@ Pantalone: "When this Game was created, it was meant to resemble the "real world" as much as possible, specifically of course the way warfare happened in the real world."

Not really. The game is quite abstract. It is not intended to be an accurate simulation of real-life warfare.

In a real war, it would not take you a whole year to move an army from Marseilles to Tuscany.

I'm with Spyman on the Groupthink thing - it seems to me that Pantalone has got hold of the wrong end of the stick. The critical papers seem to be
Janis, Irving L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink. New York: Houghton Mifflin and
Janis, Irving L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Second Edition. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
In the former, Janis defines groupthink as the psychological drive for consensus at any cost that suppresses disagreement and prevents the appraisal of alternatives in cohesive decision-making groups. In the latter he applies this to the watergate scandal. What Pantalone seems to be claiming is that some kind of mob-mentality has been generated over this affair and that he is a victim of an unreasonable majority. This is clearly not the same situation as was considered by Janis and therefore it's not groupthink as the term is widely used.

@JECE - yes I meant unpause and not unban

Yeah, I fail to see much realism in this game!

Maniac: Yes and maybe, then :-)

Right, so are we to conclude here that group think is the cause of all agreement, and it couldn't possibly be the case that people actually reached the same conclusion independently?

@TGM

I'd agree with you, but I don't want to be guilt of Group Think.

abgemacht +1

I retract my previous statement so that abgemacht has a chance to agree with it.

I would like the make the following unique, and heretofore never-before uttered statement: group think is the cause of all agreement, and it couldn't possibly be the case that people actually reached the same conclusion independently.

May I request that abgemacht retract his statement so that I can come up with it too?

I'm sorry, rlumley, but TGM has already retracted his statement. If I were to retract it also, I could be guilty of GT.

As if my name weren't damning enough...

I am also happy to disagree with you on all points :)

we're all zombies it seems...

Aww damn. You're right abgemacht. I didn't think about that. What if, instead of retracting it, you amended it to say something different? That would then be a different action than TGM's retraction, and you wouldn't be guilty of group think...

Although I will not acknowledge your point, rlumley, i would like to amend my previous statement to the following: I am a Jelly Donut.

I would like to make a point that I really think has gone unnoticed here: Pantalone, are we to conclude here that group think is the cause of all agreement, and it couldn't possibly be the case that people actually reached the same conclusion independently?

I would like to now annul my previous statement so that it has no meaning.

Can I suggest that it's not the agreement that should be avoided but that in a decision making body (like wot we are not) the tendency to avoid conflict in order to build concensus can lead to poorly considered decisions and the failure to take account of all options. (I concede that this is not an original point but put it to you that this is not on account of group think but is instead due to the Harvard referencing system which led, amongst other things, to the Holocaust and the Rwandan genocide)

Things have toned down a bit with the absence of OPPOSITION.

No they haven't. I can't believe that you would suggest such a thing. You're a dormouse, you live in a sea-slug's shell and your mother may or may not have smelt of elderberries. You and all your sort should be taken out and made to eat icecream with chopsticks. It's the only thing your kind understand.

Thank you Parallelopiped for explaining what groupthink actually is. It is not just mob mentality either (although an extreme example could perhaps manifest itself this way). It is a type of cognitive error than is experienced by groups. In a sense it is analogous to cognitive errors that are experience on an individual level, such as confirmation bias. When making decisions it is helpful for groups to take this effect into consideration and actively counteract it.
Imagine your working on an important team project, and the schedule is tight. You need to consider the options, make a decision and implement a plan as soon as possible. Not everyone in the group has equal status, there might be a leader (who is respected and has considerable authority). Members of the group might come from different fields too - some might have a financial background, others marketing, while a couple are engineers (or some other technical field). In this situation the finance people might out number the others,or have a higher status and thus have more clout. Perhaps the marketing people agree with the finance people. In this situation the engineers are more likely to agree with the group in the interests of unanimity than they would if they occupied a higher status. An individual or two might have their doubts about the direction the team is taking, and they might even put the points forward, but they will be less likely to really push for it, if they think the other members will not buy into their idea. Alternatively they might even keep their mouths shut. Sometimes as the bearer of unique information bears a social cost: "Why put the idea forward. No-one going to agree with me? Their just going to think I am a dick. Or at best I will just slow the group down from making the decision the group is going to make anyway". Groupthink.

you guys rock... i laughed myself silly reading the last 20 or so messages...

man I hate the fact that I had been away from the forum for three whole weeks. and it certainly counteracts Panatlone's conclusion that we as a 'group' lack the intellect that his idealized notions envisioned.

and texas... YOU put him up to that fleet??? why you little...

Hehehehe... sorry about that Babak ;)

This thread is a great read by the way. Almost makes up for the trashed game.

Very civilized, as well. :-)