Return to Unfiction unforum
 a.r.g.b.b 
FAQ FAQ   Search Search 
 
Welcome!
New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.
Website Restoration Project
This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.
Announcements
This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.
This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.
  

The time now is Tue Nov 19, 2024 6:41 pm
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)		 View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum
Calendar
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: The Haunted Apiary (Let Op!) » The Haunted Apiary (Let Op!): General/Updates
[UPDATE] Rogue Process Destroyed!
View previous topicView next topic
Page 12 of 15 [213 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
Author Message
sam
Boot

Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 49
Location: UK (but soon to be in NZ!)
Phaedra wrote:




Milgram does not apply here.

... I would suggest actually reading a detailed account of what occurred in the Milgram experiment, not a sermonistic summary.

____________________________________________

Or a flat denial of anothers opinion?

Given that we know Melissa's m.o is to punish
Quote:
... even minor transgressions
with shockingly excessive force....


and that she is relentless and has absolutly no conscience to executing her mission... I'd politely suggest that any AGRer who didn't appreciate the full potential ramifications of assisting Melissa track anybody/anything down has their head rammed firmly up their

Spoiler (Rollover to View):
jumper Very Happy



Milgram link - yeah fair comment on the church website thing - it was just the first site that google came up with. I was assuming that most ARGer's will have studied Milgram before.[/quote]

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:12 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Butterfingers
Greenhorn

Joined: 17 Oct 2004
Posts: 5

 		Oh for f**ks sake. Will you all just grow up?

I don't post that often, because I don't feel the need to. But this certainly warrents comment. Although, not dignified comment.

This is a game. It is entirely fictional, just like movies and books and stuff. Who cares if a character dies? I certainly don't. I honestly can't believe people are even talking about this.

Making choices based on a moral code!? What the hell!?

How many people here have killed characters in computer games? I admit I have. Does it mean that my choice to kill a character in a computer game is a moral choice? That I'd carry out the same act in real life? That killing people is part of my 'moral code'?Hell no.

If I was put in the same position, I'd try to kill as many in game characters as possible to see how the story would evolve and play out. It's purely fictional entertainment and I like it.

This is the most stupid, childish discussion/thread I've had the liberty to ever read. Yay for you guys.

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:20 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Digitally l33t
Veteran


Joined: 13 Oct 2004
Posts: 72
Location: Greenwich Village, New York

 		I must admit, I have shot a man off my mounted gun solely because I found him unfit for longterm duty.
_________________
1st Sgt. Grant, Spec. Op.
Crewmember since 2004
Certified Combatant [NY]

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:25 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 ICQ Number 
 Back to top 
sam
Boot

Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 49
Location: UK (but soon to be in NZ!)

 		The critical point here is whether or not the actions of the players affected the path of the game, or was it fated (scripted) to happen.

The bulk of this post is an interesting discussion on moral decision taking. Nothing more, nothing less. If you don't like it, don't continue to read this thread.

I hope like you, that every one remebers it's just a game - but even a game can provide topics that raise challenging questions. Let's just hope that none of the characters have to vote in the next couple of days, or make a call on abortion eh? Very Happy


Sam

edit to add:

From http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/halo1.htm

Quote:
Pete Parsons: The "Halo" universe has an overarching story that is well thought out and was well thought out before "Halo 2." We have roughly 600 years worth of "Halo" fiction, and we know what happens inside of that universe at any given time. The ["Halo 2"] story itself only existed as notes and was really fleshed out. We know ultimately, at least in the "Halo" universe, where humanity came from, where it's going to, at what point in time it comes in contact with The Covenant [the villains in "Halo"] and what happens well beyond that.

"Halo 2" picks up literally right after "Halo 1." But there is still plenty of story in and around that. And you can see some of that in the three novels we have.

HSW: There is tons of fan fiction and tons of speculation. If you look on the Web, there are a lot of fan-generated theories about the origins of the Flood and The Covenant and the Forerunner, Guilty Spark, the Halo and everything. Did you guys pay attention to that when you were building the story of "Halo 2"?

Pete Parsons: Here's a conversation that never happened: "Oh, what are the fans saying? I read this piece of fan fiction -- we should change the universe in this kind of way." We never do that. We don't do it for our fiction; we don't do it for our games. We certainly look at what they're interested in, and in cases where they may be interested in one particular aspect or asking questions about another aspect, we certainly may flesh out more of the story because of that. But I can't think of times where we look at fan stuff and say, "Oh we should pick up on that and do it." And it's not because we don't love our fans and care about them. It's because we, as a group, have our own very specific ideas about what happens and how it happens.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:26 am
Last edited by sam on Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:37 am; edited 1 time in total
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
sam
Boot

Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 49
Location: UK (but soon to be in NZ!)
Digitally l33t wrote:
I must admit, I have shot a man off my mounted gun solely because I found him unfit for longterm duty.


Very Happy Hah. Guilty as charged here too - Sometimes that Sergeant just gets on my nerves... cut from an earlier post I made...

Quote:
... I've just finished Fable, playing it as the most evil nasty vilain imaginable, and it was kinda fun. Now I'll go through it as a goody two shoes - same with KOTOR. Thing is - I knew I was being a bit naughty as my character killed those ingame children/traders/chickens...




Sam

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:28 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
vpisteve
Asshatministrator


Joined: 30 Sep 2002
Posts: 2441
Location: 1987

 		Mimes. I've only shot mimes in a game. Really. Mimes.
_________________
Making the world a better place, one less mime at a time.

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:38 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
 Back to top 
Akodo Bob
Boot

Joined: 29 Sep 2004
Posts: 19

 		[META] Playing the game verus playing the game
Butterfingers wrote:
How many people here have killed characters in computer games? I admit I have. Does it mean that my choice to kill a character in a computer game is a moral choice? That I'd carry out the same act in real life? That killing people is part of my 'moral code'?Hell no.


The way I see it, when we made the choice to become beekeepers, but especially after we formed the loyal crew and SParmy, we became characters in this story. We aren't avatars controling a predefined "main character." I am me, you are you. We are all people from the 21st century trying to interact with artificial intelligences from the future. When I became Erik, 2nd Lt. I choose to believe, for the duration and scope of this game that this is not some sort of clever Bungie ploy, but instead the signs of a real entity, reaching out to us for help. Melissa, the Sleeping Princess, Dana, even Aunt Margret, must all be real.
Without this suspension of disbelief, what fun is the game? What possible pleasure, what possible reward do we get out of running to phone booths in the middle of the day, answering cryptic messages, and listening to and talking to actors? Why manipulate the plot? Why be manical for the sake of being manical? If you decide that's how you should play the game, then so be it, but be prepared for the protests of other players, who are taking it more seriously.
Perhaps it is easier to view the game impersonally if you haven't been contacted by Melissa or the SP, or haven't run around getting photos of the local area. Regardless, I've felt that a majority of the players do allow this suspension of disbelief. Isn't that why we don't brute force? Why we have the [META] tag? Why players get so riled up about the "death" of a character. I think the PM's are encouraging us to make choices as if we really believed that it was all real, and that we could help save the world. But I dunno, maybe it's just me.
_________________
I lurk, therefore, I am
I've joined the loyal crew!
2nd Lieutenant Erik reporting

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 4:49 am
 View user's profile AIM Address
 Back to top 
krystyn
I Never Tire of My Own Voice


Joined: 26 Sep 2002
Posts: 3651
Location: Is not Chicago
Butterfingers wrote:
Oh for f**ks sake. Will you all just grow up?

You start.
Quote:
I don't post that often, because I don't feel the need to.

I have all the information I need, then.
Quote:
Making choices based on a moral code!? What the hell!?

Have you taken a look around this community? Have you informed and educated yourself in the aspects of the collectively-played genre that you so confidently never need to participate actively in?

These are characters that are going through certain events through time. It has been proven, over and over again, through conversations on payphones, through e-mails to in-game characters, and through the hours and hours of audio footage that behavioral cues and morality have definitely played a part in this game. To deny this would reveal a remarkably obtuse vision of this experience on your part. That may be your prerogative, but to barrel in here and expect us to share your vision, when you haven't yet felt compelled to grace us with your presence?

Well, fine. Morally, I won't dock you, but you get a -5 beehive wig of charm, you game-player, you!
Quote:
This is the most stupid, childish discussion/thread I've had the liberty to ever read. Yay for you guys.

Oh, please. That pink tuft of hair is so eighties. The Princess would rather have purple and/or turquoise.

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:37 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
Phaedra
Lurker v2.0


Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 4033
Location: Here, obviously
SuperJerms wrote:
Phaedra wrote:
Milgram does not apply here.

The subjects in Milgram's experiment knew they were hurting someone. They could hear the "other subject" (who was no such thing) screaming and begging them to stop. They chose to continue.

The crew, on the other hand, believed they were completing a relay. All the evidence we have been given thus far pointed to the idea that if something were going to happen to the SP, it would happen on Sunday. As far as any of us knew, it was just another relay, a little harder than the others but substantively no different.

It was not until it was too late for any of us to do anything that we realized what was going on.

So, in many ways, it's the exact opposite of the Milgram situation.

And I'm not sure that a church website is the best place to get an accurate description of a psychological experiment. I would suggest actually reading a detailed account of what occurred in the Milgram experiment, not a sermonistic summary.


Emphasis mine.

Phaedra, this isn't meant to sound combative or anything, but have you actually read Milgram's study or are you just assuming the summary posted above is biased since it's on a Church website? I am not trying to bring religion into this at all, and I did not read anything else on that link except for the Milgram summary, but I can not believe that you just called it a sermonistic summary if you have actually read Milgram's own summary.


I understand that you don't mean to be combative.

I have read Milgram's Obedience to Authority. And no, I didn't call the summary on the website "sermonistic" just because it's on a church's website. I didn't necessarily mean to imply that that makes it biased, but it is a brief summary designed to make a point. (The links below are dealing with peer pressure.)

Quote:
I have read Milgrams study, and have also watched filmstrips of the experiment happening. I watched as Fred Prozi almost has a nervous breakdown midway through the testing, yet pushes the voltage way past the death point. I watched as Milgram smugly compared these subjects to Eichmann and the guards who administered Cyclon-B at the death camps.


Yes, and it is precisely because Milgram drew those parallels, and because he was smug, that I think people should read the whole thing and draw their own conclusions rather than simply accepting our cultural "memory" of what the study was about. I think people also need to bear in mind the limitations of the study.

Quote:
Now, it's true that the death of SP was a total surprise to everyone involved here. Though some weren't against the idea of killing her, we didn't know that the tag relay had such sinister goals. In this way, Milgram does not apply.


It's not just that the death was a surprise. In Milgram's study, what I see as the point is that the subjects were fully aware that they were hurting their "co-subjects."

People seem to toss around Milgram every time the question of obeying an "authority" with harmful results comes up. But lots of people obey authorities never knowing that the results will be harmful. Which, as I said before, is more or less the opposite of the subjects in Milgram's study, who "knew" that their "learners" were in pain.

Also, despite Milgram's smugness, his experiment doesn't explain Nazi atrocities.

Two things are often ignored about the study in comparing it to the Nazis. First, the subjects knew they were participating in a psychological experiment. Even back then, there were regulations and codes of ethics. The participants had every reason to trust that the experiment would not have any permanently harmful results. Even back then, no one was conducting public psychological experiments in which people died. Also, and most importantly, the subjects were reassured that the shocks would cause no permanent damage. You can fault them for not trusting their own senses, I suppose, but the point remains that they were given that reassurance that no one was being hurt, from people in white lab coats who looked like they were qualified to judge.

Second, often forgotten or ignored is the fact that many of the subjects protested and gave every sign of an intense internal struggle. These were not automatons rhythmically pulling a switch.

Let's compare this to the Nazis. They were well aware that their actions were causing people to die. No one was reassuring them that the people in the camps "weren't actually being hurt." They may have gotten their orders from an authority, but they were never promised that what they were doing was harmless.

This is a substantive, and important, difference.

Quote:
However, the last few months have seen people arguing about who we will listen to, what costs we will pay, what actions we will comply with. Some have been very vocal that they saw Dana as a living person, but would gladly sacrifice her if Melissa asked. Others sought to kill SP simply to arouse anger in those who liked her. Still others wanted to kill Aunt Margaret, so long as SP would survive.

The reasoning was as varied as the means people were willing to employ. I even recall someone saying they would die if it would help things (eep!). Make no mistake about it, this is exactly what Milgram's experiment was designed to consider. To quote Milgrim on why he made his experiment,
Milgram wrote:
The dilemma inherent in submission to authority is ancient, as old as the story of Abraham, and the question of whether one should obey when commands conflict with conscience has been argued by Plato, dramatized in Antigone, and treated to philosophic analysis in almost every historical epoch. Conservative philosophers argue that the very fabric of society is threatened by disobedience, while humanists stress the primacy of the individual conscience. The legal and philosophic aspects of obedience are of enormous import, but they say very little about how most people behave in concrete situations.


In many ways ILB has been different from Milgram's obedience experiments. Certainly SP's termination was different because we were duped into complicity in the act. Yet, inasmuch as we discussed how far we'd be willing to go, what we'd be able to do, and who we'd be willing to sacrifice, ILB raises these same issues.


Certainly it does. But most of the accusations thrown around here were directed at the action of answering the phone and giving the correct relay answers, not the moral and philosophical discussions going on elsewhere.

Certainly, if the focus is those dicussions, then let's talk about Milgram.

But the poster who brought up Milgram, I believe, was replying to posts throwing around accusations of "You murdered the SP!!!!"

In that case, I maintain that it does not apply. The crew acted in ignorance of the results of their actions. Milgram's subjects, and most certainly the Nazis, did not.

Quote:
Did some offer to kill Dana because it was, "Just a game?" Sure. Would they have really done it if they thought a real person would die? God knows I hope not.


I'm reasonably sure they would not.

Quote:
Yet we return to a question I have been thinking about alot. As you raised it, one of the principal issues of interpersonal ethics is that you, "Don't abuse others to make yourself feel better."

Without getting overly philosophical, what about those who had a real emotional attachment to SP? It seems to me unimportant whether SP was a real person or not...some people had a real emotional attachment to her. I remember in my youth that my younger sister loved playing with barbie dolls. One time I was forced to play with her. I was bored, annoyed at how she wanted to play, and generally upset at the situation. To amuse myself (primarily because I knew it would upset her), I popped the head off of Ken doll, threw it across the room, shouted, "OH NO! KEN IS DEAD!" and left the room smiling. I hurt my sister's feelings, not by attacking her but by attacking something she loved.

SP may not have been a real person. Maybe she was more like a Barbie doll. But some people loved her. They said as much, each time they talked. People are changing signatures to "The Last Fortress." A thread has arisen for Eulogy.

While some have been (sometimes callously) explaining away why SP is better off dead, why the SParmy shouldn't be acting so emotionally, or why their trivializing the emotional bond developed with the characters in this game is ok, I am failing to see much difference between these posts and how I acted towards my sister when I was six years old.

And a strange thing begins to happen when an emotional bond occurs between real people and fictional characters. Perhaps, like the velveteen rabbit, SP became real in those people's minds. Perhaps, even with fiction, real emotional attachment can occur and real pain of loss can be felt. If not, then why do we write stories? But if that loss is real, perhaps we all should tread a little more lightly around such sensitive issues.


I'm sorry if you viewed my post as callous. And certainly I understand that some people had an emotional attachment to the SP.

Nevertheless, that does not excuse what has been going on here any more than Chappy can be excused for laughing at her death.

If people are angry or upset that she is gone, that's fine. Go to the eulogy thread. Mourn.

But again, and I don't care how "into the game" you are, it is not okay to call the crew murderers. It is not okay to compare them to Hitler or Bin Laden. And I say again, if you're doing that, it's a sign that you need to take a step back and remember that it's a game and that, no matter how immersive the game, no real person was hurt, physically or emotionally, in the SP's death. On the other hand, real people may be hurt by name-calling and accusations.

EDIT: I forgot to add, my explanation that the Princess' death may have been required was not intended to suggest that people are wrong to mourn her. I was trying to explain that her death may have had a purpose. If it sounded callous, my apologies. The intent was precisely the opposite -- perhaps I put it too formally, but I was trying to say, "look, guys, maybe it wasn't in vain."
_________________
Voted Most Likely to Thread-Jack and Most Patient Explainer in the ILoveBees Awards.

World Champion: Cruel 2B Kind

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:41 am
Last edited by Phaedra on Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:55 am; edited 1 time in total
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
Phaedra
Lurker v2.0


Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 4033
Location: Here, obviously
sam wrote:
Phaedra wrote:




Milgram does not apply here.

... I would suggest actually reading a detailed account of what occurred in the Milgram experiment, not a sermonistic summary.

____________________________________________

Or a flat denial of anothers opinion?


It wasn't a flat denial of your opinion, it was an opening statement in an (admittedly highly condensed) argument.

Quote:
Given that we know Melissa's m.o is to punish
Quote:
... even minor transgressions
with shockingly excessive force....


and that she is relentless and has absolutly no conscience to executing her mission... I'd politely suggest that any AGRer who didn't appreciate the full potential ramifications of assisting Melissa track anybody/anything down has their head rammed firmly up their


You are, as ever entitled to your opinion. But despite the intro to the ILB website, precisely whom has she ever punished with "shockingly excessive force"?

Her summary of the SP event = she is now "virus-free." Ridding a computer of a virus doesn't exactly count as punishment, does it?

Let's see, there was the "crew" member who couldn't remember his rank...and she discharged him. That doesn't seem like excessive force to me. If I were her, and I weren't sure whom to trust, and here was a guy claiming to be crew who took an eternity to come up with a rank, I'd discharge him too.

Quote:
Milgram link - yeah fair comment on the church website thing - it was just the first site that google came up with. I was assuming that most ARGer's will have studied Milgram before.


A fair assumption. Yet generally, it's safer to quote psychiatric associations, encyclopedias, universities, etc. when dealing with psychological studies.
_________________
Voted Most Likely to Thread-Jack and Most Patient Explainer in the ILoveBees Awards.

World Champion: Cruel 2B Kind

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:51 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
kasuta
Boot

Joined: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 13

 		I was thinking about these latest developments last night, and how angry people are getting and looking for someone to blame, and I was wondering if this latest twist has changed anyone's opinion of Dana. It seems most people have been very protective of Dana since the beginning, I remember threads about sacrificing her that got fairly heated.

The beekeepers did not willingly participate in eliminating the princess-they were 'tricked' into it, so to speak, by Melissa. However, Dana knew what she was getting into and what the consequences of her actions would be. Even if she was coerced and/or blackmailed, she still made a conscious choice. If anyone is looking for a target for their anger and sense of loss over the SP, why isn't Dana considered a viable target?

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:15 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Phaedra
Lurker v2.0


Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 4033
Location: Here, obviously
Nightmare Tony wrote:
Phaedra wrote:
Nightmare Tony wrote:

And as official SPArmy Chandler, a candle must be lit to the memory of our dear Princess. For now she sleeps once again, with the flight of angels.

To Melissa's crew: God help you, for the Princess was all that remained of the humanity of Melissa. You will crave the human comfort of a Bin Laden or Hitler compared to what you are about to do...



I beg your pardon?

Pray, explain your analogy.

I find the last sentence both incoherent and incomprehensible.




Phaedra, the comparison applies more to what Mellisa wqill become. The crewmembers will have to become far more loyal than before from an imperfect Machiavellian type (who can sing a mean duet of Amazing Grace), into one who learned to act with utter ruthlessness and lack of compassion.


Indeed. But I was referring to the fact that I find it incomprehensible how you think Hitler was more human than Melissa. I am unclear as to why you think this is comparable to the actions of the Nazis.
_________________
Voted Most Likely to Thread-Jack and Most Patient Explainer in the ILoveBees Awards.

World Champion: Cruel 2B Kind

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:35 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
gains
Boot

Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 14

 		It's fairly certain to me we weren't allowed to know what result our actions would bring about purposely.

Mel is a damaged AI construct, trapped behind foreign (enemy?) lines, trying to subvert enough of the locals to help her escape. She needed to give away the bare minimum of information, having people unwittingly do what she could not in her damaged state.

She doesn't want to stay here, as every second surrounded by potential foes might mean that she needs to activate her Cole protocols.

The biggest threat to Mel is not that someone will delete her core functions, it's that she'll become so destabilized that she could be compromised by enemy probes into her mind, and have to self terminate to prevent sensitive data falling into enemy hands.

Captain Keyes taught us that.
_________________
. . . be seeing you . . .

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:57 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
Trynian
Veteran

Joined: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 146
Quote:
Oh, please. That pink tuft of hair is so eighties. The Princess would rather have purple and/or turquoise.


Pink tuft of...?

Oh.

*falls over laughing*

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:58 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Nightmare Tony
Entrenched

Joined: 07 Jun 2004
Posts: 824
Location: Meadowbrook

 		Phaedra, I dont think it that horribly in terms of a comparison. I am using it as an exaggerated warning, after seeing someone use the same names of Hitler and Bin Laden in there. Consider it more of an ingame prophesy from a mad chandler character, I mean, I had couched it in a warning tone for that.
I dont want to get endlessly trapped in explaining the ramiifications of a hurried little post I wrote in 5 seconds while half alseep.

Can we move on, please? Thanks.

Besides, according ot Godwin's law, I lost already.
_________________
For this is the place where dreams and nightmares are birthed and bred
Nightmare Park

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 12:09 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 12 of 15 [213 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
View previous topicView next topic
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: The Haunted Apiary (Let Op!) » The Haunted Apiary (Let Op!): General/Updates
Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group