Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 401 of 412
FirstPreviousNextLast
Matthewew (157 D)
16 Nov 17 UTC
How do I talk to players?
Am I just missing something. How do I talk to the other players in my game?
13 replies
Open
JECE (1322 D)
11 Nov 17 UTC
Who wants to play 1600?
http://vdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=32997
PPSC with perfectly divisible pot if we don't draw.
Rulebook press, rulebook civil disorder and hidden draw votes
42-hour phases, so that you won't CD if you check the game once a day
6 replies
Open
Thaneofwhiterun (1266 D)
15 Nov 17 UTC
Strangest/ Least probable alliances?
What do y'all think are the least likely alliances between countries in the long term?
31 replies
Open
JoJoReference (35 D X)
14 Nov 17 UTC
(+1)
Advanced theory
Who would win in a fight, Alex Jones with a katana, or Obama with a hatchet & shield? No prep time or outside help allowed
20 replies
Open
slypups (1570 D)
15 Nov 17 UTC
Replacement player needed for public, non-anon World Diplomacy game
Game: http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=207427
India has disappeared and we need a replacement player. His position is still pretty good, so lots of potential there. If you are game, we'll try contacting a mod to swap you in so that there isn't another NMR.
5 replies
Open
ARNESEN (365 D)
15 Nov 17 UTC
What does Bhm. Sea stand for in the modern map version?
In the modern map, there's a territory named Bhm. Sea. What does that stand for? I always assumed Bohemian Sea though that doesn't exist (and the sea isn't close to Bohemia). Perhaps it is Bornholm Sea (after the Danish island in the Baltic in that area)?
1 reply
Open
ubercacher16 (443 D)
13 Nov 17 UTC
Self Interest
Beyond a shadow of a doubt every human being is driven only and fully by their own self interest.
188 replies
Open
flash2015 (460 D (G))
13 Nov 17 UTC
When Is The New Forum Going Live?
I had a quick look at the forum a while ago. It looked good to me. Any idea when it may go live? On a completely unrelated note - any chance we may turn SSL on for the site?
13 replies
Open
steephie22 (182 D (S))
10 Nov 17 UTC
Identification Methods
For a story I'm writing, I need an adult who has lost his memory to not be easily identifiable. How do I make this feasible?
For instance, I expect the Dutch government to have the fingerprints of Dutch citizens. Do legal immigrants or people with a refugee status have their fingerprints taken as well? Would illegal immigrants or tourists from countries that don't take fingerprints make for a solid storyline? Are there other options?
24 replies
Open
damian (675 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
(+10)
Daily Qur'an Thread
In which we discuss passages from the Qur'an each day.
84 replies
Open
mmcconkie (52 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
Known World 901 - Playable?
Sorry if this is a dumb question, but I'm fairly new around here. I'm looking through the variant maps, and I see one that looks like a lot of fun, the Known World 901 map. On the Variants page, it lists it as active, but when I go to create a new game I don't see it as an option to select.
12 replies
Open
brainbomb (345 D)
12 Nov 17 UTC
(+1)
An open discussion about elaborate ways to restore reliability rating
I was thinking how there are members on this site who ruined their Reliability early and can never restore it to the 90th %tile. What if we did a series of experiments on these people. Hook them up to machines. Or perhaps put them in a room full of rats and see if they survive. The goal being we develop a way that someone could go from a 13% RR to a mighty 78%
12 replies
Open
Durga (781 D)
02 Nov 17 UTC
3 more unranked gunboat games
Help me get better at gunboat again
40 replies
Open
Fluminator (511 D)
09 Nov 17 UTC
(+3)
America appreciation thread.
I love the United States. I wish I lived there. Let's talk about how nice of a place it is.
88 replies
Open
Jamiet99uk (75 D)
07 Nov 17 UTC
(+8)
I achieved a thing
I got my final results for my Master's degree that I've been doing part-time for the past two years* today.
39 replies
Open
brainbomb (345 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
Democrats are in deep trouble!
LOL! They keep talking about Russia and indictments and the latest wave of wins in virginia. But what about the civil war? What about Jimmy Carter?
64 replies
Open
Valis2501 (3553 D (G))
09 Nov 17 UTC
SJ Whipping F2F Diplomacy 2018!
It's finally here everyone, the day you've been waiting for! SJ Whipping 2018 is back for another year!
13 replies
Open
Valis2501 (3553 D (G))
09 Nov 17 UTC
(+1)
Cascadia Open F2F Diplomacy 2018!
Vancouver baby!
https://www.meetup.com/Pacific-Northwest-Diplomacy/events/242801707/
https://www.facebook.com/events/887382088062452/
5 replies
Open
Matalienados (102 D)
07 Nov 17 UTC
Español
Hola amigos, podemos formar un grupo con nuestra lengua materna, para competir
23 replies
Open
yavuzovic (247 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
Why did I cut chatting
I was writing post to Daily Qur'an Thread...
Did you remember my thread about mice in the dormitory?
A mouse run to another bed from under my bed.
Shit, I can't sleep more!
8 replies
Open
Ezio (592 D Mod)
11 Nov 17 UTC
spring 1901
Which single move do you think has the most drastic impact on the game in 1901?
35 replies
Open
dargorygel (332 D Mod (G))
10 Nov 17 UTC
(+5)
Big News (for me) on a slow Forum Friday Morning
Friday mornings seem an inactive time on webDiplomacy. So I can announce that my daughter is in labor. Hooray! (which also means I am officially old. Boo!!)
17 replies
Open
Crazy Anglican (292 D)
11 Nov 17 UTC
Happy Armistice Day
Happy Veterans Day in the USA!

99 years ago today this horrific war we like to recreate in bloodless speech ended :-)
5 replies
Open
CommanderByron (564 D Mod (S))
11 Nov 17 UTC
#MeToo
There’s enough vile people on here I think this conversation would be fun to watch.
6 replies
Open
LeonWalras (293 D)
07 Nov 17 UTC
(+5)
We need extensive background checks
before people are allowed to shitpost on the forum.
44 replies
Open
JamesYanik (548 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
Alabama GOP
Please go away.

-Sincerely, Everyone
20 replies
Open
Smokey Gem (210 D)
09 Nov 17 UTC
Is it possible that human kind will ever live in peace. ?
We all want it that incredible vast majority. o why do we do what we do . How can we be so benovolent and violent at thesame time?
CroakandDagger (675 D)
09 Nov 17 UTC
(+1)
The answer is not pleasant, but it explains a lot.

A peaceful society cannot defend itself from a violent society. If one People condones political violence, terrorism and rape of their rivals wives and daughetrs on an industrial scale and another People espouses tolerance, patience and pacifism then one of these Peoples will cease to exist if they share the same space.
Deeply_Dippy (439 D)
09 Nov 17 UTC
(+1)
Is it possible; yes.

Is it probable; no.
ishirkmywork (1321 D)
09 Nov 17 UTC
the choices are peace and cooperation
or
certain extinction due to short sighted competition and tribalism.
these days i'm not too bullish on the first scenario, considering we are going to be extinct in a couple of centuries due to climate change.
TrPrado (362 D Mod)
09 Nov 17 UTC
(+1)
Conveniently I wrote a paper about Woodrow Wilson last night. He had this same vision of a lasting human peace. As it went on, his idea for achieving peace came more and more at the need to get there through war. The idea of peace through war was his justification for the League of Nations. The concept has remained popular yet its remained essentially impossible to separate it from the desire to accumulate land, wealth, and power, as Wilson had envisioned.

I also hate Woodrow Wilson.
ishirkmywork (1321 D)
09 Nov 17 UTC
we are still cleaning up his crap.
Randomizer (90 D)
09 Nov 17 UTC
Once humanity is dead it will be at peace.
StevenC. (1040 D (B))
09 Nov 17 UTC
no
Octavious (1716 D)
09 Nov 17 UTC
Imagine a world so grim and humanity so lifeless there was nothing worth fighting for.
swordsman3003 (9353 D Mod (G))
09 Nov 17 UTC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MF_4EWSuzQY

says it all in less than 30 seconds
ishirkmywork (1321 D)
09 Nov 17 UTC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLCF7vPanrY
Smokey Gem (210 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
Psychologist did a study that most people like to share resourese equally as long as their share is a little bit more.

Why can we see a concept we cannot achieve . Is peace an evolutionary dead end.?

I suppose there is no " peace " in nature at all when you look at it . All organisms compete for resourses that might just be the nature of life .
But we have concsiuos thought as well so the fight is relley between our instinkive selves and our evolutionary programing .

Just go with that Im not debating creationism v evolution.
Smokey Gem (210 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
" Freedom from the Human Condition "

repetative but interisng free book.
President Eden (2427 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
(+1)
I believe that humankind will never live in lasting peace with each other. The competitive pressures of our environment will ensure that any global peace will be temporary at best. We are structurally incapable of empathizing with the entirety of humanity -- there is a cognitive limit on the number of people with whom we can relate on a nonsuperficial level and it is much smaller than "seven billion and rising." The inevitable need to ration limited resources to sustain life, coupled with the enormous gap between the total number of people in the world and the number of people with whom we can relate on a substantial level, creates an unsolvable exclusionary list of priorities for each of the seven billion people on this planet. That scenario makes violence inevitable.

However, there are a couple of fantastic mechanisms we have evolved to utilize, which work both to expand the scope of our empathy and to negotiate with outgroups to reduce violence.

1) In-grouping based on shared culture, religion, and race. These collective identities work to establish common bonds with people outside of your normal cognitive capacities, which expands your in-group to a scale of thousands or millions.
In this respect, I think conventional political academics' discussions of nationalism are grotesquely off-point. They focus on the capacity for one nationality to commit acts of violence against another nationality, but they don't realize that this violence is inevitable. They naively believe that by eliminating national identity, you eliminate the violence committed in its name. The reality is that this violence would simply be committed with a different focus in largely the same quantities and intensities. Nation-states built on a common identity, whether shared culture, race, religion, or even other factors like history (see: the United States), have stronger in-group cohesiveness and form more stable societies.

2) The creation of states for members of an in-group to use to represent themselves in interactions with out-groups. We have seen the ability of a competently-managed state to reduce violence and instability, both within that state's boundaries and in interactions with peoples outside of those boundaries. In the context of having strong nation-states as their charter members, I even think historically-inept organizations like the United Nations have a role to play in this. They just have to give up the hate boner for states with strong national identities and recognize their role as a negotiator between peoples, instead of trying to dissolve the undissolvable divides between people in the naive belief that we are all the same and can all be one people.

It is a shame that so many in Western societies see nation-states as a liability. They are liable to increase violence between different peoples, it's true. But they lead to much more stable societies than the multicultural, multinational states that this decades-long globalization push results in, and with competently-managed international organizations (which didn't exist the last time that the world's most powerful states each had strong and distinct national identities), the ingroup-outgroup violence can be mitigated and managed.

We're never going to eliminate violence on a group scale. As long as there is scarcity, we are inevitably going to have some conflict. But by channeling our historically-best methods for expanding our in-group empathy and creating strong institutions to represent our groups and negotiate disputes between other groups, we can get as close as is realistically possible.
Smokey Gem (210 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
@Pres E.

Would this change do you think if there was an extrenal threat to existance . IE another life form extraterestrial Would our capacity to enlarge our In-Grouping capacity.

And if so is it possible for evolved states / companies to manipulate informaton to make such a senario true in the yes of the masses.
Smokey Gem (210 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
eyes not yes.
KingCyrus (512 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
(+2)
"I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world because they'd never expect it."
CAPT Brad (2582 D (B))
10 Nov 17 UTC
there was Pax Romana, a long period of relative peacefulness and minimal expansion by the Roman military force experienced by the Roman Empire after the end of the Final War of the Roman Republic and before the beginning of the Crisis of the Third Century.
CAPT Brad (2582 D (B))
10 Nov 17 UTC
(+1)
in other words, no. we can't even be civil in the forum and we all share a love for the game of diplomacy. what hope is there for the world that does not understand the game of diplomacy?
President Eden (2427 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
(+1)
For your first question, yes. I think the logic that informs my beliefs implies that if an extraterrestrial, existential, nonhuman threat appeared on Earth, humans would be more likely to band together against that threat rather than attempt to leverage that threat against other humans. I think there'd be a lot of both, and the degree of animosity between different human groups would inform each group's response. For example, I hardly expect that Israelis and Palestinians, or Pakistanis and Indians, would be likely to unite against an alien threat than they would to try to leverage it against each other; but I think the United States and Russia would be more likely to cooperate against the threat if it posed a grave danger to either of them (and certainly the US and China would work together).

As for the second one, I think that's a question of capacity more than functionality. If media companies across the globe were somehow able to coordinate a mass global misinformation campaign to convince the world's human population that an existential alien threat was imminent, then the world's governments might be able to leverage that belief to forge increased cooperation. I am not sure how that would happen, but for sake of thought experiment, if they were capable of doing this, then yes you might see that result.
CAPT Brad (2582 D (B))
10 Nov 17 UTC
eden blowing smoke again ^
Smokey Gem (210 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
amazon is an AI
Bamawhite (601 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
Because global leaders and media lying to 90% of the world population and forcing them to do what the leaders want is okay.....
MajorMitchell (984 D)
10 Nov 17 UTC
Well of course we can have peace, just as soon as the believers unite under one God & exterminate all those wicked unbelievers. Then annihilate different factional groups of heretics within the faith. If course those who show disenchantment, have a tendency to ask too many questions will also have to be ruthlessly culled. It yes, Peace through religious oppression is definitely achievable despite centuries of evidence that indicates otherwise.


23 replies
CommanderByron (564 D Mod (S))
08 Nov 17 UTC
Curiosity: Coloreds
Why are the countries colored differently than the original board? anyone with insight, not complaining just curious.
17 replies
Open
swordsman3003 (9353 D Mod (G))
10 Nov 17 UTC
(+2)
hypothetical changes to classic map
Ideas I have had that I thought might improve balancing. Not saying that I would advocate for all of these; they're just ideas I think about sometimes.
12 replies
Open
damian (675 D)
08 Nov 17 UTC
48 Hour Full Press. GR 250+
Does anyone want to play a game?
39 replies
Open
Page 401 of 412
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top