I don't know if you were being sarcastic or not, but Slashdot's moderating policies are complete bullshit too, and most users are somewhere very far away from reality.
I don't know how it is in the US, but in Finland cell phone connections are dirt cheap. If you use your phone seldomly or only for emergencies, it costs virtually nothing. I think my last bill was around 5 euros or something ($7). There's a dizzying amount of different plans and packages, some of which allow you to talk free of charge under certain conditions, or give you tons of free air time.
The downside was inhibited ability to hunker down and cram out work -- this was solved by setting aside a portion of the office as a DND area. Except for real emergencies, DND was observed by everyone.
Yeah, because cheating in a multiplayer game is obviously no big deal and it's just someone playing the game they way they want to. You're the one with the disorder.
Conversely, there's no sane reason to think that they do. Griefing in a FPS - where the *very object of the game* is to *kill other virtual people*...
Griefing is not the objective of any FPS. Teamkilling, wallhacking, aimbotting etc. are strictly forbidden and disrupt the gameplay.
... is so far removed from any situation where real morals and consequences apply that a judgement cannot be made either way. If we start claiming what people do in computer games, whether in the spirit of the game or not, is representative of their real-life moral makeup, we might as well give up and hand over our keyboards to Jack Thompson.
It's not far removed from anything. You're dealing with real people and your actions have real consequences.
There's no reason to think that these people don't suffer from personality disorders. The Internet just allows them to act out without any fear of punishment.
Oh hold on there. Some 300lb man tackling me while I'm walking down the street minding my own business is not justified at all, but in a game of foot ball it is quite legal and acceptable. Its part of the game.
This logic does not apply to everything.
Um... So you are really comparing rape and loosing a game as one and the same? That bothers me.
Huh? What you are describing was WAD (Was As Designed) vs Exploit.
Just because something is allowed doesn't mean it's morally justified or that people should do it.
Just because you are ganged up on and and "ganked" doesn't mean the players that did so are bad people. They are playing by the rules as the developers have allowed.
By the same logic a rapist isn't a bad person if rape is legal in his country.
My examples merely illustrate the fact that just because something occurs online doesn't mean that it doesn't have a real effect on real people. Games are played by real people, and by griefing them you cause them real annoyance, frustration and anger, and waste their time (which they may or may not pay money for). Gankers caused me to leave a PvP realm in WoW simply by making the game completely unplayable, which meant that I had wasted a considerable amount of time leveling up a character that I was ultimately forced to discard. PvP is fine when it's an even match or when the underdog has at least the possibility of escaping, but ganking is really no different from aimbotting or wallhacking in a FPS game. It's actually even worse, since even aimbotters and wallhackers can be killed, or voted out by the players.
I did roll PVE. I'm not going to pay 12 euros a month for the priviledge of having other players constantly ruin my game. People who pay money for that are pretty fucking stupid. I doubt Counter-Strike players would pay money to have someone aimbot and wallhack on their servers.
So you believe that actions become morally inert as long as they happen online? How far do you take this philosophy? Would it be okay to infect someone with a virus, hack their website or post their personal details online?
Personally, I think player killing makes you a complete assclown, and probably indicates that you have a personality disorder or some other mental issue.
Decisions made in multiplayer games can actually tell you something about a person, not to mention that those decisions actually affect other people. Players who gank in MMORPGs or grief in shooters very likely suffer from personality disorders, maybe even to the point of being psychopaths.
Slashdot Mirror
Not because they don't want to, but because they're unable to.
I don't know if you were being sarcastic or not, but Slashdot's moderating policies are complete bullshit too, and most users are somewhere very far away from reality.
I can't even begin to imagine how eugenics/genetics/tranhumanism is connected to any of this.
Several months, but I don't remember how many.
I don't know how it is in the US, but in Finland cell phone connections are dirt cheap. If you use your phone seldomly or only for emergencies, it costs virtually nothing. I think my last bill was around 5 euros or something ($7). There's a dizzying amount of different plans and packages, some of which allow you to talk free of charge under certain conditions, or give you tons of free air time.
Dungeons & Dragons increases productivity!
Yeah, because cheating in a multiplayer game is obviously no big deal and it's just someone playing the game they way they want to. You're the one with the disorder.
I just brought vertinox's logic to its inevitable conclusion. I didn't make any comparisons.
Griefing is not the objective of any FPS. Teamkilling, wallhacking, aimbotting etc. are strictly forbidden and disrupt the gameplay.
It's not far removed from anything. You're dealing with real people and your actions have real consequences.
There's no reason to think that these people don't suffer from personality disorders. The Internet just allows them to act out without any fear of punishment.
This logic does not apply to everything.
Where did I make such a comparison?
Just because something is allowed doesn't mean it's morally justified or that people should do it.
By the same logic a rapist isn't a bad person if rape is legal in his country.
Even this is more interesting than the "news" of Firefox getting a minor update.
Hmm?
He said that he does player killing, in an attempt to "balance the world."
-1 Troll? Ahahaha. Looks like some ganker/griefer got pissed off.
My examples merely illustrate the fact that just because something occurs online doesn't mean that it doesn't have a real effect on real people. Games are played by real people, and by griefing them you cause them real annoyance, frustration and anger, and waste their time (which they may or may not pay money for). Gankers caused me to leave a PvP realm in WoW simply by making the game completely unplayable, which meant that I had wasted a considerable amount of time leveling up a character that I was ultimately forced to discard. PvP is fine when it's an even match or when the underdog has at least the possibility of escaping, but ganking is really no different from aimbotting or wallhacking in a FPS game. It's actually even worse, since even aimbotters and wallhackers can be killed, or voted out by the players.
I did roll PVE. I'm not going to pay 12 euros a month for the priviledge of having other players constantly ruin my game. People who pay money for that are pretty fucking stupid. I doubt Counter-Strike players would pay money to have someone aimbot and wallhack on their servers.
So you believe that actions become morally inert as long as they happen online? How far do you take this philosophy? Would it be okay to infect someone with a virus, hack their website or post their personal details online?
Personally, I think player killing makes you a complete assclown, and probably indicates that you have a personality disorder or some other mental issue.
Decisions made in multiplayer games can actually tell you something about a person, not to mention that those decisions actually affect other people. Players who gank in MMORPGs or grief in shooters very likely suffer from personality disorders, maybe even to the point of being psychopaths.
Hmmh, modded Troll (again). The leftist thugs of Slashdot are so predictable.
By average people I mean people who aren't involved in terrorism.
Depends on your definition of a fundamentalist.
Yes, but not enough of them.
They are not meant to solve those problems, so what exactly is your point?
I haven't see any "rebellion" in Iraq. Terrorism, yes. Rebellion, no.