Wednesday, March 20, 2013

I go to a bar to have fun, not to talk, dance or drink

Imagine that you walk to a single girl in a bar.
- Hi, would you like some drink?
- No, I'm just having fun.
- You mean listening to music?
- No, I don't care about music, I'm just here for fun.
- Would you like to dance?
- Nooo! I'm here to have fun.
- Are you waiting for someone?
- Get lost already nolifer! What's so hard in understanding that I just want to have fun?!

A weird conversation isn't it? Now let's say you are on the phone with a buddy.
- Hi, any plans for tonight?
- Yes, I go to the cinema.
- I like movies too, we can go together. Would you like to see the new action movie?
- Those aren't my thing. I just want to have fun.
- OK, comedy then!
- Nope, I just want some fun.
- Maybe romantic movies are your thing.
- Dude. Please. I'm not a hardcore like you. I just want to hang out and have some fun.

No one had such conversation, right? Cinemas, bars, football fields, bowling clubs are all places where you go for fun, yet not a single person would utter the word "fun" there. They already decided what kind of activity is their fun and they go directly for that activity.

There is only one place where uttering the words "I do it for fun" is common: sex, where it has an explicit meaning "I don't want relationship." This distinction is needed because the socially default form of sex is in a loving relationship. The reason why people use the "just for fun" statement for sex is to somewhat avoid the social stigma related to that. Saying "I don't even like you but I'm horny" would be much less acceptable, yet much more true. There is no need to use this trick in the cinema, since watching any kind of popular movies are OK, so one can openly say the truth: "I want to see an action movie". In the case of video games the situation is similar to the sex case. The pure truth would be embarrassing, that's why people use the generic and positive term "fun". The pure truth would be "I'm bad in the game, so I don't even attempt to win, I just want to kill time". Small kids who are unaware of its social stigma gladly say "I don't know, I'm just playing" when you ask what exactly Barbie do on the top of the firefighter truck with a gun in her hands. Older people are aware of the social stigma of "loser" so they try to avoid it by the "for fun" statement. If the truth wouldn't be shameful, they could be more precise on what are they doing.

My point is that the "for fun" people are aware of their loser status, try to avoid the stigma and fight back by labeling non-losers as "no lifers" or "no fun people".

27 comments:

Leeho said...

What about visiting some place with your friends just to chat with them? People usually try to find some excuse, like dinner, or bowling, or something like that, but that's an excuse and nothing else. They are out exactly to hang out and have fun - chat with each other, getting themselves social.

For example, when you're going for lunch with your colleague and talk to him about recent movie, what for are you doing so? Not because you're interested in the information he's sharing with you, that's nonsense. People just have a deep, biological need to chat because it's what makes a social relationships between them. MMO's, dinners, drinks, dancing, bowling and any social activity is about that, not about the activity itself - for about 95% of people.

Ask yourself - would you do the very same activity with robots doing just the same as people you're doing it with, but with no chat or just technical communication? Would you play a game, if you're the only human playing, and AI is just as good as it fancies you? If yes, you're in the ~5% who are doing it for the activity itself. If no - you're behaving just like monkeys in the zoo, who are looking each other for non-existing bugs in the fur, because it's how they are making themselves social, and being social is what made them survive.

Steel H. said...

Dude, I suck at EVE, I cba to learn proper PvP, tracking, orbiting, overheating and other such nonsense. I like F1 mashing blobwars because I get to just show up, anchor up, mash F1 on the broadcasted target and then collect reimbursement, and get like 100-200 kills per fight. That or gank AFK miners in hisec. And actually, I'm kindof bored with blobwars. I just like to see other peoples internet-pixel spaceships explode with me on their killmails, that's fun. Happy now? In bourbon veritas.

Gevlon said...

@Leeho: I usually have chat channels turned off. I eat in my office because I'm annoyed by colleagues talking nonsense in the cafeteria.

Anonymous said...

@Gevlon So you don't enjoy doing things in RL for 'fun' either. That doesn't mean lots of other people don't.

I personally go to bars with friends all the time despite not wanting to do what the bar activities are. Sometimes I like to talk to randoms, but most of the time I don't.

Just because you play with the chat channels off and eat in your office doesn't mean there aren't many people who play predominantly because of the chat and that there aren't many people who find work bearable only because of their social interactions at lunch time.

Anonymous said...

As Pink wrote "I'm not here for your entertainment"...in other words, I am not here to fit into your definition of how I should game, live, drink, party etc. Fortunately, Eve is a sandbox, and everyone gets to decide what they do for fun. Usually this involves profit, but it by no means has to. Sometimes it is "fun" just fly around random systems,jumping random gates, and see where you end up...like when you take a walk with no set destination,or head into town without a destination in mind.

Next you will be trying to say you do not have any enjoyment (otherwise known as fun) in gaming.

And, as an asocial, I do go to a bar not to dance, drink or talk to strangers. I go to talk to people I already know, or, just sit and watch the world go by.
As an avowed anti-social, I would think you do not go to bars at all.

Anonymous said...

The issue here is that EVE, and sandbox MMOs in general, are not "games." They have no winning and losing; they deliberately eschew levels and progression.

Without winning and losing, who can say whether someone who never undocks but runs a huge corp is playing well or poorly? Someone making a risk-free 10m/hour? Someone making a very risky 20m/Hr? Someone who has no hi-sec alts, just pvps and buys a second plex every month? In particular, I think you are a very skilled player, but suspect most of the PvP/GF EVE population thinks you are playing the game wrong.

In fact, who is doing it wrong: the person who is playing EVE incompetently and enjoying it or the person playing it well and not enjoying it? Who will provide more lifetime revenue to CCP?

There is always the argument that the person who is playing EVE or watching TV better is the one doing it less.

Rammstein said...

"Would you play a game, if you're the only human playing, and AI is just as good as it fancies you? If yes, you're in the ~5% who are doing it for the activity itself. If no - you're behaving just like monkeys in the zoo, who are looking each other for non-existing bugs in the fur, because it's how they are making themselves social, and being social is what made them survive."

This is a false dilemma, which you set up in quite an obvious fashion, combined with a strange vagueness about this hypothetical AI. Computers are better than humans at chess. Computers are not able to pass a Turing test, AFAIK. First, playing EVE seems much more like passing a Turing test than playing chess. Secondly, playing against computers at chess, even one tested to be the same skill as a human, is qualitatively different. They play differently in a few ways, which is both less pleasant to play against and then different as a means of preparation to play against humans in the future.

The nature of play is the key here: play serves as a form of learning and stretching the mind--if you live in a world of humans, it behooves you to play in a world populated by other human players, or else your learning and mind-stretching is not as transferable to the rest of your experience. Gevlon's blog, which you apparently read, is a great example of this. He seems to develop many cogent insights in the nature of human society and psyche from observing humans playing MMOs. These insights are a perfect example of something that goes between the horns of your false dilemma which I noted earlier.

Premier said...

Playing "For fun" is specific to games because other media doesn't have different ways to consume it. You watch a movie or read a book, you don't really have any options in how you watch or read it like you do with games.

Playing 'For fun' also comes up a lot in usually competitive games to show that you don't want to do the competitive part. Kicking around a football with some friends is "For fun". Playing poker for peanuts or matchsticks is "For fun" and using silly trick decks in Magic the Gathering is playing "For fun".

Sure if you try cram the phrase into places it doesn't belong of course it's going to sound weird. Playing a game "For fun" means you're ignoring the goal or competitive angle to just dick about. In Guild Wars 2 we have a Guild PvP night where we just play each other and mess about in the battlegrounds, it's light hearted and "For fun" in a way that Tournament PvP versus other guilds isn't.

Anonymous said...

I go to the park, sit on the grass, take a book and read it.

There is runners, walkers and some guys who play football.

Guys : Hey, you play football?
Me : No tanks, i'm just reading a book.
Guys : Hey, you're in a park... and you must play football with us !
Me : No tanks, i'm reading and appreciate the place.
Guys : You're on the grass, and this place is to play football...
Me : Yes, i'm on the grass ... but i don't want to play football... and realy i'm a bad football players
Guys : Ok

The guys take me the books from...

Guys : Now, you must play football...

Eve is like a park, there's differents kind of men/women who do thinks not all the same, just different thinks in different ways. There's place where is safe such a public bench, and other place that is not safe such as young gang who fight ...

Gevlon said...

@Anonymous: you are reading a book, not just "having fun". The EVE equivalent is "farming kills" or "collecting screenshots of raging kids" or whatever GOAL. That goal probably doesn't match mine, but still a goal. The book reading has a goalpoint: finishing the book. The "I just wanna kill time and have fun" have no goal.

Maxim Preobrazhenskiy said...

The conversations in OP sound very much like a girl first absent-mindedly saying that she wants to do some activity and then realising that even though she likes the activity in general, she still doesn't want to do that activity with a given specific person.

Now, is the girl a loser for shooting down a pushy guy at the bar, or is the pushy guy a loser for not knowing how to handle girls? :D

It does look similar in multiplayer games, actually. Everyone agrees that they want to play, say, Soul Calibur, but then everyone suddenly realises that even though they all want to play Soul Calibur, one of them is more interested in a fighting challenge, while the other just wants to see Ivy grope some girls :D.

And then the first one starts nagging the other to stop using those stupid (albeit revealing) moves and to be a better challenge, while the second one just smiles and keeps doing his own thing.

And suddenly, it is the goal-oriented challenge-driven guy, who is a loser.

Premier said...

I tend to think that "I'm just having fun" is a more polite way of saying "Quit bugging me, I'm playing a game here"

Also sometimes what you find fun is either hard or embarrassing to express so you go for a vague shorthand. I could tell my real life friends I enjoy Minecraft because I enjoy making things tidy, but I don't because they'd take the piss.

And people who want to kill time and have fun do have a goal. They want to kill an hour or two in a way that's more enjoyable than staring blankly at a wall. For some people that's playing Fruit Ninja, blogging, Netflix or messing with Facebook and for others that's EVE.

shamus said...

Quote: The "I just wanna kill time and have fun" have no goal.

So what we're talking about isn't really about whether 'having fun' is somehow inherently bad, but about having a goal.

Here's a question. In your loving relationship, why do you have sex? What is the goal? If it isn't procreation, then presumably it is because it is an enjoyable experience. Otherwise known as having fun.

You've fallen into the ape routine of equating sex to relationships. A biological imperative aimed at ensuring your genes get propagated rather than others. When you uncouple the act of sex from procreation, by means of contraception, then that imperative is no longer valid. At which point who is the loser? The people who restrict themselves to one sex partner, or those who get variety without having to make an unrelated relationship commitment.

Ultimately, in gaming, media, sports, we choose to do activities based on them being enjoyable. For many people, being goal orientated is important. Indeed, gaming is pretty much predicated on a goal - to win. The problem is then that 'games' such as EVE or WoW aren't traditional games in that sense. They don't have a defined victory condition. Any individual encounter within the environment will have the game condition (finish a quest, defeat a monster, kill the enemy, capture the point) but the environment as a whole doesn't. For some people, they can gain enjoyment simply from being in that environment, making their avatar do things, maybe playing the role of a space trucker or goblin warrior. Within the environment they might not have any goals, they might lose the internal games. However, their goal (the player, not the avatar) is simply to spend some time doing something enjoyable.

MMOs have gaming aspects. Some are obviously much more game orientated than others. But even then, if all you do in WoW is pootle around starter zones killing baby wolves and chatting to people you're not losing at WoW. You're just losing at the levelling game within WoW. Or more to the point, you're simply not engaging with it. If all you do in Eve is NPC missions, or mine and sell ore in high sec. areas you're not losing at Eve. It's much more of a sandbox environment than other MMOs so arguably it becomes even harder to 'lose'. You're still achieving your goal of enjoyment.

I've been to a bar to have fun. I've been a designated driver so I've not been drinking. There's been no dancing (think pub, rather than bar). And I've done virtually no talking. I'm an introvert, yet simply hanging out with friends listening to them and maybe chipping into a conversation occasionally is enjoyable. More enjoyable than staying in on my own, bored of current games/books/TV. Your average bar goer will look at that and say "that's not fun", and it wouldn't be for them, and it isn't if you define fun as outgoing, goal orientated activities. But if you define fun as engaging in an activity that is more enjoyable than others on offer then it really is fun.

Why do we have sex rather than play Scrabble? Not because we want to make babies rather than words, but because its fun!

Anonymous said...

Dear Greedy Goblin,

Wake up!

Unless you are in the illegal RMT business, you are playing a game. You are ultimately killing time. If you are not having any fun playing the game, please, go find something else to do.

It is a game, it is entertainment, it is not a job. Neither I nor anyone else has to play to make you happy. You have to play to make you happy.

I'm happy hanging out in Hi Sec getting the minerals necessary to make the ships that you like to do something with -- maybe you get them blown up, maybe you use them to blow other ships up, maybe you just buy them and then sell them somewhere else. I don't really care. That's your game play. Mine is to get the raw materials and build the ship in the cheapest way possible, so I can maximize my wallet growth to fund that next Plex so I get someone else to pay for me to play ...

Gevlon said...

@Shamus: you didn't get the point. I don't claim that fun is bad. Uttering the words "I do it for fun" is bad. If watching your wallet grow is your fun, go for it. If your killboard is your fun, too. If it's music, films or sex, whatever floats your boat.

But then say "wallet", "killboard", "music", "sex" and not the vague and meaningless "fun".

Hivemind said...

@ Gevlon

"But then say "wallet", "killboard", "music", "sex" and not the vague and meaningless "fun"."

The problem is that that presupposes that all fun comes from working towards or achieving a set goal which can be easily summarised. "I find growing my wallet is fun, so I play to grow my wallet" for example. You miss the point that it is possible to approach the game from the opposite perspective - "I want to have fun, so I will do things that I find enjoyable". For a lot of players "things that I find enjoyable" covers a lot of different activities, often in moderation, rather than a single easily defined activity like "growing my wallet". It may vary depending on the mood of the player, or their availability - they have a bad day at work and want to take their frustrations out on NPC pirates in missions where they normally prefer to mine, or maybe on a Wednesday evening they are only available for half an hour so they use that time to kick off industry jobs whereas on a Saturday they can spare several hours and use it to go on a PvP roam through nullsec. "I play for fun" is a lot easier to say than "I mission until I get tired of running missions, I mine when I feel like it, I PvP when the mood takes me".

The important thing about people who are genuinely playing for fun is that they're actually completely opposite to the traits you've ascribed to them - far from being "aware of their loser status" they have no interest in any sort of status, especially one that's assigned to them by some nebulous "community" they're not really part of (or a random Goblin blogger). They do what they do because it's what provides them with enjoyment, purely because it is providing them with enjoyment and they will switch to something else if they decide it will provide more enjoyment. They're not playing in competition with anyone else, except possibly on an individual engagement level - a "play for fun" PvPer will probably still care about the outcome of each engagement, preferring a win to a loss, but won't care about the longer-term aspect of their killboard, K/D or ISK ratios. They may lose 3 ships for every 1 they kill but they're still getting their fun from the fights themselves and the occasional kills.

Druur Monakh said...

What if I re-read a book which I have read so often already, that I could write an paraphrase off the top of my head?

Would that make me a loser?

JacktheManiav said...

I told you that "I do it for fun" is a figure of speech, an idiom, voire une fa├žon de parler.

It means that you don't play in a competitivly viable manner. It's not something to take litterally.

Those posts lead nowhere and you wil forever fail at proving pay for fun
is bad because you can't, you attack a ghost.

Tego said...

um actually killing time is a goal. the problem isn't people who are playing the game how they want to be playing it, however that is. the people who are the problem are those who are not even aware of sub optimal method they use to play, or those who want to play well (to whatever standard they choose) and refuse to do it in a logical way.

A moron is someone who wants to learn how to fly a titan, but has no implants, and the wrong remap (with one available) and insists on having something like frigates level 5. They are acting stupid, Or someone who wants to work the market but doesn't train the needed skills or get proper faction. Someone who wants to make ISK by mining, but does it where Knights are active while AFK and with no tank. Those are morons, slackers wont work for their goal. Someone who's external real life goal is to unwind, and kill some time before they head to bed could choose any activity they want, as long as its relaxing, and their goal is relaxing then they accomplish it, even if it involves doing something you find stupid. The people you should care about are the ones who's methods and goals miss-align, who show lack of competence at a task they claim ability in.

Those who hide behind "for fun" may fit your definition, but those who can articulate it to "killing time" have a valid goal

shamus said...

"I do it for fun" is surely the response for "why are you doing that?".

So...

premise: being able to manipulate an avatar within a virtual world is, of itself, an enjoyable experience.

Given this, how does someone who has no in-game goals answer the question of why they play the game? What if they don't care about the gold, the kills, the levelling, the progress.

Why might one go to the bar and flirt? In order to have sex. Why does one have sex? Because its fun.

Why might one go to the game shop and buy a game? In order to play the game. Why does one play the game? Because its fun.

Simply 'being in' the game is the achievement of the goal. You're doing it because its fun.

I played various sports at school. In pretty much all of these there were people much better than myself who I knew I had no chance of beating. And yet I would often chose to play them rather than the people who I was better than and would probably beat. Why? Because it was fun. I wasn't doing it to improve my skills, I wasn't doing it to get fit, I was doing it purely because I enjoyed doing it and the alternative was not doing it. Which wouldn't have been fun.

I put it to you that the problem isn't with the response but it is with the question. Essentially you're asking someone why there are playing the game in a way you don't see as fun but omitting that last bit. Hence why the answer "to have fun" is so meaningless to you. If you'd asked the question "why aren't you researching your class and builds, and tactics so that you can increase your dps and trivialise those dungeons you're doing" the response from these people might be "because that's not fun". Now, they're not saying being optimal isn't fun, they're saying getting there wouldn't be fun for them. That would turn the 'game' into a 'chore'. At which point they might rather go and do/play something else more enjoyable in order to get their fun.

If I ask why you do anything you do and continually ask why to every response you give, I'd wager the ultimate answer would be because you gain enjoyment. You do it because its fun.

gallego said...

Saying that they're doing it "for fun" is not the equivalent to saying that they're bad. People do stuff for a myriad of reasons and if they're better at succeeding at those goals than you are can you really argue against them "winning" more than you are?

My wife and I play spades with our friends often. I enjoy it because I like to pit my skills at winning a game of spades against others but my wife plays it because she enjoys going through the motions of the game of spades as vehicle to do something together with and enjoy peoples' company. If she's meeting her goals more proficiently than I am how can I say that she's not succeeding at the game more than I am?

This is where I think you show a complete lack of empathy and your need to make everyone else play in the same context of what you came to play eve for causes you so much grief and is a fruitless exercise.

You can call all those people playing eve that don't share in your goals for the game losers and slackers all you want, but if they're meeting their goals more often than you're meeting your own, you have to call them more of a "winner" than you.

Rammstein said...

""I do it for fun" is surely the response for "why are you doing that?"."

It surely is a common response, but it's not a very useful or communicative one.

"If I ask why you do anything you do and continually ask why to every response you give, I'd wager the ultimate answer would be because you gain enjoyment. You do it because its fun."

This statement displays a few logical errors shared by most of the other commenters here. I'm responding to yours because you present your argument the most clearly, as a means of responding to and demolishing all such objections.

#1) While it's true that a vast variety of human behaviors stem from a comparatively few number of motives, saying that fun is the only such motive is incorrect.

#2) Your argument is presented as if you think Gevlon is unaware of the fact that humans have motivations which drive their actions. Actually, what he has done isn't fail to perceive that one can ask "why" and drill down to motivation, but he's continued to ask "why" even after reaching the level of motivations, to understand these motivations.

I'll model your technique of repeatedly asking 'why',starting with a common and general question, to illustrate the two flaws above:

Why do you work? To earn money and social respect.

Why do you want those things? To gain socioeconomic status to maximize my health and survival in the future, to attract a better mate and ensure better survival for her and our progeny. (This is a basic human motivation which =/= 'for fun', illustrating your logical error #1)

Why do you want to maximize the health, survival and status of your offspring? Wanting those things is a basic evolutionary trait, organisms which don't possess that desire don't produce successful offspring and are lost from the gene pool. (Valuable information has been gained by continuing to ask 'why' past the point of human motivation, your failure to realize that this was occurring in the OP being a part of your flaw #2).

Why does evolution proceed in this way? Evolution is a natural phenomenon traceable to the operation of the laws of physics.

Why do we have these laws of physics, and not some other set of laws? I don't know. (The actual end of any conversation which is derailed by someone repeatedly asking 'why' like a very curious child or unsubtle philosopher.)

Jim L said...

Since you often fail to grasp the advantages of social behavior I am not surprised you fail to see that there are often social aspects to those who say they just want to have fun. Using your example, I am not really into music. I hate dancing. I drink only occasionally. So if you asked me why I am at a bar my answer would probably be "to have fun". What I really mean is I am using music, dancing, and alcohol as a vehicle to hang out and enjoy time with my friends.

Also, does your girlfriend know that you are calling her a loser? After all, the behavior you describe perfectly fits the description of what you said she did when she played. Just sayin.

Gevlon said...

@Jim L: your answer is "hang out and enjoy time with my friends"

Anonymous said...

As for bar and sex: Most people who go to clubs and bars go there to find a partner, or at least have sex, but none of them admit it(not even to themselves!), and when you say you dislike these places because they are too loud, stinky and expensive for no reason, they don't understand you, because the club is a "fun place". Sometimes, socials can be *really* retarded. Also, wiggling your arms randomly is not dancing. Take a class!

Shamus said...

@Rammstein

Except I don't work to gain status or attract a mate. I do work to maximise my health and longevity though.

As much as I can I choose to work enough to allow my free time to be as enjoyable as I like. If I worked more, or harder, I could have more enjoyable free time. However, I make a decision that I have enough. The added enjoyment I could gain is, for me, outweighed by the added burden I would endure through the extra work to achieve that.

Take the Eve player who does nothing more than run NPC missions. Lets assume they've got the ship they want and the skills they need. They're not interested in any story or completing all the missions or getting a certain standing. They're not part of a corporation and don't have any friends.

We ask them, why do you just do missions over and over?

My argument is that is isn't natural to answer "because I just enjoy being in the game and the simplicity of getting a task and completing the task in short chunks without having to do anything more than follow some simple instructions". It is much more natural to respond "because its fun".

The longer response is really just describing what they're doing, rather than why. Both parties know what is being done, the trouble is that one finds it fun and the other doesn't and is expressing puzzlement therefore of why someone would do it.

Enjoyment is a very complex thing. Is it the roleplaying a space trucker that is enjoyable? Is it the task completion that is enjoyable? Is it following a simple list of instructions that is enjoyable? Is it watching the graphics that is enjoyable? Is it the spacey music that is enjoyable?

Enjoyment is also a very fragile thing. If you take someone like this and try and analyse why it is enjoyable then there's a good chance it would become un-enjoyable!

More to the point, why should someone have to justify beyond "because its fun" performing a pointless activity?

Azuriel said...

@Gevlon
The pure truth would be "I'm bad in the game, so I don't even attempt to win, I just want to kill time".

"Bad" according to what? What are you winning in EVE, Gevlon?

@Anonymous: you are reading a book, not just "having fun". [...] Book reading has a goalpoint: finishing the book. The "I just wanna kill time and have fun" have no goal.

Fun is the goal, in all entertainment. Do people read books just to say they read a book, with no care or concern over its contents? Do you continue reading a book even after it bores you halfway through? You are making the baseless assertion that reading pages of words sequentially is somehow more of a "goal" than acting within the confines of a game's parameters. They are indistinguishable from one another, and they are not the point of the activity in any case; they are merely the means through which entertainment is derived.

@Rammstein

Computers are not able to pass a Turing test, AFAIK. First, playing EVE seems much more like passing a Turing test than playing chess.

How so? Unless you are attempting to communicate with the AI, there is almost nothing of the traditional Turing test in flying spaceships. I suspect that the only reason we don't have more intelligent AI/bots in games today is because they would be too good for players to reliably beat, rather than any sort of limitation on potential for cunning, human-like play. AI that outsmarts players is usually accused of "cheating."

The nature of play is the key here: play serves as a form of learning and stretching the mind--if you live in a world of humans, it behooves you to play in a world populated by other human players, or else your learning and mind-stretching is not as transferable to the rest of your experience.

I doubt "transferableness" to the real world is an especially compelling argument for entertainment generally. Who, exactly, cares how transferable it is?

@Tego
the people who are the problem are those who are not even aware of sub optimal method they use to play, or those who want to play well (to whatever standard they choose) and refuse to do it in a logical way.

Actually, even these players are irrelevant. All that needs amended to the fun declaration is "[...] without looking everything up" or "[...] by my own power" or some variation thereof. Looking up prevailing strategies is a good way to short-cut the learning process, but what does that accomplish when it is exactly that learning and conquering of game systems that is fun for a person? No one would suggest to look up spoilers before reading a book, and yet the Gevlon M.O. is "do exactly this for maximum gain." Great... now what?

M&S really only exist in a competitive team environment, wherein you are directly impacted by their poor (compared to your own) performance. Out on their own, they're irrelevant. Whom are they hurting? Themselves? Who cares? Quibbling over their "sub-optimal" self-fun generation is worse than pointless.

Subscribe to the goblinish wisdom