[GBM] On Free Will
Paul Proteus
As always, Mood Musik
This is going to be somewhat of a spiritual successor to an earlier article, similarly named, of mine. Time has passed, and yet, not much has changed.
The Fallacy of Stability
Perhaps it's time we had some anarchy
What's frustrating, to me at least, isn't necessarily that the political atmosphere of the eUS hasn't changed, but rather that the dialogue surrounding it has remained static in spite of events that I'd have hoped would have forced some reflection.
In spite of the success of rainy's campaign against the mundanity of a single-candidate scenario, and in spite of the actual competitive nature of a campaign cobbled together by players considered borderline non-entities by the national narrative, we've learned nothing.
In spite of the fact that WildOwl is essentially running unopposed, his (and my) friend's endorsement feels a need to chastise any tangential, and clearly satirical announcements, as a threat to stability. From an excellent writer, I read that this game is past redeeming through community outreach. I read that we cannot "fun our way out of this."
I don't know if it's possible for me to disagree more.
This game is dying for many reasons. Undeniably, it's a bad game. That certainly contributes. Yet, and perhaps it's a result of my own naïveté, I can't help but believe this attitude contributes. It is an odd game – and eRepublik, contrary to what you may hear, is a game – in which we are to give up on having fun. It is an even odder online community-based game in which we are to also forsake the very concept of expanding and engaging our community. Most damning of all, perhaps, it is a game I do not want to play, in which we continue to guide, and create make-shift repairs to Theseus' rotting ship, with a steady hand no less. It is still eRepublik, but at the same time it's not, it's hardly even a game.
Rather, the eRepublik I play for is what we make out of the rubble. What happens when we realize the game we are playing is no longer what we signed up for. What happens when we realize that we can make something new, do something different, mine entertainment and satisfaction out of what remains for the few months we have left to do it.
This is what I say to your play-style
We can choose to play a pale imitation of 2009 until the lights go out, or we can create something special. There is so much we can do that wasn't possible.
None of that involves single candidate elections. None of that involves planning our President in a back room half a year in advance. If we play with the goal of taking turns letting old players preside over buttons and wrack up medals, and give up on reaching for anything more, we're not only going to lose out on retaining newer players, we're going to lose 5 year veterans like myself, until all that's left are a handful of people, switching off clicking buttons and entering Credit Card info.
To choose stability over risk, to choose the unexpected over the interesting, to limit ourselves, is ultimately, and quixotically, the pursuit of the reverse. As we strive for stability, we achieve the opposite.
Refusing to take risks, is, in its own way, suicide.
A Brave New World
Why bother when it's so much easier not to care
As the inexorable march of time continues, as parties slip into irrelevance, and newer players find fewer and fewer resources available to help them, I see absolutely no reason why we must resort to cynicism.
Ultimately, when playing a dying game, fun is the only option we have.
Being said, I look forward to WildOwl's term, he's a good guy and a strong candidate. More so, I look forward to the future, and next month, when perhaps things will be less black and white, when the opposition is more than a self-depreciating joke, and when we can recognize just how important a little unpredictability can be.
That's all for today, carry on~
And, your moment of zen:
Props to Dely who found this
Until next time,
Paul Proteus
Comments
First for Paul!
Free will is an interesting concept. What exactly does it mean?
It means we don't have to follow narratives, nor play into expectations of order. We have the power to mold our experience in this game.
Well, you can achieve that only in a small and insignificant country (UK currently being a very good example of that). "Serious" countries have predefined paths that are backed by tycoons/oldfags/... just like in RL.
Don't get me wrong, I do agree with you, I just don't think what you expect is realistic.
Oh I'm grandstanding to prove a point, on a smaller scale it definitely is possible, but I'm more advocating an attitude than any pragmatic change.
We formed SZR (parody party from a Serbian TV show) to address exactly that. Somewhere along the lines we failed, got overrun. It's not like we don't want to keep a positive attitude and treat a game like something meant to entertain. We do. But it is really hard to maintain the "non-serious facade with serious intentions" style in a large community. The non-serious facade gets bashed all the time and the serious work behind it gets unnoticed. When ever something goes wrong, it is the fault of you not being serious enough, or something along those lines. We still try to maintain the comedic aspects to a point, but they are mostly merely a background theme these days.
I hope you'll have greater success 🙂
A bit late to this article but i'd like to point out free will is an illusion.
Stop trying to convince us with your idealism and multi-paragraphed article.
Also...I ONLY READ THE BOLD TEXT.
I only look at the pictures, personally
My only problem with your argument is that you seem to be saying that there's something NOT fun about electing a Wild Owl type candidate in a single-candidate type election.
That's where I disagree with you.
The fun in this game is what we make.
When a sort of lulzy candidate makes a sort of lulzy campaign, that is the fun that is had. It shouldn't go down as less fun if that candidate is not taken seriously in the actual election.
It is, however - and this is more to the point of your linked article - concerning that more candidates are not at least attempting office - especially after a term which saw a slew of newer faces in Cabinet.
But if we are to bend the growth curve toward the positive around here, it has to be done slowly and steadily. So do keep up the dialogue.
I don't disagree entirely about WildOwl. I was, however, put out about how it was worded in the second article I linked. I do, however, think that a single candidate race is inherently less interesting than a naturally close election is. We should foster an environment that encourages competition, differentiation between parties, and everything that comes with that. As the atmosphere stands, electing WildOwl /is/ fun, but we should reach for better.
And it's not that lulz campaigns should be taken seriously, they're intrinsically not serious. Where would the fun be if they were. It's that the factors that cause them should be taken seriously.
And that's absolutely true, but we've created an environment incredibly hostile to newer candidates, being in a cabinet isn't enough anymore to be taken seriously.
Finally, my article was certainly incomplete in expressing my ideas, partially because I injured my hand before writing it lol. As far as that is concerned, I accept it is fairly flawed, not terribly interested in content, and is more intended as a dissenting opinion to further conversation.
Mission accomplished.
I hope the hand heals.
Agreed lets make a mess just for the sake of it. So people have something to do.
That.
Like A$$-Owls last presidencies were entertaining??
Or fun
Or whatever???
When someone calls Fluffer a bro, he's telling all about himself!!
If it is any consolation,I contacted Old Fooks and SFP and asked them to run candidates that aren't Wild Owl so that RGR cannot be on the ballot.
Does that help?
Maybe I should run for CP soon. It, at least, would be fun.
\o/...see just another reason.
Excellent work...!
The zombies are running the asylum, both in eRep and in RL
It's good to see you alive again