were slightly less grandiose?

The issue is not how grandiose a story is but if it negatively impacts it has on roleplaying within the community. One person at least feels it does, it bothered her, and she was asking if it bothers other people, who I assume based on their direct experience of playing with him, and the unique factors that went into the creation of that backstory, do not feel adversely affected by his backstory. Given that it is unlikely that anyone else would reproduce the unqiue factors that went into the creation of Gryf's story nor would they likely roleplay their characters as humbly in nature as Gryf has proven to over the years, it is unlikely that people would be more supporting of new 'outlandish' stories anymore than people were of the demon backstory.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Well, you have argued against making policies based on theory. What else is there?

Observation.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Because, what, the act of five people thinking about something has the power to instantly rewrite the attitudes of everybody on the server?

If it became a problem it would be a problem for more than just 5 players, not a case of people all having a great time with grand backstories living it up and having the party stopped by some cranky kingdom leaders.