World of Warcraft®

I didn't exactly ask what you would do if I were to hypothetically round up a few friends and do this. I am asking for your permission to do this. Would you want me to do this, or not mind if I did this?

Again, if not, why not? Where is the dividing line?

This is a nonsequitor to the argument. Being annoyed or not is not what being debated. The problem is that people standing around, half of them flagged, don't get special protection because it looks like RP.

06/04/2012 11:15 PMPosted by Kyalin

Uh, my permission? I don't control you. You ultimately will do what you want. I'd find it annoying, sure, but I also don't control what others do, so would just do what I would need to do if it was annoying me that much.

It's a 'yes or no' question. If I were to ask your permission to arrange a posse specifically to target your RP events, would you grant it?

An irrelevant question, I see no reason to bump this thread further with such questions - take it in game if need be, but this has gone on long enough and the outcome of this question has no effect on this specific argument.

I really don't see as irrelevant as you two do, but I think those answers will be sufficient.

A pre-planned thing? Sure, why not? Do I get to find out where you're going with this, now? Also let's get this to 10 pages. Please. I have a reputation to maintain among my friends. 10 pages go go go.

06/04/2012 11:18 PMPosted by Kyalin

I really don't see as irrelevant as you two do, but I think those answers will be sufficient.

The reason it's irrelevant is because it's a controllable situation. If you are not flagged, you can't be pvped. They can jump around and hoot and holler, but they can't do anything. If you are flagged and refuse to flag down but also refuse to pvp back, you are still engaging with them (in a passive aggresive way), and thus they will stick around.

06/04/2012 11:21 PMPosted by Rowanne

A pre-planned thing? Sure, why not? Do I get to find out where you're going with this, now? Also let's get this to 10 pages. Please. I have a reputation to maintain among my friends. 10 pages go go go.

An OOC drama thread being the longest thread on the front page would be so awesome.

06/04/2012 11:21 PMPosted by Rowanne

A pre-planned thing? Sure, why not? Do I get to find out where you're going with this, now? Also let's get this to 10 pages. Please. I have a reputation to maintain among my friends. 10 pages go go go.

As far as where I'm going with this, it's strictly a hypothetical. Personally, I believe, flagged or not, showing up to purposely ruin someone's day is a bit discourteous, which is why I try not to engage in such behavior (if I'm attacking a town for example, I'll leave vendors and quest givers alone). But then, there's that values dissonance problem so I wanted to find out if that same feeling was shared among people in the Horde.

A pre-planned thing? Sure, why not? Do I get to find out where you're going with this, now? Also let's get this to 10 pages. Please. I have a reputation to maintain among my friends. 10 pages go go go.

As far as where I'm going with this, it's strictly a hypothetical. Personally, I believe, flagged or not, showing up to purposely ruin someone's day is a bit discourteous, which is why I try not to engage in such behavior (if I'm attacking a town for example, I'll leave vendors and quest givers alone). But then, there's that values dissonance problem so I wanted to find out if that same feeling was shared among people in the Horde.

You are aware that when it comes to ettiquette, there is no "right" answer, so this argument can't be won or lost?

You are aware that when it comes to ettiquette, there is no "right" answer, so this argument can't be won or lost?

How do you know that there isn't a right answer?

Edit: I do mean this seriously, because I haven't met a relativist yet who has been able to provide the basis behind the paradigms that they so concertedly cling to.

Of course it's discourteous, but your example is pretty bad. If it's a pre-planned thing, then it's not ruining anyone's day because it's PRE-PLANNED. That being said, unlike others, I accept the fact that I will never be capable of controlling other people's actions, and so when others are being inconsiderate and there's something I can do to stop it, I will do it. I am not going to even BOTHER to ask them to stop because /they are being inconsiderate/ and already do not care that they are inconveniencing me.

06/04/2012 11:31 PMPosted by Kyalin

How do you know that there isn't a right answer?

Because questions of etiquette and morality are subjective. The Golden Rule is no more valid then Might Makes Right, in absolute terms, because both are based on things that can't be measured in numerical values. A person can think one is better then the other, but that doesn't mean that they are "right". It's like asking which is tastier: Keynesian Economics or Existential Philosophy?

Because questions of etiquette and morality are subjective.

You could say the same about what constitutes acceptable accounting principles, and yet we still have GAAP and IFRS (the latter being largely based on GAAP), and that's just accounting. There are entire frameworks of rules and guidelines for some very 'subjective' subjects, for which definite and absolute conclusions have been drawn.

The Golden Rule is no more valid then Might Makes Right, in absolute terms, because both are based on things that can't be measured in numerical values.

So in other words, because we lack, or have not developed a commonly accepted metric, everything is the same? Does that mean that we invented temperature along with the thermometer?

06/04/2012 11:53 PMPosted by Kyalin

Because questions of etiquette and morality are subjective.

You could say the same about what constitutes acceptable accounting principles, and yet we still have GAAP, and IFRS, which is largely based on GAAP, and that's just accounting. There are entire frameworks of rules and guidelines for some very 'subjective' subjects, for which now conclusions have been drawn, and debate has largely been ended, usually on the paradigms of 'if you seek X, you must do Y.'

The Golden Rule is no more valid then Might Makes Right, in absolute terms, because both are based on things that can't be measured in numerical values.

So in other words, because we lack, or have not developed a commonly accepted metric, everything is the same? Does that mean that we invented temperature along with the thermometer?

Actually, the correct answer was to discuss the fact that some systems of ettiquette and morality have more overall absolute utility then others. That is the commonly accepted counter argument to the problem of subjectivity. The argument you put forth still suffers from the problem of subjectivity, since frameworks are, by definition, social constructs. See, when someone gets vague, like I did, you have force their argument back to solid ground. So, no points.

Also, why are you arguing with me? I'm clearly either a troll or so convinced I'm right that you can't argue with me, since arguing requires that a person be open to changing their initial position if it is proven wrong.

So you were just testing her?
This makes my face hurt.

Well, this thread is so full of people not listening to each other and just slagging each other for no real reason, I figured "Why not just be weird and see what happens?" :)

06/04/2012 06:58 PMPosted by Oskor

I think I may have missed where you said it, but just how many times were you attacked?

Well, there was the first attack in the Town Hall. And then we killed him and he came back, and I think that was when Jyocses jumped in -- killed both of them and they came back and so we opted to move inside the keep.... which is when Gentyl did flag down so we could continue our business. But that didn't stop them from sitting there for I'd guess a good hour. (Which is another reason I don't think it was an IC attack and I don't think they would have just left us alone if we'd just let them kill Gentyl once.)
So, three times? Cause I can count. On my fingers. Sometimes. Shush.

Kyalin's question isn't completely irrelevant, actually. If it weren't a pre-planned thing, dragging guards into the middle of an RP event and fighting them would be considered griefing, right? We're all agreed on that?
But, by the whole "it's part of the game" argument... guards are always flagged for PvP and it is part of the game to fight them, have them chase you around. Even if no one at the RP event is flagged, we should have no room to complain when someone shows up and starts slaughtering guards in the middle of an RP event.
I think the whole "it's part of the game" is giving actual griefers a huge argument against us. Their emotes, jumping on tables, etc are arguably all part of the game. Just because its part of the game doesn't mean it's courteous to do.

Again, completely ignoring the fact of some people simply being jerks and not will not abide by your requests /simply because they can./ I will note this is not something I would do, but I'm not so sure why it's so difficult to accept that some people just are not going to be courteous, nice people and will do what they will do simply because they can. :|

I'm pulling the plug on half of this.

It has gone on long enough.

Apologies for spoiling the discussion.

Actually, the correct answer was to discuss the fact that some systems of ettiquette and morality have more overall absolute utility then others. That is the commonly accepted counter argument to the problem of subjectivity.

I'd agree with that statement, although I would point out on the point that frameworks are a product of society that IFRS is a global framework, one whose principles and rules have spread to, and have been accepted by many cultures and societies. We haven't yet achieved full convergence, but the process is certainly there and has produced amendments and developments to the reporting frameworks of many nations. China's adoption of ASBEs is one example of this, certainly not the only one, but a good one.