tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post8787473875502621865..comments2024-02-27T14:44:07.868+01:00Comments on Greedy goblin: Welfare, /ignore and HitlerGevlonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07072766785893313616noreply@blogger.comBlogger58125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-20746476862267443052010-10-01T01:20:32.108+02:002010-10-01T01:20:32.108+02:00@ Vesoom: You don't kill other players. In Wo...@ Vesoom: You don't kill other players. In WoW, you engage them in sanctioned combat, much like sparring in martial arts. And yes, I have done that in real life.<br /><br />To kill other players would be to kill them in a hardcore-mode style game like Diablo 2. And even then, that wouldn't be enough - the death of their character would also need to permaban their account and prevent them from continuing to play on a different character. That would be in-game death!<br /><br />@ Holy Moly: <i>"Because it IS a game. There are no negative consequences.</i><br /><br />"Because it's just school."<br />"Because it's just a blog."<br />"Because it's just a joke."<br /><br />The game is part of real life. In case you didn't realise, you're dealing with real people on the other side of the screen. If you abuse a person in game, it's exactly the same as if you abused them in person.<br /><br />Again, if you wouldn't bully or insult or abuse someone in person, why would you do it in game, when there's still a person who's copping it on the other side?<br /><br /><i>"Also, Gevlon isn't preaching discrimination against the "M&S". If he were, he would blog about actively seeking out those players and making their life miserable."</i><br /><br />You don't know Gevlon or his blog well enough then: http://greedygoblin.blogspot.com/search/label/Ganking<br /><br /><i>"However, his blog is all about the flaw in our willingness to suffer fools gladly...<br />I'll be damned if I'm going to spend the time that I paid for to help run an idiot or two who can't be bothered to get out of defiles through their LK title."</i><br /><br />Then he would advocate the use of /ignore, not the attempt to drive them out of the game. There is a difference. Again, Gevlon's stated that he "want[s] to expel them from the gaming circles I'm in... I want them out!"<br /><br />In real life, the equivalent is to bully a person out of their school and force them to transfer to another school. That's basically what the Ganking project was - come in, bully the existing people there and drive them off server. Noting that cyberbullying is just as destructive as in-person bullying, both are equally immoral.Squishalothttp://www.wowhead.com/user=Squishalotnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-37647946494277794032010-09-30T16:45:35.585+02:002010-09-30T16:45:35.585+02:00@Squishalot
Because it IS a game. There are no neg...@Squishalot<br />Because it IS a game. There are no negative consequences. Also, Gevlon isn't preaching discrimination against the "M&S". If he were, he would blog about actively seeking out those players and making their life miserable. However, his blog is all about the flaw in our willingness to suffer fools gladly. In real life, I will help someone, even if it means saving them from drowning at a personal cost. Like I mentioned before, we are emotional creatures, and those emotions get the better of us. However, in a game with unlimited resources and Google to help you learn to play it, I'll be damned if I'm going to spend the time that I paid for to help run an idiot or two who can't be bothered to get out of defiles through their LK title.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-17465127651048030122010-09-30T16:43:16.235+02:002010-09-30T16:43:16.235+02:00@Squishalot,
I politely disagree that actions/att...@Squishalot,<br /><br />I politely disagree that actions/attitudes in game are equivelent to actions/attitudeds IRL. Have you never killed a player of the other faction? Surely you would not do that IRL. <br /><br />I have killed other players. I do not believe that I have murderous attitude.Vesoomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-47471839712019268852010-09-30T15:42:58.601+02:002010-09-30T15:42:58.601+02:00@ Holy Moly - Which again, goes back to the point ...@ Holy Moly - Which again, goes back to the point that I've been raising with Gevlon all along. You wouldn't act a certain way in real life, so why would you act like that in game? Any 'it's just a game / it's not real life' arguments are swiftly dealt with as hypocrisy, since Gevlon shoves such excuses straight into the M&S basket.<br /><br />So if the people who preach hatred and discrimination in real life are real life's morons, aren't people who preach hatred and discrimination in game, in game morons?Squishalothttp://www.wowhead.com/user=Squishalotnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-15069494281341885252010-09-30T08:13:34.476+02:002010-09-30T08:13:34.476+02:00@Squishalot
Yes, you are correct about the correla...@Squishalot<br />Yes, you are correct about the correlation of a lack of education and increasing crime rate. That's not what I'm getting at. I didn't want to get too presumptuous about what Cantar meant by his comment. It could be taken many different ways, and I simply decided to interpret it as bitterness over the current economic situation. The truth of the matter is that very few of us who invested into a solid college degree have been impacted negatively. I don't care if they raise taxes to pay for a national healthcare bill (they won't, but still), because I would still make enough to get by. So to make a comment about the "deterioration of our society" is largely unfounded, and is a fear-mongering tactic used by certain people to get votes so they can kick those who are "taking their jobs." That said, welfare is a necessity due to the fact that without it, there would be civil disorder. The world that I mentioned earlier is just as idealistic as a socialist utopia. There can never be such a world, because those who aren't smart enough to play the money game may just be strong enough to take it from those of us who are by force. And, before authenticators came out, that is exactly what they did by hacking. Now, the "M&S" in the game are obviously no threat. If they don't like you, they can exclude you from their circles, but your skill speaks for itself. In the real world, however, they can heckle, attack, interfere with your daily life, and even kill you to get what they want. Which is why we keep them pacified through welfare, jobs, handouts, etc..Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-39398074121265644582010-09-30T07:44:55.822+02:002010-09-30T07:44:55.822+02:00@ Vesoom: "Maybe we could extend it a bit far...@ Vesoom: <i>"Maybe we could extend it a bit farther? When 3rd graders on the playground exclude someone because they aren't in the in-group, they are very much like Hitler except in a few small ways and their genocidal attitude is worth noting?"</i><br /><br />/ignore is excluding someone. Gevlon's vouching for taking the person and throwing him into the dumpster, thus removing the person from the playground entirely.Squishalothttp://www.wowhead.com/user=Squishalotnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-68533721546774752822010-09-30T01:49:25.955+02:002010-09-30T01:49:25.955+02:00@ Holy Moly - education is negatively correlated t...@ Holy Moly - education is negatively correlated to crime, and also negatively correlated to the level of government support (i.e. welfare, but not necessarily in cash form).<br /><br />So by removing the help to the less fortunate, you increase crime, because the inability to make money legitimately results in the 'need' to obtain money illegitimately. Does that make the world a better place?<br /><br />There was a recent debate in Australia about a set of workplace legislation which would have the impact of better rewarding people in line with their deserving-ness and the work that they do. Although I do agree with that in principal, the critics were correct in saying that it would lead to a more American-style two-tiered society (rich vs poor, also seen in developing nations too) and associated crime levels, imposing greater burdens on society. Not a criticism of the US or any other nation with a big rich/poor gap, but it is an inevitable fact of life.Squishalothttp://www.wowhead.com/user=Squishalotnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-5562889980273955522010-09-29T23:38:37.316+02:002010-09-29T23:38:37.316+02:00It doesn't really help to remove them from the...It doesn't really help to remove them from the game. If you did that the next layer up would become the lowest level and sooner or later they would begin to annoy you in the same way. I'm sure you can see that this becomes self perpetuating until there's only you left.<br /><br />Much easier to start a game on your own and get there quicker.chewynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-48462761480169306432010-09-29T23:00:05.394+02:002010-09-29T23:00:05.394+02:00Wow, I understand that taking an arguement to an e...Wow, I understand that taking an arguement to an extreme can help in understanding its consequences, but my goodness, isn't that a bit far? Gevlon posts about wanting to exclude people from a game and we get replys about his "genocidal attitude". <br /><br />And: "The only differences (worthy of note) between you and Hitler are". Don't you think when you take the analogy too far you lose some credibility with us regular people? You might be right in your arguements but I think extending someones attitude about players in a game to: "The only differences (worthy of note) between you and Hitler" is quite a stretch. <br /><br />Maybe we could extend it a bit farther? When 3rd graders on the playground exclude someone because they aren't in the in-group, they are very much like Hitler except in a few small ways and their genocidal attitude is worth noting?<br /><br />That's sarcastic of course, but I think you lose credibility when you push your analogies too far.Vesoomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-86495110816456333842010-09-29T20:01:35.945+02:002010-09-29T20:01:35.945+02:00re: letting someone die = homocide, in the US, it&...re: letting someone die = homocide, in the US, it's generally perfectly legal to let someone die, even if there was no risk to you to save them. There is no inherent legal duty to assist others. Unless you had a specific duty to help them (e.g. a doctor with a patient, ship steward with a passenger), I think only one state mandates taking positive action. While Good Samaritan laws (insulating good intentioned people who do try to help) are common, laws requiring action are not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-45537053361232157952010-09-29T19:58:22.861+02:002010-09-29T19:58:22.861+02:00In essence, Gevlon is correct. The world would be ...In essence, Gevlon is correct. The world would be a much better place if everyone just fended for themselves. No harming, but no helping either. However, there is a problem... We are emotional creatures. We are also animals, and are governed by these emotions left over from our ancestors. A long time ago, altruism was a necessary response by our nervous system to ensure the survival of the species. It is seen in social animals all the time (bees, ants, most mammals, etc). However, now that we have reason, we can preserve ourselves through means of technology. While a world that Gevlon envisions would be nice, we cannot shake our natural instincts to help others, and to be accepted by others. Even if we manage to make reason rule over our emotions, and we stop helping, we are seen as "Hitlers". <br />@ Cantar:<br />I'm gonna have to ask you what you mean by "deterioration of society." Do we live in the same U.S.? This is still, by far, one of the best places in the World to live, especially for money savvy people such as Gevlon. The only ones I see complaining are the lazy people who enjoy on government handouts in forms of tax breaks, bailouts, and wellfare, now that the money is tight and they've been cut off. Those of us who know how to make our money (i.e. who invested into an education that didn't lead to a dead end job) are still loving life.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-36004461602871015552010-09-29T18:24:20.041+02:002010-09-29T18:24:20.041+02:00As one that called you out as Virtual Hitler, I...As one that called you out as Virtual Hitler, I'll return to follow up on my reasoning. His final solution was not to "kill all Jews," genocide wasn't his aim (as previously mentioned, it's usually not cost effective). What Hitler desired was for his country to be free of the "lazy, Jews" (who sold Germany out in WWI, or at least it was believed so at the time, reality is rather unimportant.) that only survived because of how much money they already wielded. <br />I compare you to him because you have the same desire, to be free of "the sub-group of society, who are detrimental to society as a whole." What if you got your wish of no government welfare, and the M&S united all their existing funds (obviously under some charismatic intellectual leader) to buy all the banks, and then decided to take x% of all the money to help themselves? Do you sit back or take some action? <br />The only differences (worthy of note) between you and Hitler are 1) out group designation and 2) proposed solutions 3) the chances of it "getting out of hand." He picked a fight with the richest 1% of his population, you seem determined to pick a fight with the poorest 10-50% so Cheers to picking the easier fight. 2) Your solution "cut off aid" is not in a totally different realm from his original decree that the Jews had to go (they were free to leave, so long as they left). Finally, and most importantly (imo at least) is the difference in the likelihood that your followers will take the decree too far is all but nonexistent. I don't care how many wowheads you convince that the M&S are evil, none of them will show up on the M&S's door to take what the m&s is too evil to possess. <br />Sorry for the late wall of text, have fun our goblin overlord.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-33851460105548745472010-09-29T15:50:18.293+02:002010-09-29T15:50:18.293+02:00@ Gevlon: looking forward to it.
@ Aljabra: Moral...@ Gevlon: looking forward to it.<br /><br />@ Aljabra: Morality is not a social construct - what you are thinking of is a particular moral code, which may indeed be a moral construct. This is precisely why I suggest you go read up on it a bit more.Squishalothttp://www.wowhead.com/user=Squishalotnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-6505992643443221812010-09-29T12:43:34.308+02:002010-09-29T12:43:34.308+02:00Yes, in some cases it can be destructive not to sa...Yes, in some cases it can be destructive not to save someone from drowning or other form of death, if you are a direct observer and have means to save the person.<br /><br />However, this and other strawmanish comparisons do not imply that there is any single situation, where it is destructive not to heal an Arthusdkswe character that is staying in some aoe for all its duration and let them die!<br /><br />Also the "disabled person" argument does not work, since just two words do debunk it: Disabled Olympics. <br /><br />You can pull all extreme cases you want, still none of them prove in anyway that an average healthy Jason Smith laying all day in the bed, drinking off his welfare and having no intention even to look for a job, is somehow just "unlucky". <br /><br />And not just that. It's even more interesting. If you have a job, then you are somehow *evil* towards all of them welfare leeches. <br /><br />Saying out that they should look for a job is totally abysmally evil and destructive towards welfare leeches.<br /><br />I don't think I need to explain more, how abnormal and irrational both zero points "I deserve welfare, coz I am just unlucky" and "I deserve to get boosted, coz I have a life" are.Janahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01732571182862802229noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-184378778442573962010-09-29T11:36:46.738+02:002010-09-29T11:36:46.738+02:00@Phelps
'However we all know (even Gevlon perh...@Phelps<br />'However we all know (even Gevlon perhaps) that pure capitalism is evil and will and does eventually consume itself with greed and self interest.'<br />Understand the word pure no system is a total free market system. Governments, morals and ethics make such a system impossible. However Gevlon tends to the extreme of free market which if left unchecked produces the undesirable.<br /><br />'Free Market societies don't commit genocide, because genocide isn't cost effective'<br />Yes it is! America was built on the removal of the native indians. Australia aboriginals. etcBobbinsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-87703138682897288742010-09-29T08:52:24.515+02:002010-09-29T08:52:24.515+02:00@Phelps
"Free Market societies don't com...@Phelps <br />"Free Market societies don't commit genocide, because genocide isn't cost effective. It's a luxury that only happens in socialist societies"<br />Your are quite wrong here, free market societies do commit genocide as often, as socialist ones, and history know enough cases of just that.<br />The very birth place of free market concept, Great Britain Empire and it offsprings (you won't call THEM socialists, won't you?), had commited more genocide, then Hitler could dream of. Concentration camps wasn't invented in Germany, as you may know, China was bathed in opium by very free-market-minded britains, whole American Indian nations was wiped out completely by the people of the country, well known for declared love for free market. Boer people would've like to hear, that free market don't do genocide - that, of course, wouldn't make them less dead, but the concept, that they were killed not in genocide can surely make them rest in peace, as well, as millions of people of India.<br />Genocide can be cost-effective, therefore free market is no shield from it.Aljabranoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-55972574203942424962010-09-29T04:14:33.675+02:002010-09-29T04:14:33.675+02:00> http://greedygoblin.blogspot.com/2009/05/avas...> http://greedygoblin.blogspot.com/2009/05/avast-ye-admiral.html<br /><br />Thanks for the story on cannibals, Silence of the Lambs is generally viewed as better than the sequels by a different director. The pirate analogy is basically invalid (especially for pirates from Somalia), because the point of view that results from following news networks in most countries is often different from the informed view of someone involved in a circumstance, so the superficial judgement of someone in a distant country is not always consistent or relevant. There are NOT always options that a person would see as leading to a "better life", this is just a fact. It has no relation to actions regarding starving children in Africa, just the conclusion of the linked article was maybe debatable and is a distraction from the current context.<br /><br />I think <a href="http://greedygoblin.blogspot.com/2009/02/jobs-revenants-and-status.html" rel="nofollow">mopping floors</a> might be more relevant, even if unemployment in some countries (the 30~50% incidence of unemployment ones) is due to structural/security problems where no jobs are available, even poor ones, and it is not possible for a single individual with no capital to improve the situation on a short-term time scale.Taemojitsuhttp://daughterofankh.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-26473287214340804872010-09-29T01:32:56.669+02:002010-09-29T01:32:56.669+02:00@Syto: How will an M&S ever learn to stop (if ...@Syto: How will an M&S ever learn to stop (if that is possible) if people continually support them? If you take Duskstorm's proposed view, by continuing to help the M&S, you are harming them in the long term by failing to teach them to fish.<br /><br />Alternatively, through his "damage" to M&S, he supports more goblins. Through more goblins, the core pillars of productivity are increased, resulting in more socials. More socials results in more support for M&S.<br /><br />Really, those are just spin though.<br /><br />What I really wonder is: by removing M&S from the game, how is he actually harming them? I mean, "it's just a game", right?Lighstagazihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09131012991568788276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-23583383075259679662010-09-28T22:32:26.095+02:002010-09-28T22:32:26.095+02:00It's simple. Socials are socialist.
However ...It's simple. Socials are socialist.<br /><br /><i>However we all know (even Gevlon perhaps) that pure capitalism is evil and will and does eventually consume itself with greed and self interest.</i><br /><br />No, we don't all know that. In fact, those of us who actually understand history <b>know</b> the opposite. <br /><br />Free market societies committed zero genocides in the 20th century. Socialist societies (and yes, Nazi/Wiemar Germany was <b>socialist</b>, Nazi stands for National <b>Socialist</b> Party) accounted for well, well over 200 million deaths -- most of those in the undeniably socialist Russia and China.<br /><br />Free Market societies don't commit genocide, because genocide isn't cost effective. It's a luxury that only happens in socialist societies (even when we stray into socialism, like FDR's internment of the Japanese in our own socialist/fascist period.)Phelpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06270536870200063563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-71181964050002569912010-09-28T22:26:34.821+02:002010-09-28T22:26:34.821+02:00first lol(with all forms of scorn) @ cantar - no, ...first lol(with all forms of scorn) @ cantar - no, just no.<br /><br />second RE the helping of starving infants in Africa.<br />yes you are right he or she has done nothing wrong but being born.<br />however we have fed the Africans since the fifties with not a lot to show for it, it might be morally right but in actuality its just pointless.<br />the actual way is to help them feed themselves, compare India to Africa. <br />removing our subsidies for farming and tariffs would do more for the Africans than the entire I- worlds foreign budgets) yet we continue with giving them food.<br />thirdly letting a drowning man drown would in almost no country's be a crime since laws forcing you to intervene are relatively uncommon and they always have clauses stating that it must be to no or minimal risk to help.<br />trying to with no experience and training rescue a drowning man will more than likely get both of you killed. (Arthur made a very eloquent paragraph on that subject)<br /><br />and finally i must say that no goverment help is stupid.<br />one way or another you wind up paying, either you pay the poor kids school or you pay his lifetime incarceration.<br />whether you like it or not everyone has to pay the piper.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-16048714313765477952010-09-28T21:31:29.792+02:002010-09-28T21:31:29.792+02:00I agree. If someone constantly is whining and cryi...I agree. If someone constantly is whining and crying for help, ignore them and let them struggle.<br /><br /><br />But let's say a friend of yours is in need, alltho he refuses to recieve any help, you would help him (I would anyways).Bonebeasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14617319068831807991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-77369362000048646772010-09-28T20:30:33.585+02:002010-09-28T20:30:33.585+02:00Obviously, the decision on whether you should help...Obviously, the decision on whether you should help or not help someone depends on the situation. <br /><br />1. Is the person who needs help at fault for needing such help?<br /><br />2. What would it cost you to help them?<br /><br />Lets take the previously used example of someone drowning. If it was a person who decided to go jump up and down on the middle of a frozen lake, and trying to help them would risk your life, then most people would say that you should not (or if it was someone who decided to ride their segway along cliffs . . . ).<br /><br />Now, if the person drowning in a lake happened to be someone who was injured and was pushed into the lake by a robber, and you could easily save them w/o risk to yourself, then you'd have to be seriously demented not to help them.<br /><br />Basically, it's smart to help people who are worthy of help. But helping idiots just encourages more idiots. Many of today's governments have unfortunately moved from helping hardworking people, to punishing hard work and helping slackers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-32867027431097681992010-09-28T19:12:38.849+02:002010-09-28T19:12:38.849+02:00You do hurt the MS though, and the more you're...You do hurt the MS though, and the more you're successful in your proposed aims the more you hurt them. See your arguments makes sense if you merely withhold your own aid from the MS. But that's not all you do, you explicitly state that your goal is to make the non-ms socials cease helping the MS. To the extent you are successful, your existence is actively harming the MS since if you didn't exist more socials would be helping the MS.Sytonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-21391643056041140552010-09-28T18:40:58.343+02:002010-09-28T18:40:58.343+02:00I think Gevlon's approach actually is altruist...I think Gevlon's approach actually <i>is</i> altruistic. "Tough love," if you will.<br /><br />M&S will never stop being M&S if they are enabled by others. If left to fend for themselves and actually compete, a moron will either get smarter or quit -- a slacker will either get motivated or quit. Both outcomes are good for those of us who enjoy raiding with good players.Duskstormnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-63532583058091686152010-09-28T18:21:18.994+02:002010-09-28T18:21:18.994+02:00@anonymous:
"the comments need approval for a...@anonymous:<br />"the comments need approval for a reason! He filters out all the lolkids that go along these lines "lol u meen, u r hitler lol"<br /><br />I don't have any problem with bloggers deleting the posts of trolls. But writing a post refuting unreadable deleted posts isn't exactly up front.<br /><br />Now we're discussing and postulating about what someone said someone else said, maybe assuming it was LOTS of stupid someones. We have created an enemy (or army of enemies) that is in our imagination only.<br /><br />I'm an American, I've seen a bit of that. And I don't like it.<br /><br />I like the M&S posts, because I can make up my own mind about the exchange. Although you can marvel at their apparent stupidity, you can also realize that it was a few seconds of exchange, and how do you know that that Virendra wasn't being a total asshat to pwnu prior to the screenshot?Bristalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11849907713604626977noreply@blogger.com