Slashdot Mirror


Sims Online Presidential Campaign Shapes Up

Ant writes "Wired News has an article on a campaign for the presidency of Alphaville, the biggest city in The Sims Online. Two challengers will square off in a final primary for the opportunity to unseat Alphaville's incumbent president, the appropriately named Mr-President, in next month's general election."

212 comments

  1. Sim Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    I hear one candidate is already attacking the other because he believes there are WMD's in the Sim World.

    1. Re:Sim Reality by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      I hear one of the candidates' usernames is "George Bush" and that his lackies are already hacking into the Sims Online servers to ensure victory.

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
  2. SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by bethane · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You do not have a right to free speech on games like "The Sims Online".

    These games are a privledge, and if the communities are outraged about censorship, or anything else, well they should fight with their money.

    Sidenote:
    This may not be the case with TSO, but i've noticed in many MMORPGS (think EQ), people are so addicted to it, despite the fact they hate the company that owns it, they continue to play it.

    They still piss and moan about it but they never actally cancel the game.

    Maybe thats what happened here.

    --


    Bethanie: Whore...
    Fan Whore
    1. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by redJag · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A democracy doesn't imply free speech.

    2. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by Persol · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Democracy - Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives

      Democracy seem to be VERY entwined with free speech. The important word in the above definition is -exercised-. It is very difficult to exercise your will without a certain measure of free will, yelling fire in a crowded theater not withstanding.

    3. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by lambent · · Score: 1

      However, in a true democracy, if free speech is the will of the people, it will be so.

    4. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by BHearsum · · Score: 0

      Democracy and free speech are still mutually exclusive.

    5. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by gloth · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So what is a democracy? Is the US one, considering that Al Gore, even though he won the popular vote, is not president?

      Has the "civilized" world been democratic in the 1800s, when only white male were allowed to vote in most places?

      So, what exactly is a democracy?

    6. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Greetings, dumbass. Please Google electoral college. This is an actual institution used in the electoral process and not a Republican trick (I know, it is shocking but true).

      By the way, the US is a Federal Republic or Representative Democracy, depending on who you ask, not a Direct Democracy.

    7. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Democracy seem to be VERY entwined with free speech.

      Democracy does not imply absolute Freedom of Speech. There are many Democracies in the world which not have any provision in law for the protection of Freedom of Speech, and they are still very much Democracies.

    8. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything the poster said is true. Gore won the popular vote but is not the President as he lost the electoral vote. He also never said the United States of America was a Direct Democracy; you simply assumed he did (Why did you not assume he meant Democratic Republic?)

      So what do you regard as factually incorrect about any of that?

    9. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      A democracy doesn't imply free speech.

      Indeed. One notorious counterexample is the United States of America.

    10. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by ArseneLupin · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      So what is a democracy? Is the US one, considering that Al Gore, even though he won the popular vote, is not president?

      Actually, he would even have won the electoral vote, if his opponent wouldn't have cheated. That's the difference between real life and a game: in a game, cheaters are evicted. In real life, they become mightiest man of the world!

    11. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US, unfortunately, is a Democeratic Republic.

      You vote for the people to represent you, and they vote for the president.

      Sucks, eh!

    12. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by Squareball · · Score: 1

      And yet every time every recount was done even when the media went back later and did their own recount, Bush still won the recounts. Hey if Gore had won his home state he would be president right now.

    13. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by maxpublic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Democracy - Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives

      Not true. A democracy can easily become a dictatorship, a tyranny of the will of the majority over the minority. It'd be quite easy for a democracy to outlaw any speech it doesn't agree with, e.g., a fanatically religious democracy could outlaw any mention of atheism, or religions other than those approved of by the state, or any criticism of the state church.

      This is why our Founding Fathers were quite careful not to choose democracy but rather a limited, Constitutional form of republicanism for their new nation. So that a rabid, banal majority couldn't legally seize control of the government and use it to cruelly oppress the minority.

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    14. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's traditional. Samuel Huntington, the first President of the United States, wasn't elected by popular vote either. :^P

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    15. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, that worked.

    16. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by coandco · · Score: 1

      Democracy - Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives Democracy -- Three wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner. This is why even the US isn't a democracy, despite popular opinion... coandco

    17. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by antc3 · · Score: 1

      The United States has never had a popularly elected president. We're just lucky enough that the guy with the most popular votes wins most of the time.

    18. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by Mad+Marlin · · Score: 3, Informative
      t's traditional. Samuel Huntington, the first President of the United States, wasn't elected by popular vote either.

      The "president of congress" is not the "president". If you watch C-SPAN sometime, you will notice that people keep on talking to "Mr. President", asking for more time for their speech, or to hold some vote, or for a quorum call, or who knows what else; Bush is not in the room at the time.

    19. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by AndroidCat · · Score: 1
      As soon as the Articles of Confederation were ratified, the title changed to President of the United States in Congress Assembled. Now .. you might say that's just congress, but that's all there was at the time. Also, even after the Constitution, the seperation of the President from legislative debates only happened because Washington eventually said he "would be damned" if he was going to sit through all that, setting a precident.

      It's a "yeah, so what?" point of trivia, of course.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    20. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by jayminer · · Score: 1

      Simple Greek:

      Demos: People
      Krateo: Rule

      Democracy: Rule by the people

      Nothing about free speech.
      (By the way, I can't speak Greek, but it's common knowledge)

    21. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by n3m6 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A democracy is majority rule, with protection of minority rights. Freedom of Speech gives the minority the ability to defend themselves.

    22. Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY by PMuse · · Score: 1

      Demos: People
      Krateo: Rule
      Democracy: Rule by the people
      Nothing about free speech.


      Yup. Democracy just describes where power resides and, to some extend, how it is exercised.

      The use of "true" and "pure" in these posts is somewhat confusing. Perhaps we should adopt a piece of jargon from economics. In ecomomics, a "perfect market" IIRC is one in which every participant knows all the prices at which goods are available. For instance, a supplier can charge higher prices when buyers are unaware of an alternate, cheaper supplier located elsewhere. Similarly, candidates can get elected despite having bad intentions if the voters are unaware.

      Free speech is one method of attempting to get "perfect information" into the hands of voters in a democracy. (Most societies put limits on free speech to suppress bad information or for other less-laudable purposes, but I digress.)

      If voters have complete information and can act on it, then we could call that a "perfect" democracy (by which we would mean a democracy operating on "perfect information"). Of course, nothing guarantees that those voters will do things with the information that you or I would like.

      --
      "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
  3. I'm surprised this even made Wired. by James+A.+J.+Joyce · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The fact is, in The Sims Online, power doesn't lie so much with the presidents as with the houses of the most popular people. And, as in real life, the most popular households in TSO are those which are general bacchanalia houses bordering on brothels. So the presidency is more of a figurehead as opposed to an actual powerhouse.

    1. Re:I'm surprised this even made Wired. by mikeophile · · Score: 5, Funny

      So it's more like reality than we thought?

  4. Given previous stories about Alphaville... by InfinityWpi · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...One candidate has mob ties, the other will be caught having cybersex with an underaged prostitute, and a third will vanish from the campaign because EA doesn't like his ideas for cleaning up the game...

    1. Re:Given previous stories about Alphaville... by MetalMorph · · Score: 1

      This should've been modded Insightful.

      --
      My words are backed with NUCLEAR WEAPONS!
  5. wha? by agent+dero · · Score: 2, Interesting

    News for nerds, stuff that matters........

    Maybe i'm just as lcued in on the 'online pretend simulated people type thing"

    And somehow i'll still be interested on seeing who wins!

    oi

    --
    Error 407 - No creative sig found
  6. SOCOM President by TheApocalypse · · Score: 4, Funny

    Does this mean i can run for president of the SOCOM world?

    1. Re:SOCOM President by SteveXE · · Score: 1

      No because SOCOM sucks, go play Rainbow 6.

    2. Re:SOCOM President by sofakingl · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, but the chances of being assassinated are much higher.

  7. Yes. [nt] by James+A.+J.+Joyce · · Score: 1
  8. Only two parties? by fuzzy12345 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    With only two candidates running, there won't be much of a diversity of viewpoints, and they'll no doubt have virtually (grin) indistinguishable policies on everything, in the middle of the political spectrum.

    Art imitates life, I guess.

    --

    Everybody's a libertarian 'till their neighbour's becomes a crack house.
    1. Re:Only two parties? by Ghoser777 · · Score: 1

      "Don't blame me. I Voted for Kodos" - Homer Simpson

      Matt Fahrenbacher

      --
      James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
    2. Re:Only two parties? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Alas, RTFA. You will see mention of the incumbent president (1), Ashley Richardson (2) and a third fellow called Seth (3). They all come from separate places/have separate viewpoints so that doesn't make 2 parties, does it?

      Plus there are other candidates, these are the three most likely to win according to Sim Analysts.

      So once again, RTFA before posting.

  9. I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what people used to do before the Sim mania, or for the fact before the internet?
    It has been such a long time that I cannot remember.

  10. Participation. by saintlupus · · Score: 5, Funny

    The sad thing is that there will probably be better voter turnout than for the US Presidential election in a few months.

    Sigh.

    --saint

    1. Re:Participation. by whoda · · Score: 1

      Who modded this funny?
      It's the truth. :/

    2. Re:Participation. by El_Ge_Ex · · Score: 1

      The sad thing is that there will probably be better voter turnout than for the US Presidential election in a few months.

      Yes, but whose fault is that? The voters? The parties? of the canidates themselves?

      In my opinion, I'm not going to vote. There is no canidate out there I feel is worth voting for, and no I won't go for the "lesser of two evils" bulls***. Look where it has gotten us...

      -B

    3. Re:Participation. by lucare · · Score: 1

      If you want to vote check out http://www.avgov.com/primary.html ...
      Seems anyone not just those who play the game can vote.

      -Bill

    4. Re:Participation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So go cast a vote for Jello Biafra.

    5. Re:Participation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but whose fault is that?

      Thank you. I get a little annoyed having the guilt always be thrown on the people who don't vote, with little thought given to the reasons behind it. I don't care if a Republican or Democrat gets into office, because both the parties suck. They're both so busy fighting each other that they long ago lost sight of what they were supposed to be standing up for. And, in the end, both canidates would love to see me thrown into jail to be analy raped every day for the rest of my life, soley because I like to eat the "wrong" kind of mushroom every few months. Which is a little ironic given both parties view on homosexuality.

      Personally though, I vote - but third party. There's no chance of them actually making it into the white house at this point, but what's mainly needed is just enough of a representation to get everyone who feels disinfranchised to begin seeing the possibility of finally bypassing the Democrats and Republicans. Once that happens, I think the floodgates are going to break down. And even if no third party made it in for a while, it might be enough to put some fear into the mainstream. Though, in any case, I just like voting third party because it's closer to giving the finger to the Democrats and Republicans than not voting at all is. Not voting says you don't care one way or another about them, voting third party says you activly dislike them.

    6. Re:Participation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, vote for the person that most represents your interests.

      There are plenty of third party candidates that will be in the election. Don't limit yourself to the two bullshit parties. That's the only way the'll get recognition, and we'll get the chance to break the system up a bit.

      Y'know, votes count.

      Personally, I'll be voting for anyone likely to get Bush outta the 'House, which means I'll be be voting democrat, but I'm unoffiliated, and normally I would vote for who best fit my interests...

      But look what that got me. Bush. Eck.

    7. Re:Participation. by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      No, that's not what you do. You simply vote for whomever you see fit as best for the job. That's why we have write-ins. That way, you take away a percentage of the bad guy's votes.

    8. Re:Participation. by El_Ge_Ex · · Score: 1

      You lost the point of my argument. I don't think any of them are fit for the job.

  11. Democracy & Free Speech by Baron_Yam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd argue that a democracy without freedom of speech is not a true democracy.

    If you can't speak freely, you can't expect to exchange information regarding the government - which means you're not able to freely cast an informed VOTE... in which case you have a sham democracy. QED.

    1. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by jfengel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      True. But true democracies are rare.

      The United States, for example, has had to find ways to cut into political speech because it is possible to hijack it with access to media. That is, rich and poor were all allowed to speak, but the rich seemed to speak louder.

      (The poor sometimes got together to form "unions" to speak with a loud, united voice, but that, too, got hijacked by corrupt people, which cast an unpleasant pall over the entire concept, even when it's still executed well.)

      It appears that laws are never able to make a truly level, fair playing field, and therefore any democracy is going to be slanted one way or the other. The fact is you're still allowed to say whatever you want, but the louder you speak, the more likely it is the law will intervene. The laws are an unpleasant compromise.

    2. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by mog007 · · Score: 2, Informative

      The United States is a Republic, or Representative Democracy, not a true Democracy. The city-states of ancient Greece were true Democracies, for the most part since women couldn't vote. Native Americans had a form of true Democracy, except voting was just done at the tribal meeting when there was an important decision to make.

    3. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by modecx · · Score: 3, Informative

      You're confusing the right to free speech with the right to have people listen to you.

      You can blather on and on about whatever you want, easily enough. Go stand on the corner of a street, or write your own publication, edit it on your own, print it on your own, and yor speech is as free as it can be, but nobody has to listen.

      Just as you're handing out your newsletter, some people may take it and read it, and maybe take it to heart. Some might take it--take it home and use it to line their birdcage without giving the actual content a second thought. Some others may refuse to take the newsletter, and some might even get violent, take all of your papers and shove 'em down your throat...

      Such is the same with speech. No one person has to listen to anyone else's insane ranting. They can choose to, but they can just as well choose to say NAAAAANAANAA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!!!! whilst pluging their ears, or quietly nod (thinking that you're a dumbshit.)

      That's what the corporations that run the TV do. If you're on their good side, and agree with their shareholders, chances are they'll let you say your piece. If they're honorable (or even just want to appear to be), they might even allow a minority to say something the corporation as a whole wouldn't agree with. Those are the breaks.

      Such as it turns out, it's not that rich people and corporations speak louder (but perhaps they can speak more often), it's more that people in general are more inclined to listen to them.

      But that too makes sense; they're successful as defined by our society. People would be inclined to listen to those that are successful, in hopes that some of that success would rub off on them--they might even be more inclined to agree--if for no other reason than they want to be on the bandwagon.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    4. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by jfengel · · Score: 1

      The city-states of ancient Greece were true Democracies, for the most part since women couldn't vote.

      Or slaves.
      Or those without land.
      Or children.

      "Democracy" has always defined "demos" a bit less generally than I'd like.

    5. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you reconcile your opinion with your sig? (not that you're going to read this anyways)

    6. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by raalynthslair · · Score: 1

      You mean a democracy like one where a few people can decide the president regardless of what the voters want, and where people from as few as 13 of 51 locations can choose the president? Kinda sounds like our own is a sham. The electoral college is under NO OBLIGATION to select the popular vote, and the votes from 13 states for one candidate WILL win the president - California has 52 votes alone! New York I think is second with somethign like 22... Ever make you feel small when your vote (if you're not one of those "heavy 13" stats) really doesn't count if the other guy wins those states EC votes?

      --
      -- "You must be the change you desire to see in the world." Mahatma Gandhi --
    7. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what? Rarely does a president win the electoral without the popular vote. Since there is a majority of the population living in those 13 states, it seems pretty obvious that they are going to hold more sway.

    8. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by Zeinfeld · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The United States is a Republic, or Representative Democracy, not a true Democracy. The city-states of ancient Greece were true Democracies, for the most part since women couldn't vote. Native Americans had a form of true Democracy, except voting was just done at the tribal meeting when there was an important decision to make.

      The definition of democracy has changed since 1776. It is essential to understand the distinction between representative and true democracy if you are going to read the Federalist Papers. Up to that point the last time Democracy had been tried on a significant scale was Greece and the rulling classes had been brought up on the death of Socrates - ordered by the democratic mob.

      Of course the fact that the number of victims of even the milder Roman emperors such as Claudius was far greater than the number of deaths under democracy did not enter the debate. The fear that served the powers that were was fear of the mob.

      2004 will be known as the first election where the Internet played a major role. Dean did not win the nomination, but he had a major effect. Neither Goldwater nor McGovern won the Presidency, but those two campaigns set the agenda for their parties for the next twenty years.

      So the question to ask is when the first person will emerge from one of these online pseudo-elections to be elected to a real position? It certainly can happen, for over a hundred years the Oxford Union Society was where the political elite of the country was selected. Become President of the union and you were assured a political career. Of course this does not work as well these days and having been President is probably a liability.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    9. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by provolt · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Ever make you feel small when your vote (if you're not one of those "heavy 13" stats) really doesn't count if the other guy wins those states EC votes?


      While it is true that CA, NY, FL, etc. have a large number of electoral votes, it is actually the voters in the small states who have a greater influence. Even the Wyoming has only 3 electoral votes and California has 52, individuals in Wyoming have a great "share" of an electoral vote.

      3 electoral votes divided by poplulation of Wyoming, is greater than 52 electoral votes divided by the population of California.

      It would be interesting to see in which state voters have the greatest influence.

      provolt
    10. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by BrainInAJar · · Score: 1

      ""Democracy" has always defined "demos" a bit less generally than I'd like.

      What I find interesting is that when non-propertied (and i mean property in the real sense of it, that is to say, income generating property) people couldn't vote, everyone was in favour of large government to uphold the law, crush rebellion, etc. When the franchise was extended to the non-propertied, that's when we start getting this rhetoric about having small government (like the republican party).

    11. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by BlueCodeWarrior · · Score: 0

      You're also assuming that a vote must be informed. Democracy doesn't mean that you must have an informed vote...it just says everyone has a vote.

    12. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The United of States is a so called democracy where consumers vote for a someone who happens to please them and spend the most on their campaigns.

    13. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by WorkEmail · · Score: 1

      Then ours is a sham, think about CLearchannel, who owns almost all of the radio stations, and the one r two companies who control cmost of the media, and the executives from them that golf with our president.....you only hear what they want heard. Howard Stern was taken off of the air in 6 cities and fined because of some caller that said a racial slur on the air, which was not Howards fault but the editor's fault for not catching it in the buffer between real time and the time when it hits peoples radio's. But due to his ati-Bush attitude, believe he was hassled and removed temporarily, and is now organizing a "Do not vote for Bush" type thing.

    14. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by Theobon · · Score: 1

      There aren't any true cemocracies. The US is a republic.
      The freedom of speech law in the US is that you are allowed to say anything as long as it doesn't lead to a negitive situation. You can't run in to the middle of the street and yell I hate rednecks and blacks.
      In Canada the law is that their is a complete freedom of all information that ins't excepted through other laws. Like the Hate law or privacy laws.

      These are paraphrased from a law class I took 4 years ago. Research yourself if you want the right information.

    15. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Actually each electoral vote is representing the same number of people regardless of which state you are in.

      Thus your suggestion that the people in WY are more influencial that the people in CA is a gross display of your misunderstanding of the electoral process in the US of A.

    16. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by Stray7Xi · · Score: 1

      Those 13 states also have the majority of the people. What you also failed to mention is that because they have a ton of people, each individual vote means less in those states. You might as well say "if the candidate gets 70% of the vote, then the other 30% doesn't matter at all". The people's votes who really don't matter, are the ones that live in states that are onesided.

      Individual votes matter the most in city elections. Vote for city officials often enough and your vote will probably eventually make the difference between candidates. An individual presidential vote is less likely to change an election then playing the lottery.

    17. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by BTWR · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You're both right... and you're both wrong.

      Parent is right in that less populated states have (in theory) proportionally less electoral votes, in an effort to make every America have an equal state size:electoral vote ration. Grandparent is right in that it is technically still unequal. All states with 2 electoral votes (the minimum) do not have equal populations, this there IS discrepency in the voter:electoral vote ratio.

      But it's all semantics. If I had to go with 1, I'd say the parent is more right. Electoral votes are (in theory) proportional to state population size.

    18. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by zx75 · · Score: 1

      True democracies do not exist in any form on this world today.

      The United States is not a true democracy for many reasons that do not have anything to do with speech at all.

      And finally, a true democracy does not require freedom of speech to work. It requires an electorate that can make informed choices. Granted that it would be difficult for such a system to operate with restrictions on speech, and be suceptable to corruption, but that does not mean that free speech is necessary.

      --
      This is not a sig.
    19. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by 2short · · Score: 1


      Yes, assuming populations haven't shifted too much since the census, the voters in Wyoming theoretically have more influence than those in California, because each state gets a number of electoral votes proportional to their population, and then 2 more.
      But that's theoretically. In reality, if there is a voter out there in Wyoming debating which way to vote, he can rest assured that it doesn't matter. His vote means nothing. In the upcoming election, Wyoming is going to go Republican (or at least, I'll bet you it does, at any amount and odds you name). That voter is going to be counted as voting for Bush no matter what he actually thinks.

      People always focus on the not-quite-proportional nature of the Electoral College, but to my mind, that's nothing compared to it's winner-take-all nature.
      The Electoral College has arrived at a different conclusion than popular vote on two occasions where the popular vote was pretty close. (I tell you, Quincy Adams STOLE that election ) But if someone won the 13 biggest states by slim margins, and got trounced in every other state, we could have a president who not only lost the popular vote but lost it by a ridiculous landslide.

      So which states voters have the greatest influence is easy. Ask any politico, they'll tell you the same half-dozen States where they can't tell you today which way they're going to go in November.

      Sigh. It pisses me off. I pay attention. I know where candidates stand on the issues. I care. But I don't live in that handful of states. My vote is irrelevant, whether it's with the majority in my state or against it, it will neither move my state over 50% nor prevent it's doing so, because my state is nowhere near 50%. I could tell you today who my vote will be counted for, even if I hadn't decided who to cast it for.

    20. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Well, for starters you're wrong because the minimum is 3, not 2. Nice how you blew off the math of the original poster.

      Here's the exact numbers: California has 34.5m people and 53 representatives (55 electoral votes). Wyoming has fewer than 0.5m and 1 representative (3 electoral votes).

      If you actually do the math you will see that Wyoming has nearly four times the number of electoral votes per citizen that California does.

      Fucktard.

    21. Re:Democracy & Free Speech by BTWR · · Score: 1

      hahahaha - "fucktard." - I'll enjoy this argument with this 14 year-old (cuz no one older than that could be such a schmuck).

      i love when people's comebacks are grammar errors or semantics like my error.
      The lowest # electoral votes being "3" and not "2" does NOT change the IDEA of my argument ("fucktard..."). What, do you expect california to get 55 votes and Wyoming to get 0.2 votes, Rhode Island 0.3, etc? That's the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

      "Doing the math" makes no difference. I acknowledged that there is a discrepancy in the actual vote:voter ratio ("...fucktard").

      Flame on. ACs don't scare me. Bring it... ("...fucktard").

  12. Re:Seriously, this isn't offtopic or trollbait.... by Darkon · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yeah, especially given this:

    "Baynes has effectively been the standard-bearer of the so-called Alphaville Government, which has no official power"

  13. Excellent by barenaked · · Score: 5, Funny

    Excellent it is time for reform in the sim community... give it a break. I can't wait to hear the platforms of the running parties, especially the 16 year old..

  14. Forget the Sims - who's President of the Internet! by sgarrity · · Score: 5, Funny

    A friend of mine has laid claim to the title, President of the Internet. The rules are simple - whoever is the #1 result in a Google search for "President of the Internet" is the winner.

  15. Wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    You mean to tell me that George W. Bush isn't a simulated president?

    1. Re:Wait... by piquadratCH · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Go ask the people in Afganistan and Iraq how much they think Dubya is simulated...

    2. Re:Wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy crap, I know!

    3. Re:Wait... by Imperator · · Score: 4, Funny

      How dare you even suggest that! The field of AI hasn't been as successful as some people might have hoped, but it's better than that.

      --

      Gates' Law: Every 18 months, the speed of software halves.
  16. SimCity by EnsilZah · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does that mean whoever gets elected gets to play SimCity?

    1. Re:SimCity by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I certainly hope that someday game developers agree on a way to tie disparate titles together such that a single persistent universe contains nearly everything. You should be able to have a sims character who owns a rice burner and race it in NFS underground. His job could be military, and when he gets called, you play Doom (as he gets sucked into space or whatever) :)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:SimCity by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1

      And, after death, for his violent ways he gets reincarnated into SimAnt.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    3. Re:SimCity by eples · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, SimCity 4 lets you place your Sims in neighborhoods in your city.

      /free-plug

      --
      I'm a 2000 man.
    4. Re:SimCity by MrDickey · · Score: 1

      It's not who gets simelected, its who gets simappointed by the simsupremecourt.

      --
      I hate my sig
    5. Re:SimCity by Art+Tatum · · Score: 1

      Nah, XEvil is where it's at.

  17. Discrimination by inertia187 · · Score: 4, Funny

    From what I can tell, there's no Mac OS version of The Sims Online. I call that discrimination. When will we look past people's instruction set and network byte order and accept each-other as members of a community?

    They should also probably have a Commodore 64 version, but one injustice at a time.

    --
    A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
    1. Re:Discrimination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been disenfranchised!

      Signed,
      Another OS Xian-American.

    2. Re:Discrimination by mod_critical · · Score: 1

      There actually was a Commodore 64 version of SimCity. And from what that was like, believe me, there shouldn't be a C64 version of the Sims =D

    3. Re:Discrimination by orkysoft · · Score: 1

      Erm, wasn't network byte order established to be the same for all platforms?

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    4. Re:Discrimination by yarbo · · Score: 3, Informative

      I believe you mean host byte order. Network byte ordering is always big endian.

    5. Re:Discrimination by inertia187 · · Score: 2, Funny

      See? It's just another form of oppression.

      --
      A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
    6. Re:Discrimination by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      There's no european version either (it's ~3 years late... they haven't managed to bribe enough people to be able to sell it yet... online prostituion doesn't go down well on this side of the pond).

    7. Re:Discrimination by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      The C64 had a game called Little Computer People. It was kind of like the sims.

    8. Re:Discrimination by jafuser · · Score: 1

      Second Life has a mac version (Linux coming soon), and we get a lot of "TSO Refugees". =)

      --
      Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
  18. This is the sickest thing I've seen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Okay, I had no idea how sick and twisted this thing was until I read this article. These people are psychotic! This is not a game it's more an addiction that needs to be addressed! Simulated worlds are one thing, but having a simulated government for your simulated world with a simulated military and simulated intelligence agency? What in the shit are these people DOING with their lives? Yeah I post on Slashdot once in a while, but I don't sit on my ass all day playing laptop fiefdom! Good heavens!

    1. Re:This is the sickest thing I've seen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bah! For comments like that, I would have you summarily executed if you ever even set foot in my laptop fiefdom!

      Call the virtual guards! Off with his head!

  19. Need a (real) life by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sounds like some people are taking these virtual life games a bit too seriously..

    They are JUST games people....

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Need a (real) life by ev1lcanuck · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the folks down at Wired. Elections are just (a new) part of the game, it's not that the people playing are taking it too seriously. The only people taking it too seriously are the ones at Wired who bothered to write an article on it.

    2. Re:Need a (real) life by Tango42 · · Score: 1

      And whoever submitted it to /., and the editor that accepted it...

    3. Re:Need a (real) life by effex100 · · Score: 1

      And all of us who are sitting here discussing it.

      --
      SMOKE... are ya smokin yet?
    4. Re:Need a (real) life by Tango42 · · Score: 1

      Touche

  20. Re:Vote Ceren! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The scary thing is, whoever keeps posting this has gradually added more and more pictures of this girl to the post.

    Although I guess it could be argued that if you allow people to take pictures of you in skimpy clothing and post them to the web, then you're basically asking to be stalked...

  21. Re:Vote Ceren! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She's not even all that attractive.

  22. Re:Seriously, this isn't offtopic or trollbait.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Indeed.

    I was thinking about a possible connection/analogy between black holes and "ghosts".

    Could a human consciousness under extreme conditions/events punch a hole or a recording of the events in the fabric of the reality?

  23. OMG!!!!11 What!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY

    Thanks for the update! Last I heard it was just a fucking videogame.

  24. Re:Vote Ceren! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Actually she is.

    Why? Because she looks like a normal, healthy smart young woman.

    Besides, the black leather/pvc looks absolutely gorgeous on her.

  25. how so? by SHEENmaster · · Score: 5, Funny

    Most states are expected to have voter turnouts higher than 100%.

    --
    You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
    1. Re:how so? by Epistax · · Score: 1

      Are we referring to electronic voting? :)

      If so, I'm hoping they do the papertrail work. No reason not to.

  26. Yeah, but who counts the votes? by 0WaitState · · Score: 4, Funny

    I demand that The Sims either open source their voting system, or provide every voter a PKI-signed certificate record of their vote! Otherwise we will never be able to trust that the right gamer was elected, and civil chaos will result! The Sims could at least attempt to meet the standard we apply to these United States of ours, ... oh, wait.

    Never mind, go ahead and fix it like a game show.

    --

    Remain calm! All is well!
  27. What I see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From what I can tell, there's no Mac OS version of The Sims Online. I call that discrimination. When will we look past people's instruction set and network byte order and accept each-other as members of a community?

  28. Sims question by IgD · · Score: 3, Funny

    Can you kill people in the game? Can you launch a violent coup, etc?

    1. Re:Sims question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me show off my shiny new ignorance here... I don't know about Sims Online, but in the original Sims game, you could lure people into one's swimming pool and remove the ladder.. and so eventually they'd drown and become ghosts.

    2. Re:Sims question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Can you kill people in the game? Can you launch a violent coup, etc?

      And, more importantly, can you topple the towers? Hmm, this would probably put people with desktops at an advantage...

    3. Re:Sims question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      No. Those features are to be in the "Bush Family Evil Empire" expansion pack due next year.

    4. Re:Sims question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or also just build walls around them with no way out, then you could watch them cry for being hungry and also wet themselves before they turned into ghosts

  29. Hmmmm by Gilesx · · Score: 2, Funny

    Am I the only one that doesn't see the point in running for election to rule over something that you don't really rule over at all?

    --
    Sunday you're Thinking Different, Monday you're a huge tool, paying too much and waiting to think like everyone else.
  30. Re:Vote Ceren! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No she doesn't. She's very ugly. I wouldn't touch her skanky hole with a 10ft pole!

    Disgusting.

  31. Is this newsworthy? by Rexz · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Thousands of small, self-elected Internet organisations with no power beyond their own membership elect leaders every day. I don't see how this story is any different from a medium sized EverQuest guild choosing a new leader or a discussion board adding a new moderator.

    This "Government" appears to have no control other than through the actions of 100 or so voluntary members who have no more power than a normal player. Using this election as a case study of such small, self-policing authorities is valid, but it has no more authenticity than the politics 10 year-old's Secret Agents club.

    1. Re:Is this newsworthy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's newsworthy when a EA shill err reader writes in about it to boost their sagging game population/subscription base. Look for a /. billboard in next months update as part of this deal.

    2. Re:Is this newsworthy? by Kobayashi+Maru · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't know, somehow this fascinates me. I don't claim to be a psychologist, or sociologist, but there are some interesting ideas at work here.

      First, why has a significant portion of TSO (or any other online game) gravitated toward general elections? I know when I play games (and I rarely do), that one of the first things I try to do is find the bounds of the game. I try to shoot my team memebers, or drive through the buildings, or contruct buildings that spell out my name. I haven't played The Sims, but if I did, I would probably try to randomly attack someone, or see if they'll have sex with one another. And I think that's human nature -- to experiment.

      So why is it that the players discussed in this article are trying to graft the rules of our "the real world" onto a game? Is it experimentation? Have these players become bored with toying with the absurd limits of the game and are instead interested in finding the practical limits?

      Or are people trying this out of a feeling of detachment from the real world? Are people so frustrated with the current state of affairs that they are trying to establish a utopia of sorts in their online world?

      Is this a case of politically-minded people asserting themselves on an online world? And if so, are they politcal rejects (or the politically inexperienced) that would not otherwise flourish in the real world? And if either of those is the case, what of the participants of these elections? Can you then say that some people are comfortable plugging in to "the system?"

      I could go on and on. It's these questions that make me want to take a few psych classes. And it's these questions that prevent me from enjoying gaming. I can't help but analyze my every move. And by that time, my city has crumbled, or someone has shot me, or my unit has been outflanked. Kind of annoying!

    3. Re:Is this newsworthy? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually you can't do any of those things on TSO... basically the game is - make money (make gnomes, gamble, become a prostitute, join the mafia), buy stuff, make more money...

      There's no killing as such, or death. When I last played it they were talking about introducing trading (so one player could give things to another) but no idea if it ever came off. They *had* to do something to break the 'make gnome sell gnome' cycle or otherwise there wouldn't be any players left by now.

      Alphaville has actually made the papers - apparently 90% of the 'lots' on it are brothels, and they're controlled by an online mafia who will trash your lot and throw you off the game if you don't keep paying them (not sure how they do this.. presumably they're 'in' with maxis and have privs to do it).

  32. pictures where? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a link please?

  33. Re:Seriously, this isn't offtopic or trollbait.... by kryocore · · Score: 0

    I've never played the SIMS and don't plan on it for a while. I like the world of Metroid Prime and SSX3 and, when it comes out, will like DOOM3, much much better. Is it just me or do the people who like the SIMS appear to have many similarities to people who use AOL? Maybe I am missing something, afterall it was posted on /. Is there a cool version of the SIMS like "The SIMS GTA style" where you can go buy a bazooka from some guy and blast things with it?

  34. scr00 by __aaklfb6460 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Perhaps, we'll see for the first time the President screwing the first lady in Hot Date, on the love bed with the nude patch. :P

    1. Re:scr00 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The president screwing the FIRST LADY? Must NOT be a Democrat...

  35. Sims Online coverage on /. by Awptimus+Prime · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Okay, let's get one thing out of the way. Sims Online is not a geek's game. It's designed more for teenage girls and soccer moms than any geek. Any geek would see it for what it is: IRC with graphics..

    This game is right up there with There, inc. I think if both of these games vanished today less than 1% of the /. community would care. That is, unless there was some slick story about a technical failure of said company.

    Let's keep /. going strong with News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.. Not with every Hello Kitty tea party, IRC world, attempt to mimic social behavior in real life. While on that same note, please cut back on the Wired articles. I remember a /. that made fun of them. Now, they appear to be /.'s most major news outlet.

  36. Bread and circuses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and the Sun is hardly a paragon of quality journalism.

    1. Re:Bread and circuses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right you are brother! Do not believe this propaganda!

      Also:

      Reports of Iraqi economic growth by Agence France Presse - LIES!

      Reports of a "big rebound in business" (noting a lack of oil shipments through the north, which resumed since the article went to print) by Christian Science Monitor - LIES!

      "Business is phenomenal," an Iraq in Baghdad tells Reuters - LIES!

      Of course, we all know that Capitalism is evil and they should be starving under a totalitarian dictator, but alas, the world is not perfect :(

      Bread and circuses, comrade!

      (Now back to important things, like the Sims election! I eagerly await the next /. American Idol thread too!)

  37. Re:Vote Ceren! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She may be all those things, but she is also cross-eyed. It makes her look more than a little retarded.

  38. US Goverment != Democracy by sadler121 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The US government was never intended to be a democracy. The founding fathers abhorred democracy equating it with "mob rule". Of course they didn't like Tyranny ether, obviously, or there would have been no revolution against England.

    The US government is a REPUBLIC, meaning that, instead of having authority given directly to the public, authority is given to a select few, who in turn run the government.

    In that way the American government is more modeled after Rome than it is Greece. But still, the constitution divides power between three branches of government, and with the separation of powers implied in the constitution, this allows for a sufficient security against one major voice rising up to silence the others.

    A little OT I think it is funny how Republicans are crying that the courts are acting out of line, in regards to homosexual marriage when, in reality, the courts are just doing its job.

    I also find it hilarious, and also striking that people dismay the courts because they are "un elected". IMO, that is the great strength of the courts and ESSIENTIAL to the balance of powers in the federal government. We need some branch of the government that is separated somewhat from the consent political, partisan bickering that the other two branches engage in daily.

    1. Re:US Goverment != Democracy by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      But you do think that the courts were acting out of line, in regards to "electing" Bush?

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    2. Re:US Goverment != Democracy by Czernobog · · Score: 2, Informative

      You are just plain wrong.
      Rebublic has exactly the same meaning with democracy, the former coming from the Latin word for democracy and the latter from the Greek.
      The two concepts you seem to want to present are those of "direct democracy" and "representative democracy."
      The reason why your US forefathers equated "direct democracy" to mob rule was because like all politicians they abhorred the concept of anyone and everyone having a say and a system that would enable them to follow their words through.

      --
      /. Where the truth
    3. Re:US Goverment != Democracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
      You are just plain wrong. Rebublic has exactly the same meaning with democracy, the former coming from the Latin word for democracy and the latter from the Greek.


      Republic is derived from the latin word "public affair" whereas Democracy comes from the greek meaning "rule by the people". I'm not sure how you think the two mean exactly the same thing.
    4. Re:US Goverment != Democracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A Republic simply has somebody other than a monarch as the head of state.

    5. Re:US Goverment != Democracy by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      The reason why your US forefathers equated "direct democracy" to mob rule was because like all politicians they abhorred the concept of anyone and everyone having a say and a system that would enable them to follow their words through.

      Sort of. They abhorred it because they believed the philosophies of people like John Locke. They believed, perhaps rightly so in their time, that the average person was simply not educated enough to participate so directly in government. Things like the electoral college were set up to "save us from ourselves."

      I wouldn't equate that position to abhorring the thought of people having a voice and an ability to follow through. They simply wanted the people participating in government to be the most intelligent parts of society (boy would they love Bush!). It would be interesting to see if they arrived at the same conclusion if they were alive in present day.

    6. Re:US Goverment != Democracy by Dhalka226 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We need some branch of the government that is separated somewhat from the consent political, partisan bickering that the other two branches engage in daily.

      I know that was a typo, but it's an interesting one because as I'm sure you know, judicial nominees (at the federal level) do need to be given consent from the Senate, which brings the political, partisan bickering directly back in. Since they are also appointed by perhaps THE most political figure in the country, the president, and almost always appointed because they hold the same important ideals as the person appointing them, they are pretty political people themselves.

      I suppose you're right that it is "somewhat" separated, probably farther than elected positions are, but they are definitely still involved. It's a shame.

    7. Re:US Goverment != Democracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > In that way the American government is more modeled after Rome than it is Greece

      Ancient & Classical Greece was a collection of city states, each with a different form of government. You can't refer to them in the singular sense, like you can with the Romans. Perhaps you are refering to Athens, though?

  39. Re:Forget the Sims - who's President of the Intern by srcosmo · · Score: 4, Funny
    Well this is me voting against him:

    President of the Internet

    --
    free speach
    Did you mean: free speech
  40. Who trusts computer voting system results? by Phat_Tony · · Score: 5, Funny

    Who's going to trust the results of this election? Everyone knows computer voting systems aren't secure.

    At least the Alphaville ones probably weren't designed by Diebold.

    --
    Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
    1. Re:Who trusts computer voting system results? by SmittyTheBold · · Score: 1

      I say they should mail paper ballots to all registered Sims Online users.

      --
      ± 29 dB
  41. Re:Forget the Sims - who's President of the Intern by Krunch · · Score: 1

    That would be the president of the web.
    What about the same search on Google images or Google groups ?

    --
    No GNU has been Hurd during the making of this comment.
  42. Re:Vote Ceren! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Feel free to go back and spank your monkey over the unnatural, silicone enhanced blonde airhead posers you found in your dad's Playboy magazine.

  43. No MMOG is a "privilege" by mao+che+minh · · Score: 5, Informative
    It is EA's privilege to have you as its customer. It is Square/Enix's privilege to have you as a customer. Etc. It is not a privilege for you to play their game(s).

    That is the fallacy of MMOGs. The companies that run the MMOGs treat their customers like it is a privilege to get to play their game. And sadly, the players/customers routinely take it in the ass with a confused smile on their face.

    For example, go to any popular MMOG forum and take note of the excessive complaining about all manner of game dynamics and routines. Most of the time, the people complaining would just like the game to be changed in some way, and these feelings are usually shared by the majority. Nevertheless, the most popular retort to any such complaint is something akin to "well it is Square's game, and if you don't like it than you don't have to play!". The extremely sad thing is, is that as customers you should expect a company to improve its product to the majority's wishes, and to fix bugs in a timely fashion, etc. But since such a huge user-base of customers without any self-worth exists, the MMOG companies continue to run their shops the way they do: with a complete disregard for customer satisfaction and product quality.

    1. Re:No MMOG is a "privilege" by newbiescum · · Score: 1

      The problem with all the complaining is that I would say a fair share of it is the "I want to be the most powerful god-like character" or "How dare such and such got changed, now I need to get XYZ to be just as powerful?" It's a cyclical thing too in that once one class of players is satisified, another group complains that they didn't get any improvements. There's always that amount of complaining and when the players are always online, they have plenty of time to complain. Look at the Battle.net forums on Warcraft III for instance. There are always players complaining about such and such balances or that "X" race is better than "Y" race. Weed out all those complaints, and then I think you'll find the majority of bugs are fixed (interface bugs, pathfinding bugs, actual code changes and not gameplay issues, etc.).

      And as for customer satisfaction, I think you should look at the turnover rate of players. Obviously players find some value in games like Everquest and Final Fantasy XI. Otherwise, they would end up like Anarchy Online.

    2. Re:No MMOG is a "privilege" by Samurai+Cat! · · Score: 1

      Most of the time, the people complaining would just like the game to be changed in some way, and these feelings are usually shared by the majority.

      Majority of the forum posters, perhaps, but not necessarily a majority of the customer base. Only a small fraction of any game's customer base are regular forum posters, and that small fraction tends to be the loudest/whiniest.

      --

      "People" using "unnecessary" quotes should be "shot".
    3. Re:No MMOG is a "privilege" by Idarubicin · · Score: 1
      It is EA's privilege to have you as its customer. It is Square/Enix's privilege to have you as a customer. Etc. It is not a privilege for you to play their game(s).

      Eh? Privilege? When did this enter into the matter at all?

      The operation of these online games is governed by straight contract law. Each party has rights and obligations under the law. Each party gets something of presumed value out of the transaction. I get to play the game for entertainment, Square gets some of my real-world money. Neither side enjoys some sort of special privilege; we're both individuals entering a contract.

      For example, go to any popular MMOG forum and take note of the excessive complaining about all manner of game dynamics and routines. Most of the time, the people complaining would just like the game to be changed in some way, and these feelings are usually shared by the majority. Nevertheless, the most popular retort to any such complaint is something akin to "well it is Square's game, and if you don't like it than you don't have to play!". The extremely sad thing is, is that as customers you should expect a company to improve its product to the majority's wishes, and to fix bugs in a timely fashion, etc.
      And rightly so--it is Square's game. They're providing a service which I, as an individual, can choose whether or not to purchase. It may be bad business sense to alienate customers...but if their cash flow is still good, why not squeeze as much out of us as possible? If people are still paying for it, then how bad could it be? From Square's perspective, maybe they feel that their chief responsibilities are to keep up with providing fresh content and keep the servers running, and that some people have inflated expectations.

      Note also that for every user who complains on the forums, there are likely hundreds of users who didn't complain--is that because a) they're too lazy, b) they like the way things work, or c) they're afraid they're going to get flamed abusively and excessively if they tell someone to quit griping. Short of doing a proper random survey (not "all my friends agree with me on this"), I daresay nobody can answer that question.

      They offer a product. If the majority wants something different, someone else will come along to serve that market niche. For physical products, some companies compete on the basis of price, others on customer service, others on quality--most on some combination. If one product doesn't meet your expectations, find another one.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    4. Re:No MMOG is a "privilege" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only a small fraction of any game's customer base are regular forum posters, and that small fraction tends to be the loudest/whiniest.

      kinda like democrats

    5. Re:No MMOG is a "privilege" by Atryn · · Score: 1
      Most of the time, the people complaining would just like the game to be changed in some way, and these feelings are usually shared by the majority.
      I'm sure many ppl on here have been involved in multiplayer worlds of some sort. I am a wizard on a classic LP-MUD. Often times the "majority" of the players do want the same things. However, there are often reasons why those things would be bad for the game and/or game company.

      For instance, I'd bet most players in the Sims would like for their jobs to pay more money. If you just let them all vote themselves a raise, that would probably pass. However, you would also have devalued the currency and decreased the game's difficulty and therefore challenge.
      --
      Come play Moral Decay!
    6. Re:No MMOG is a "privilege" by brkello · · Score: 1

      I am sorry, but you are flat wrong. If Square listened to every post on what they needed to change in the game, it would have to be patched daily and the download files would be so large that the servers could only be up for 1 hour of play time a day.

      Ok, but you would say that only the opinions that are a majority count. How do you know it is a majority? These are people who actually use the forum, all the people who don't have a problem are playing the game and aren't voicing their opinion.

      The people who are saying "well it is Square's game, and if you don't like it than you don't have to play!" are probably the people who think that the game is fine and doesn't require the petty (and usually game damaging) changes that the forum writers demand. So not playing IS a option if they don't like it so much. But guess what, they are still playing because it is a good game.

      I actually play on Square's game and enjoy it. The give updates that do happen to have some of the things fixed/added that people complain about. They selectively choose which things to fix/add. This makes sense and I would say the majority of people in the game (not in the forums) are happy with it.

      If you disagree with me, well, I hope you someday have to make a game. And when you read the forums about your game, I hope you make every single majority opinion fix that comes around. I guarantee you it will be the worst game out there.

      --
      Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
  44. WGEM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Worst Game Ever Made.

    This game is the best example in modern times of how not to make an MMORPG.

    I dare you to find a thriving TSO community.

    This isn't news, it's a failed attempt to stir up interest in a bone-numbingingly boring game.

  45. Re:Vote Ceren! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's also possible the reason he wouldn't touch her is because HE'S FUCKING GAY

  46. did you hear the canidates' debate? by Cynikal · · Score: 5, Funny

    all it sounded like was blah-blah blah-blah to me...

  47. the U.S. has never been a democracy by bwy · · Score: 1

    The U.S. has always been a republic, not a democracy. There is an extremely large difference between the two. A true democracy would be truely frightening.

  48. I sense a conspiracy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    ...a MUSICAL conspiracy!

    Alphaville
    Mr. President

    (Ok, maybe you need to be European to understand this humor ;)

  49. Re:Vote Ceren! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She needs to do some crunches and run a little fat off that ass. Dried out nasty fading green dyed hair certainly looks "smart" sir, I do apologize.

  50. Campaign stump by WarPresident · · Score: 1

    After a hard day's shaking babies and kissing hands, I think it's time to tell you where I stand on the issues.

    Firstly, I'm a uniter, not a divider. Whether it's the rich 'Pioneers' that will get me elected, or the multinational Alphaville companies that I owe my allegiance to, I will have your best interests in mind.

    I will create a tax break for all Alphaville residents that spend more than 60 hours online each week, repealing the crippling monthly charges that so many of our nation building contributors must shoulder. This will create jobs for those who have to build digital exercise machines, paintings, stoves and so forth.

    But all is not well in Alphaville. An insidious enemy is at work behind the scenes. The axis of Maxis must be stopped. As president, I will abduct all suspected enemies, and wall them up in Guantanamo House until they either confess or die.

    All voting is electronic, and with my friends at AlphaBold, you're "voting" for me one way or the other.

    --
    Here come da fudge!
  51. Re:Forget the Sims - who's President of the Intern by Espectr0 · · Score: 1

    Strange, i don't see Al Gore there!

  52. Re:404 Not Found by hikerhat · · Score: 1

    Much like the current president of the US, it appears the presidient of the Internet takes lots of vactaion. Probably more than any other president of the Internet.

  53. Negative campaigning... by stevobi · · Score: 5, Funny

    Maybe I'm just simical, but I expect that most campaigns will resort to MUDslinging...

  54. Re:Seriously, this isn't offtopic or trollbait.... by Nicholas+Q+Name · · Score: 0

    Nah. I gave up when they wouldn't let me have sex with the dog.

    (Its okay, it was a female dog - I'm not strange or anything...)

    --
    Sig: Closed for refurbishment.
  55. Re:Forget the Sims - who's President of the Intern by mabu · · Score: 1

    LAME.

    Are you that ignorant or are you just trying to be funny?

  56. Re:Vote Ceren! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Women should have a big, round ass and hers is just about perfect.

    It's ok to prefer little-boy-like asses instead, but don't go dissing the more traditional female beauty.

  57. What do you expect them to do in a LIFE SIMULATOR? by Jack+Zombie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They're aren't taking the game "too seriously," they're just taking their fun seriously. And it is very interesting from a sociological point of view as well, since it crudely mimics reality.

    Not everyone likes short games for lazy people with an attention span of... hey, look! Some dirt! Yum!

    Besides, if real life is so good, why is everyone trying to get away from it?

    --
    "You should never doubt what nobody is sure about." -- Willy Wonka
  58. Re:Forget the Sims - who's President of the Intern by stephanruby · · Score: 1

    That's fine, I'll be the "CEO of the internet" then.

  59. Customer Service vs Consumerism by cprincipe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It is true that Square/Enix are the vendors and MMOG players are customers. They could certainly improve relations with their customers by listening to their customers and trying to accomodate as many requests as possible.

    However, at the point where Square/Enix chooses to ignore a customer complaint, it is that customer's choice at that point whether they wish to accept those terms of service. Unlike the phone company, The Sims Online is not a monopoly. If the customer doesn't like the product/service, and doesn't like the response of the vendor, then the customer is not compelled to continue using the service. Anyone who believes otherwise is no longer a consumer - they are an addict.

    --

    bun-fhuinneog agam!

  60. Re:Forget the Sims - who's President of the Intern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's called sarcasm you idiot

  61. Conclusion--humans suck by bonch · · Score: 1

    Human nature tends to ruin any ideal governing structure. At least I'd say Democracy sucks the least.

  62. Wow.. by destiney · · Score: 1


    I can't believe people are still playing the game. After a couple weeks the new-ness wore off and it became so boring that my kids wouldn't even play it.

  63. I don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Alphaville is a good band by itself. Only have fond memories of their smash hit 'Forever Young'. Why did they have those Eurodance weenies Mr.President as president? And now the Sims get to elect a new one? Smack my ass and call me Sally, I don't get it!

  64. OH YOU ARE SO FIRED! by YOU+ARE+SO+FIRED! · · Score: 1

    Simical? MUDsliniging? Those sort of puns may fly at your local improv comedy troupe establishment but not in this organization. In case you hadn't noticed, this is a business - not a factory of self-embarassment where you get to spend the whole day producing crap like that. You're fired. Don't bother packing up your things (we already set your cubicle on fire); Jenny will send the ashes to the address we have on file for you.

  65. I thought about this as well... by mindaktiviti · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I thought about this concept as well. It'd be pretty cool if your computer experience was just one big game, and instead of irc chat rooms you'd just have a "no weapons" quake 3 arena zone or something where people chat.

    Anyway, there is a game that did actually go to the next step - Savage - The Battle for Newerth or something like that. It has a real time strategy component (i.e. the leader) as well as everyone else is in the fps/3rd person (depending on the weapon choice).

    Maybe someone could make a game that's a space simulation strategy and you have an fps game inside where you drop off "soldiers" and they do co-op missions on abandoned space stations fighting for them or something. In any case, it'd be a cool gaming model and would be more "vast".

  66. RTFA by MustardMan · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you bothered to RTFA, you'd see that the "government" was formed primarily as a way to help protect new players from getting suckered by scam artists. They aren't trying to graft "real world" rules into the game - they are trying to keep people from pissing off all the new players and making them quit. It's the same reason a lot of guilds are formed in other MMORPGs.

  67. Hanging chads? by tobycat · · Score: 1

    Has alphaville upgraded to computer voting yet or are they still using punchcards?

  68. i made gay sims by fat32 · · Score: 0, Troll

    One time, two of my Sims fell in love with each other, and a third Sim became so jealous he kissed the male just to show his affection.

    1. Re:i made gay sims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Troll; cut-n-paste from here.

  69. Re:Forget the Sims - who's President of the Intern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your sarcasm is lame.

  70. The Question here is.... by slappyjack · · Score: 5, Funny

    So if Simland is formaing faux governments, does this mark the beginning of the online nation state?

    Will the arise of virtual nation states become the same quagmiritic mess of so-called diplomatic relations that exists in the real world today?

    If so, then will these diplomatic relations between online communities breakdown and become virtual online hostilities?

    Should all of this happen, I'd put my money on Everquest kicking the shit out of Sims Online, using the simoleans to bloat an ever increasing warchest, turning the peoples of Alphaville into nothing but a nation of slaves used for bizzare Orcish sexual practices, and rolling on to conquer even more virtual online lands.

    Even after conquering the majority of the internets online lands, The majority of our new internet masters will still remain savagely unlaid.

    (I'm very aware that I used the word "faux," and I'm not sorry for it.
    Nor am I sorry for the cheap shot I took at Everquest players.)

  71. Need a life? by God+Takeru · · Score: 1

    From the article itself:

    Given that the winner takes over leadership of a virtual government in a virtual city in a virtual world, one might wonder whether there's anything to take seriously here.

    Gee, really?

    --
    "Anonymous cowards are just K-whores afraid of their accounts being modded down." - Bob the O (me)
  72. I've already seen the movie. by fm6 · · Score: 2, Interesting
  73. Not quite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The US is a republic and a democracy. The two aren't mutually exclusive terms.
    A country can have a directly elected supreme ruler or a dictator and still be a republic. The only thing you need to be a republic is a non-hereditary ruler.

    To fix your statement change democracy to pure democracy and republic to representational democracy.

  74. Re:Forget the Sims - who's President of the Intern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's called sarcasm you idiot

    No. It's not sarcasm. It's political propaganda.

    It's one thing to make jokes that have a ring of truth. The dumbass Al-Gore-invented-the-internet reference is inaccurate and stupid.

  75. Re:Forget the Sims - who's President of the Intern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm... I wonder if it works if there is more than one link on the same page going to the same site.

    President of the Internet

  76. Post election by MMaestro · · Score: 1

    After post election the losing side will call for a recount only to find that some votes had been miscounted from lag. (Florida)

  77. Re:Forget the Sims - who's President of the Intern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    And how high is the PageRank for /. comment pages?

    If Google has been trying to weed out links from blogs & the like, all our work at toppling the president may be for nothing.

  78. Bush by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    450 votes form simworld for Bush.
    451 votes form simworld for Mr. Presdint.

    Bush wins!! 452 votes form florida.

    If you count all the votes form beyond the grave.

  79. Just like real life presidential election by Pop69 · · Score: 0

    They haven't bothered to release it in the UK yet so only North Americea gets to vote

  80. Good idea.. by msimm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Seriously, I think your just tripped over the future of entertainment.

    --
    Quack, quack.
    1. Re:Good idea.. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Really the original example of this is the assorted MUD-type games which have their own scripting languages. I have the most experience using MUSH which is a much more powerful system than I ever treated it as. By its very nature it is object oriented and you can build programming systems which consist of nested objects. Which I did almost none of :) But what would be more interesting than that would be MUCK which as I understand has some variant of FORTH in it, which has been exploited for all kinds of interesting software projects inside MUCKs. Anyway you could have games inside the game, and since the game's interface is textual, it would be trivial to embed access to it into other games.

      Now I guess the game that takes over where they left off is Second Life, which at least lets you build your own structures and apparently vehicles, and has an allegedly simple scripting language. I like this idea but I think that we should go a step further, and allocate space in a virtual, peer to peer world based on IP addresses, which is basically the only logical way to do this, and use DNS to store information about our virtual spaces (such as their existence, subnet ranges, filenames, and so on.) It seems a shame to let anyone else run things for us. I envision IPv4 space as one planet, separated into 2^8 segments, which are then... well you get the rest. IPv6 is going to have to be a much larger space :)

      Originally I envisioned a sort of universal engine like second life (I only mention them by name because they're in the news now and they have all the basic features required, I haven't used the thing) where you could create objects, write code to explain how they should behave, and play around in them. If you wanted to write enough code in the proper language you could write an emulator inside the system, to play other games, and so on. But you could never optimize it for everything, and get everyone to agree to use it, it would be completely impossible, so the best you can ask for is a consistent format for the exchange of information.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Good idea.. by msimm · · Score: 1

      But you know what its going to end up like: msn's next generation IM/chat with added hooks for seamlessly calling up games. You've got to figure that most gamers run some sort of im software in the background already so I think its safe to say that would be the most likely starting point (although I like your sims idea..it is sort of like a big chat room with diversions).

      --
      Quack, quack.
  81. Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are a loser

  82. Damn, what a flashback by TaoJones · · Score: 1

    > Thousands of small, self-elected Internet
    > organisations with no power beyond their own
    > membership elect leaders every day.

    Sounds like your standard IRC channel power sqabbles from way back. Been there, done that, got the tshirt.

    > I don't see how this story is any different from
    > a medium sized EverQuest guild choosing a new
    > leader or a discussion board adding a new
    > moderator.

    Nothing new here at all. Old school IRC BS with a pretty GUI...

    --
    "Fear is the rootkit of democracy.." Blarkon
  83. Sony Online are actually excellent at this by CrystalFalcon · · Score: 1

    ...at least when it comes to Planetside, which I play frequently.

    Every month or so, there comes a patch which tweaks the game a little bit, adds something, modifies some stats, etc. Sony people are following the forums and listening to what people think about the game.

    At one time they even restructured their entire server farm to accommodate a common desire (they merged the population of several servers to increase player density). This is not a small effort.

    I like that. They really do listen to customers.

  84. Slice City: SimCity within The Sims by SimHacker · · Score: 1
    If you want to play SimCity inside The Sims, check out Slice City:

    http://www.simslice.com/Slicecity.htm

    The Power Plant is the buyable object -- click here to see a pic. Place it anywhere on your lot. That starts the game. Only buy one per lot for best gameplay. If this is your first time here, please read everything below carefully. Otherwise you can click here for some Slice City Gameplay Tips.

    Slice City - "the other city that never sleeps". This city is awake and alive with hustle and bustle 24/7! Citizens use businesses, homes, parks, etc. for work and play, and these all cost you money to maintain. The happier the little people are in their habitat, the harder they will work, and the more profit you will make from them. Well-maintained cities can encourage more citizens to move in there. This will not only increase your population, but also your city size... and your profit margin. Cities that are neglected or not well-maintained will cease growing, or slowly deteriorate until they are nothing but piles of rubble. Using the various "disasters" (including a tornado option) can do that in much less time. ;) So to maximize your worker's output, keep all structures "refurbished". Your citizens may even help you do that on occasion too. And if you need more help, ask The Gardener. :)

    The citizens also need power from the Power Plant to do any expanding. The Power Plant started in the "ON" position, but you can "Power it down" (by clicking on it) to stop your city from growing any further, and to keep your daily profits/costs stabilized (good for those that like the small town feel). "Power it up" again to allow for potential growth to resume (good for those that like the larger city life). City costs, profits and growth (if any) are calculated each midnight (between 11:55pm and 12:05am).

    -Don

    --
    Take a look and feel free: http://www.PieMenu.com
  85. File Planet is Running 14 day free trial of game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The Sims Online Free Trial from File Planet

    Why are argue about it when you can play it :)

    Don't know if the download is available elsewhere.

    cheers, Coward

  86. Re:Seriously, this isn't offtopic or trollbait.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had lots of fun with my three lesbian sims until a girl (in real life) kidnapped them to use them as either slaves or wives for her own sims...

  87. I agree. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    It has worked surprisingly well, considering the political agendas of US politicians over the years.

    We could have gone with a true democracy, but reference the French Revolution for an example of stability, longevity, and peace in a "pure" democracy. "Um, thanks."

  88. Ashley Wins Primary! by bbsguru · · Score: 2, Interesting
    That caught my attention, with the recent proposal to lower the voting age in California. I'm just a bit nervous about our legislators finding out there is a 16 year-old running for President, even if it is online.

    I hope that the thousands of regular TSO players who are old enough to vote come out of this simulated fun-fest long enough to help decide issues in the real world. Then again, looking at some recent election results, I guess virtual reality already has too much influence.

  89. Then its not "by the people" by nnappe · · Score: 1

    This is why our Founding Fathers were quite careful not to choose democracy but rather a limited, Constitutional form of republicanism for their new nation. So that a rabid, banal majority couldn't legally seize control of the government and use it to cruelly oppress the minority.
    So, how can you tell THEY werent a minority trying to opress the majority?
    That's simply stupid. So, they (less than 40 people) took certain decision that then weren't subject to the decision of the majority.
    I can hardly see any progress here.
    How can we distinct between a 'rabid' and 'banal' majority and a good one?

    1. Re:Then its not "by the people" by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      The original states sent representatives to the convention.

      Even after the first draft, some of those states weren't satisfied, and thus came the bill of rights.

      It's exactly the same as when an ambassador signs contracts with other nations.

    2. Re:Then its not "by the people" by nnappe · · Score: 1

      OK, but how were the representatives elected?
      If by a majority, then they *could* have decided to wipe off the minority. If not, how does it come that they werent an opressing minority.

      I dont think you can restrict the decisions to be taken by the majority. With whose power would you do such a thing? Besides discouragement of discrimination (ie, law treating jews different than other people -nazi germany or israel like -, or by ethnic origin) and free speech, I cant think of any other restriction that you can impose to a majority.

      I mean, even the universal declaration of humans rights is by no means universal. But should it?