Rebellion. The childish version.
butnaru
A quiet afternoon. No major fight on the battle list, no major fight in the media. Compared to the last few days at least, this was definitely a boring one. Until a so-called “rebellion” stirred up the whole eRepublik.
A group of country presidents signed a list of demands, threatening to stop the wars and to act against the developers/admins. Nice thing, a petition, isn't it? A decent, democratic and mature protest, you'd say. Also decent are some of the demands, we can agree on that. Unless they came from some of the very people who used to benefit from the issues they now condemn: in this case they are called “hypocritical demands”.
The “decent, democratic and mature” moment being passed, some of the presidents jumped straight to the last part of their threat: they proposed new presidential messages, almost explicitly telling the new players to go away and never return to eRepublik. And that's the moment when the whole protest turns into a childish one: “I want the toy being painted in red or I'll break the toy”. Except that the toy doesn't belong to those 10 banned presidents and their supporters gathered on a mIRC channel.
Playing a game doesn't give you any property rights over the game. The more so as it's just a game. Maybe you don't like the rules of backgammon on a website, but this doesn't give you any right over that website. If the other players enjoy the game, you may easily say “goodbye” and let them play while you find yourself another thing to do.
Even if you paid your taxi ride to John Doe's home, even if you paid for the cigarettes you are going to smoke while being in here, even if you paid for a couple of beers we're all drinking, the house still belongs to John Doe. And if you try to burn it down, he has the right to kick you out of the premises. Or kick you right in the face.
Oh, yes, of course you can tell him you don't like the color of the walls or the size of the table we're sitting at while playing some cards; yet nothing on Earth could ever force him to act accordingly, even if he's generous enough to listen to your opinions. If John Doe and his other guests enjoy the walls and the table, you may easily say “goodbye” and let us play our card game while you find yourself another place to be.
Some rushed to find an analogy with the RL revolts in Egypt or Tunisia, hoping that this would legitimate their action. I'm afraid they have instead insulted the Egyptian and the Tunisian people.
I'd rather find an analogy with a communist revolt in the suburbs of [insert the name of a big city here], where the young proletariat tries to set the local stores and bank offices on fire and impose its own rule by force.
Sorry, but you can't win my sympathy by doing this. Not even in a boring afternoon.
Comments
[removed]
huuuuuuuu!!!
tatov
waste of time reading this
this is not their home, this is their business
as a business, John Doe is the CUSTOMER
you don”t throw the coffee cup in John Doe”s face if you want to be a successful businessman, after all, you want John Doe to come back and drink more
better close the damn business and tell John Doe to go to @#$% or to go &%$# himself
[removed]
Totally agree.
The case is simple: my house, my rules! You don't like it? Log out!
But don't try to mess with my "guests" if they don't complain. Don't try to convince them that YOUR WAY IS... THE WAY.
This is a private bussines and not a non-profit organisation or a democratic institution.
I don't like many things in this game but, still, I come every day and spend some time trying to have some fun.
Yes... I am a customer. I have rights since I buy the "product" but NOBODY IS FORCING ME TO BUY IT.
I can't blame the store owner if I am enough stupid to buy a product which I don't like. And if I bought sausages thinking to salami I can't make a strike in the store and boicot the whole bussinnes only because I expected to find something else in the package EVEN IF IT STAYS ON THE LABEL WHAT'S INSIDE.
There is a wor😛 The customer is my master!...but only if he respects MY RULES and buys the product I offer.
HE CAN'T ORDER ME TO BORROW HIM MY WIFE FOR THIS...or?
PS. In this case Jhon Doe is the OWNER and not the customer, Pangaiu🙂
Mixing things up as usual... hmm? 😁
Voted for truth!
Parca asa faceau si fanariotii la Sfanta Poarta... Cand vremea le-a trecut, le-a trecut si gata...
It's not too late to put in practice the mature version: signing world peace
It's not too late to put in practice the mature version: signing world peace x1
This is a true romanian thinking. I must agree with Radu this time... because if you think at Erepublik as a business, not a home, they have to keep their clients happy.
Ok, I go to a coffee shop because I like the coffee and the music and the people whom I meet there, but I will not agree to the staff to treat me bad. Sorry, but it's not "my game, my rules". If this game brings you money because I play it then keep me happy and more in this game.
So..if not one or two, but many complain...then you have a problem.
I've never been a fan of dictatorial rulling... I, as a player, count the same ot maybe more...
But the solution is not this rebellion... The solution is closing accounts. As far as some complain and the majority bends in front of the stupid rules, there will be no gaining for the players...
waste of time reading this
this is not their home, this is their business
as a business, John Doe is the CUSTOMER
you don”t throw the coffee cup in John Doe”s face if you want to be a successful businessman, after all, you want John Doe to come back and drink more
better close the damn business and tell John Doe to go to @#$% or to go &%$# himself x2
butnaru you don't know anything about how a company should work i pray you never work in the field.
Also last i checked "not going to war with one's country" is not breaking any laws - or we are forced into fights now?
If they don't like the new citizen message or anything else they should modify the eRep laws FIRST then act on them.
Also agreed with Wandutza - newer CPs should continue to protest against this by simply not waring each other for a period of time.
I agree whit QueenOfTheDamned.
From my point of view this article is an illegal public debate : ))).
don't fight, we will fight for you 😁
And about the "new citizen message" shame on you ... stupid decision
a backbone is what you need ; )
article. the stupid version.
Agree! Kill the child! No players, no problems!
Lapdogs of the admins. Typical Adminlandian behavior. I didn't expect anything else from a Romanian.
[removed]
@Kmerse: Each person is entitled to his own opinion. The fact his opinion is not identical to your does not make him wrong.
I am a Romanian and this is my opinion: http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/the-childish-rebellion-in-a-mirror-1698714/1/20
So please, do not insult the author [butnaru] or the rest of us just because you do not agree with his opinion. .
Game.
You're doing it wrong.
I'd say (with some economical studies behind myself) that the problem is the business strategy.
This game needs the free players, because they are the masses. And without the masses, the paying players cannot play with anyone (200 players are nothing for a game like that).
I don't know the business strategy, but if the admins do not want to go towards a pay-only erep game, then they really should value the free players.
Maybe they do. But we don't feel it. And that is the real problem.
Masses will leave the game again. Just like when v2 was introduced.
And that hurt them very much.
Radu, mihai.cazacu, Feherlo: +1
Kamikazi run ....
Pentru dreptul la libera exprimare au murit mii de oameni in 89. Aici, ca se omoara doar niste pixeli, nu merita sa ne ridicam pt drepturile fundamentale?
For the right of free expresion, thousands of people died in 89.
Here, where just pixels are killed, is it worth to stand up for our fundamental rights?
Well, the first sign should be that the most vocal players are also the most involved ones. It's the ones you can accuse maybe of being too involved and wishing for something better. And thus, there should be a dialog, as this is usually the way to solve problems. Certainly not by punishing and stepping over some basic fundamental human rights.
A business, any business, thrives on it's regular customers. They're the ones who are the best promoters and as well the best long term consumers. If you have a pool of regular customers, you can be sure you'll at least have some income.
The moment your regular customers start to protest, not because they want a different treatment, but a fair treatment, then you [as a business owner] have a problem. And the moment you start throwing the regular customers out because they said something is wrong, you will certainly not solve the problem but loose even that pool which insured you the basic income. And the more people complain, be certain your problems is in fact bigger. Shoving it under the carpet will not make it go away.
Those passionate "regulars" may remain in game, sure, but be sure as well that their "order" will get smaller and smaller.
What admins did equates in reality with sending the military to fire indiscriminately their heavy machineguns at civil protesters.
No, i am not exagerating.
Consumer protection? PR? Community relations? "Our client, our master"?
Do these ideas make any sense in Romania?
Radu, mihai.cazacu, Feherlo: +2
GG
partially agreed, but the ban of cerber and hung president made me dance \o/
[removed]
@Radu Pangaiu: totally waste your time reading your comments. as usual : )). as The Brigadier told you, in the article, John Doe was the owner of the house, not the customer (try to read more carefully next time; just to know what you're talking about).
so: John Doe is the owner of the business. and if you come to his restaurant and ask him to play manele 'cause that's what would make you (the customer) happy, he has the right to refuse. and if you try to burn the building down after that, he has the right to shoot you or call the cops to get you arrested.
as long as you don't like the jazz, you may easily find a "manele bar" - how does this sound? : )) - and let the jazz fans enjoy their coffee.
(answered also to QueenOfTheDamned here)
@fanel: faneleeee, n-ai plecat?! cum, cand aproape varsasem o lacrima citind articolul de despartire si gandindu-ma ca ramanem toti fara lozincile si mostrele tale de gandire "cu principii"?! iarasi ma dezamagesti. interesant, nu ti-a luat decat vreo cateva ore sa te razgandesti: asta da tarie de caracter! : ))
@Gray: masurile "in forta" au aparut dupa propunerile de schimbare a mesajelor prezidentiale. cred ca sunt unul dintre ultimii pe care ai putea sa-i banuiesti ca ar lupta impotriva libertatii de exprimare sau a dialogului. dar santajul ("daca nu faceti ce vrem noi, va stricam afacerea") si incercarile de sabotaj (mesajele prezidentiale) nu fac parte din dialog. in opinia mea, cel putin.
aside from that, drepturile tale fundamentale nu includ si dreptul de a-i dicta cuiva cum sa-si administreze propria afacere.
JyM22: sorry to disappoint you : )).
@Butnaru&Brigadier: I do not give a piece of #$%@ about your John Doe. My John Doe was different than yours and I know it very well. Maybe I should have called him by another name, but I made it clear I am talking about another John Doe. That is the beauty of talking about John Does, they can be whoever you want them to be.
John Doe aside, nobody wants manele music here. My John Doe wants ”the usual”, the thing that kept him coming, and behaves like the usual, civilized and stuff. Here comes your John Doe, throwing coffee on the other, and expect him to even pay the tips, leave without a scandal and come back another day to buy an extralarge hot coffee. I would not take the risk of getting the XXL one on my face, so no more money for your local. I would rather call the cops than spend another dime there.
Peach, you got it wrong, we do not work for this guy and we do not get a salary from him, it is the other way around.
@butnaru: Nu te banuiesc, tot ce am spus era legat de justificarea incalcarii dreptului la libera exprimare si in ce conditii se poate justifica o astfel de incalcare. Din punctul meu de vedere, never.
Nu cred ca am dictat eu cuiva cum sa-si administreze propria afacere, pot doar sa-mi dau si eu cu parerea si sa-mi apar anumite principii si drepturi [chiar daca pentru unii faptul ai principii si mai si indraznesti sa le aperi e o crima de lese majeste sau reprezinta o anchilozare a "ideilor"].
Cel carui ma adresez poate sa ia in seama sau poate sa nu ia in seama, dar nu are de ce sa-mi stearga opiniile si sa incalce drepturile fundamentale altora cat timp exprimarea unei opinii nu incalc drepturile nimanui.
talpnyaló
@Radu Pangaiu: related to the first phrase of your last comment - same here : )). yes, my John Doe is different than yours and I'm so glad about that. the more so as your John Doe is the one throwing coffee on the jazz fans.
@Gray: am raspunc un pic mai "tehnic" si la articolul tau. un individ are dreptul sa-ti stearga opiniile, daca le-ai scris pe peretii casei lui.
He is doing the part with the jazz fans after being screwed up by your John Doe. As I said, he would not leave without a scandal, and rightly so.
"scandal" is the key word : ))
don't try this at home, tho. at someone else's home : ))
@butnaru: da, cat timp 100% e casa lui, momentan inca se lauda ca 90% e user generated content. 🙂
It is not their home, it is their business, the unsatisfied customer has the right to even make a scandal if he is treated unjustly. After all, it is about his hard earned money.
@Gray: chiar daca e user generated content, casa e tot a lui. daca tu esti pictor si am pe pereti picturi semnate de tine, nu inseamna ca nu e 100% casa mea. chestie care imi da voie sa pun intr-o zi pe foc picturile, daca nu-mi mai plac.
@Radu Pangaiu: the customer has lots of rights (including to go have a coffe somewhere else or to call the Consumers Protection Agency), but to make a scandal is not one of them. nor to set the restaurant on fire. again, don't try this at home : ))
[removed]
@JyM22: = )). no, I mean you're really funny. try a Google search on my name : ))
@butnaru: in cazul de fata cred ca pot spune linistit ca nu e vorba de picturi ci de ziduri, stalpi si acoperis. In this case, they are my guest to take down all of it. Si sa ramana cu fundatia ; ).
I would still brake some tables😉
Waste of time reading all this childish comments🙂
We all make circles around the same shit. The problem is simple but we like to complicate:
1. House, bussines, restaurant, toilete, Erepublik... doesn't matter. It's PRIVATE! That's it!
2. It's up to the owner and his capacity to run HIS OWN BUSSINES what changes is he doing. We can't take any decisions regarding the game... ONLY SUGGESTIONS. (revolutions and strikes in the restaurant? LOL)
3. Freedom of speach in RL and Erep. ends where the law and rules starts.
4. TO PLAY THIS GAME IS AN OPPORTUNITY AND NOT A RIGHT!!! The only right we have is to... LOG OUT!(if we don't like the way we are treated)
As I mentioned above: I don't like many things in this GAME, I try to improve things by making suggestions to admins and sometimes I criticize their actions.
But I'm not a child to push things more when I know that is useles and I don't have the right.
It's up to the owner of the game if he wants to go in bancruptcy or be succesfull!
Use your heads!
Briga, private owned, but public house.
The owner can make any changes he wants but, as long as I already paid real money for something and he delivers something else (BS this time), there is a big problem, he can not do whatever he pleases. Give me the environment I already paid for. I used to be a paying customer, and I paid for something else, not this krappo. Remember the good old times?
@The Brigadier: Right - 3. Freedom of speach in RL and Erep. ends where the law and rules starts. - So if me expressing my freedom of speech is not against any law or rule, what's the reason for you to deny me my freedom of speech?
PS: Adding the rules is wrong, my freedom of speech is only within the limits of the law. Not within their rules, it's one of the rare cases when you cannot impose a lower limit on something that the law already covers. As i was saying, that's why it has special laws and charta's.
And it's up to the owner to impose on me his will, as long as he is not selling my used generated content which i provided for free? Is that a fair trade?
Because this is what happens. We are also generating content and they're selling this as well. So we do not have the right to demand that our basic fundamental rights are respected in return?