A Comedy of Species

[busyrobot]

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

And how can you say that things wouldn't be significantly better if a certain factor were removed? How can you say that certain problems would still have occured? These things aren't always obvious, much like the ozone layer thing.

That is a huge generalization. If by 'a' certain factor you meant posting know-it-alls and by 'things' you meant the forums then sure, I could agree with you. There are tons of 'things' and tons of 'factors' so whether 'things' would be significantly better or not kinda depends on the 'factors' and 'things' in question.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Give me an example.

Poltician nukes the capitol and chaos ensues. Can you track cause and effect in that case?

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

First you argued that I cannot possibly make my argument without providing direct evidence of the phenomenon I describe. Are you now rescinding that, but criticising the inductive logic? I need to know where we stand here.

I am saying when taking drastic enough action as to limit what people can and can not do via a governing body that you need to have some level of evidence to support the need. I am also questioning the inductive logic in your assertions.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

I don't think that's what I said. I think you're being irrational for going to the other extreme - assuming that I haven't seen anything else. Stop strawmanning.

I am not strawmanning I am asking you to provide more examples that you feel support your convictions instead of just saying you could know of more examples than you have mentioned.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

That's one danger. But it's just a symptom of a wider problem - an egocentric attitude to roleplaying. That's what Gryffon encourages and condones.

Can you outline the dangers you are asserting are a problem so then perhaps, at this late point, we can actually debate if they are well founded or not? I am attacking your assertions as to the risk of that one danger you outlined because it is all you have mentioned so far. How can you say 'there are more' with any weight if you won't offer them for evaluation?

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Please stop trying to break my argument into itty bitty pieces. Tackle the whole or nothing at all.

Its the only substantive risk you have mentioned as a basis for your concern - its perfectly valid for me to point out its an ill founded one.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Doubtful. Seems more likely that you just don't understand burdens of proof.

When have I asked you to prove a claim that you haven't made?

We are not talking about proving proof for claims not made, we are talking about your requests that I prove that there is an absense of proof that your points are wrong, as if your arugments have an intristic authenticity about them.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Seeing a kingdom leader roleplay in an egocentric fashion encourages players to do likewise. That's it. That's my whole argument. Inventing races is just one possible expression of it.

Yet you have not seen him roleplay, and are assuming he is an egocentric roleplayer because of his background story. Yet I have personal experience with seening him roleplay and roleplaying with him. But should I assume that difference between us is really no larger than if say, if I had but you had not roleplayed in a large purple hat?

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Well, I guess that depends. If you approve of Gryffon's backstory then you must have some pretty loose standards.

I approve of how he has roleplayed to date with that backstory, and I don't think that is the result of loose standards.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

And again: If you make that claim, you must support it. That, or leave it for the audience to assess for themselves. Make a choice and then stick with it. Repeated assertions don't qualify as either.

I support that just because people can does not mean they do, and that in this regard the community is self managing.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Stop changing the argument. You said: "that one person did not receive encouraging praise for those elements of his story, thus showing it is not encouraged". Do you now admit that praise is not the only way to encourage somebody?

When the heck did I ever say praise was the only way to encourage somebody? All I was saying is the sum effect between encouragement vs discouragement leans very heavily towards the discouragement end, and that anyone who mistakes Gryf's backstory as an encouragement to make a similar backstory, would be more than disuaded by the amount of discouragement.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Again, evading the point. "Making rules based soley on one person's theories also threaten to break the cohesion of a server". Do you now admit that predictions are a good basis for making rulings, compared to choosing a policy at random?

Who has endorsed policy at random? I know I haven't. When rules are being made already based on concrete needs allowing predictions - at least well reasoned and generally scientifically backed ones - to shape them is fine by me. But as a general rule an unsubstantiated prediction is not a good reason to make a rule where one has never been needed.

Originally Posted by Kaimetsu

Yeah, we just break out the mind control rods.

All it would take is for kingdom leaders to say "you know this has gotten to be a problem we need to rethink this now" and we could leave the mind control rods at home.