Subject:
|
Re: The Friendliest Site On The Internet. (Was Re: A little self examination?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 24 Oct 2000 19:47:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
607 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Robert-Blaze Kanehl writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Todd Lehman writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> > > I don't believe it's a higher level anything, and to call it a meta-game
> > > romanticizes it beyond the point of useful discussion.
>
> I strongly agree with this point...
>
> If I rob a bank, is it a crime?... or "a Meta-game in which I proposed to
> test the gullable nature of bank tellers, the resolution of low-light
> cameras, the competancy of local law enforcement, and the ethics of the
> judicial system (and my subsequent cell-mates)?
Naturally, it could be both. It's never not a crime, of course. If someone
thinks it a meta-game, they clearly think quite differently from most people.
Again, I don't care to judge MM's game or meta-game or tactics (or whatever
you want to call them) as being noble or ignoble right now. Somewhere in what
I said -- some word choice -- my point got lost, and that was that normal
reasoning doesn't work -- normal reasoning only works when you're playing the
same game. When you're playing on one field and the opponent is playing on
another field (whether one is higher or lower the other is in the eye of each
beholder) then the rules aren't necessarily the same. I hope that clarifies
what I meant earlier when I said "lemme interject something."
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
67 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
