miscellaneous

In a desire to avoid completely derailing that other thread... I think it's actually a very interesting topic, but will reply to the currently latest post here:

There's no rule against attacking scorers so don't need to get stuck debating definitions.

There sorta is though, isn't there?

Much like baseball, this game very much seems to have a lot of "unwritten rules" and a social contract players are "expected" to follow...

No?

There's no rule against onlining people, for example... but there's no doubt the playerbase very much has made it quite taboo, regardless...

It’s a bit of a butthole move, but it’s fully allowed within the game. I think someone else said it in the other thread, but having min con/a bot built just for scoring is a choice, and leaves you vulnerable to more properly built bots. You gotta make a choice with your bot, and while there’s a sort of gentleman’s agreement to not hit each others scorers, there’s no rule against it.

Also bit funny that the trophy for onlining someone includes a word we can’t use in posts

New thread makes sense.

I think it's fairly similar to real life. Laws/Game rules and generally accepted norms are two different things.

If someone is breaking the game rules, it's worth flagging, talking about or going to Ender. Similar to law breaking and the police. No real question here.

Then you have "norms", things that society/the playerbase has slowly agreed to over time, but breaking them isn't actually a crime. Real life versions might be returning a shopping cart to its bay, jumping a queue, or insulting someones mother. Sure, you CAN do those things, but don't be surprised if someone thinks negatively of you, or decides to do something back to you in return.

Can be hard to catch up to how serious breaking each in game "norm" might be as a new player, but everyone has a different view on that anyway, so it's not like the unwritten rules can become written. In the case at hand in the original thread, I think there's a bit of history/context to it, and the perpetrator decided potential backlash would be worth it.

Admittedly, this "norm" in particular is probably seen as a lesser issue than some of the others like onlining, considering it was how the game was originally intended to be played.

Most of us that play this game that aren't attacked online, or offline, generally fall within 2 categories (and sometimes both): respected or feared.

You are either respected because you respect others and don't go out of your way to upset the status quo or treat people with any sort of malice, or you're feared that if others attack you they know they'll have revenge to deal with and it'll likely be much harsher than what they gave and thus not worth it (or like mentioned, both).

Play stupid games win stupid prizes, fuck around and find out, etc. Plenty of things you can do, but as you and others mentioned, could be considered taboo, frowned upon, and/or result in payback at varying magnitudes.

oh please

Does this need a debate at all? Those complaining are those that are too used to their opponents doing 0 damage.

Unwritten rule or not, man-up and take a loss.

Those complaining

The people that took issue with PeeT's word choice? Because... PeeT, bless his heart, hasn't actually complained at all...

And I kinda just love me some pedantry. And, I suppose, do get irked a fair bit by the inconsistency of things in this matter, where it has very much seemed to me that the same people that want to force these "unwritten rules" on others, so often will bash the concept completely if it were to apply to them.

But, like normal, it's probably not worth having any kinda debate... because, like normal, it's probably too much to expect any kinda sincere debate about anything.

For the record, however, I will say that when I briefly chatted to PeeT at beginning of last month (for me, at least, since I basically took off first week)... dude didn't even complain about the attacks then and merely asked if I knew what it was even about - after talking about another matter altogether. I woulda "complained." Everyone else here woulda "complained." Totally reasonable to complain. PeeT didn't complain. Heck, my unsolicited advice was to retaliate and not worry about me returning any fire even if he hits my bots. Right is right and I'd take what's owed, I figured. As far as I know, PeeT decided to take some "high road" instead. Never complained.

I've had some small issues with PeeT. I know he's definitely never been a fan of mine. But... facts should be facts, whatever the case. I think it's incredibly lazy to throw out some accusation of "being a complainer" here at someone that simply chose a word that others seemed to want to take so much issue with.

Meanwhile, I think I actually even had started to make a pretty strong case for why the word he chose was incredibly appropriate. "The other side" has seemed to not even want to try very hard to explain how it isn't... and kinda chooses, instead, to just COMPLAIN about the word.

Most of us that play this game that aren't attacked online, or offline, generally fall within 2 categories (and sometimes both): respected or feared. You are either respected because you respect others and don't go out of your way to upset the status quo or treat people with any sort of malice, or you're feared that if others attack you they know they'll have revenge to deal with and it'll likely be much harsher than what they gave and thus not worth it (or like mentioned, both).

I largely agree with all this, however.

Would stress that the "fear" aspect carries much more weight than the "respect" aspect, however. "Respect" currency loses all value quickly, if it was ever seen as advantageous to target you and you aren't seen as any kinda potential threat.

Really though... I kinda just think it's almost solely because people are seen as "not worth it." Could be completely inconsequential, as a player... and you are mostly gonna be "safe" just because it's not worth it.

Whatever the case, I very much agree that all the "principles" that have been cited tend to be complete bullocks, in this matter. Instead, it's much more about a cost/benefit analysis is all.