Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 892 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
Tom Bombadil (4023 D(G))
12 Apr 12 UTC
Because there are those who complain about a lack of Diplomacy Topics
One of the weakest parts of my game is that I don't go to other players with plans, but rather listen to plans, and adapt my strategy. Do you prefer to engage first, or listen to others? And how would you suggest I improve upon actively engaging with other players with ideas rather than waiting for them to come to me?
16 replies
Open
dubmdell (556 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Muting is a curious feature
Apparently, you cannot mute a banned player. I discovered this when I tried muting bullshiot threads to make scouring the forums for an old thread easier. Curious indeed. By one's banning, they become like the mods: immutable.
8 replies
Open
NigeeBaby (100 D(G))
12 Apr 12 UTC
Full Press games......
....... make me paranoid.
5 replies
Open
Lando Calrissian (100 D(S))
12 Apr 12 UTC
variants
Frank mentioned this some time ago, but how interesting do you all think the portage variant would be?
6 replies
Open
Leif_Syverson (271 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Addiction
After nearly 3 months of rigorous discipline in not responding to political bolshoi threads (from both sides) on the forum I've had a relapse.
Help me Randall!!!
http://xkcd.com/597/
http://xkcd.com/386/
2 replies
Open
Diplomat33 (243 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
New Game
Join, and have some low key fun!

http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=85777
1 reply
Open
rokakoma (19138 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Highest rated (by GR) games ever
Who remembers high rated games? Pls feel free to share gameIDs and ratings actual when the game happend.
16 replies
Open
2ndWhiteLine (2736 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
Low Effort Thought Promotes Conservatism
http://psp.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/03/16/0146167212439213.abstract?rss=1
2ndWhiteLine (2736 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
Best part: "In Study 1, alcohol intoxication was measured among bar patrons; as blood alcohol level increased, so did political conservatism (controlling for sex, education, and political identification)."

The more your brain functions are compromised, the more conservative you become. Related question: how many drinks did Jan Brewer's husband need before consummation?
Vaftrudner (2533 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
I would like a similar study checking correlation between pacifism and hashish
orathaic (1009 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
i'm pretty sure we already knew that the conservatives were not thinking... :p
dubmdell (556 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
But now those liberal scientists have proven it!
2ndWhiteLine (2736 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
"But now those liberal scientists have proven it! "

This statement proves their research to be true in so many ways. You never hear about "conservative" scientists, do you?
Well yeah. Conservatism is about conserving an existing order, so in general, scientists (whose very job is to challenge the existing order of understanding of nature) are not going to have a conservative mentality. Add on that in America in particular "conservatism" and "anti-science/anti-intellectualism" tend to go hand-in-hand, and it shouldn't come as a surprise that you don't hear about conservative scientists. They probably by and large don't exist.
2ndWhiteLine (2736 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
Exactly my point. Just based on the study, higher order thinking is not correlated with conservatism. A conservative would be more apt to thinking in monosyllabic words, grunts, whistles, etc.
lol. I'm not sure why I bothered with a serious response, I knew this was at least partially trolling from the beginning
dubmdell (556 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Oh, 2WL, there are conservative scientists, but no body really takes them seriously. They work on things like the global flood five thousand years ago and determining how the speech of the prime mover translated into physical things. They're the cheapest scientists to hire because they require no laboratory to do their work. In fact, the Gideons will just hand you all the resources your conservative-scientist-for-hire needs! For free!
Mafialligator (239 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
This fits in with another study that was brought up on these forums that made a very, very, very similar point, but worded it in a way that was less of a value judgement. It was a neurological study that said something like "conservatives are better at identifying threats and opposition, whereas liberals are better at reconciling conflicting thoughts and points of view." Of course some members of these forums took that study as proof that conservatism was the correct stance, based the assumption that "reconciling conflicting points of view means" that liberalism is inherently hypocritical and contradictory.
greysoni (160 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
I don't know but I think it's possible to straddle the fence...so either get along or I'll bomb you back to the stone age!!!
2ndWhiteLine (2736 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
Uh oh...I feel like this thread will quickly devolve into INTJ personality types. Eden, that's your cue.
greysoni (160 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
hey, speaking for the INFJ's, I object to being left alone in the corner....again. The rarest of the rare, a voice in the wilderness.....I've traded in my wild honey and gnats for frozen pizza, however.
S types tend to be conservative, N types tend to be liberal.
Well, no, that's not entirely true. I should qualify that. STs tend to be conservative. SFs vary; ISFJs and ESFPs probably tend to be conservative, ESFJs and ISFPs could really be anything.

And on the N side, ENFPs and INFJs don't really trend a specific way, either. NTs definitely tend liberal, as do INFPs. ENFJs I don't know well enough to say.

So there's more nuance to it than my previous post. But if you had to make a blanket statement about all Ns or Ss (for whatever odd reason) then you'd want to make that one.
Leif_Syverson (271 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Quite an interesting article there 2WL..

I admit I actually took the time to read the whole thing.

As such, I would like to point out that "compromised brain function" as you put it 2WL, and "not thinking" as orathaic described it, are found nowhere in that article. Nor is the word "prove" or "proof." Instead the authors use "suggest", "claim", and "indicate".

Additionally, the article presents correlations and the researchers' explanations for the correlations (which they admit are not the only explanations). (I'd be very interested to see the actual surveys, and terms presented to the participants, along with the actual scores and raw data).


Most telling, I would like to point out the conclusion of that article:

"Low-effort thinking promotes political conservatism. This
claim provides a counterweight to early psychological perspectives
on political ideology that tended to see conservatism
in somewhat pathological terms (Adorno et al., 1950).
Our findings suggest that conservative ways of thinking are
basic, normal, and perhaps natural. Motivational factors are
crucial determinants of ideology, aiding or correcting initial
responses depending on one’s goals, beliefs, and values. Our
perspective suggests that these initial and uncorrected
responses lean conservative."

Something seems odd there. If conservative ways of thinking are "basic, normal, and perhaps natural", and motivational factors ("bias" anyone?) are used to "aid" or "correct" a natural response based on goals beliefs and values, then it seems logically that "correcting" a response based on a bias or ulterior motive would be unnatural.

Does this article then really indicate that "liberal" thinking is an unnatural artificial construct that takes extra effort to try to logically and consistently hold, because it isn't a basic, natural and normal way of thinking?
Mafialligator (239 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
It might, but that doesn't necessarily mean "incorrect". Personally I think the contrast here is more that conservative thinking means looking out from your own point of view, whereas liberal thinking involves taking alternate and even opposing points of view into consideration, which is obviously more difficult, and comes less naturally to people. However it's still a skill that humans have evolved, and can use. So even if it is more difficult, calling it unnatural is a bit of a stretch.
2ndWhiteLine (2736 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
"Basic, natural, and normal" doesn't necessarily imply correct or even rational. Much like a dog peeing in the house is an uncorrected manner of addressing his natural urge to urinate, instinct isn't always the correct course of action.

The article does bring up this interesting dichotomy, and I'll admit that you bring up a valid point. I think this dovetails nicely with the discussion on human nature yesterday. Depending on what a human's most basic nature entails, a person's instinct may be to look out for only him or herself with little regard to others. Not necessarily a bad thing, by any means. On Maslow's hierarchy of needs, these thoughts and "uncorrected conservative responses" would be at the bottom of the pyramid and relate to simple, physical wants: safety, food, security of resources, etc. I would venture to say that liberal thoughts would derive themselves from the higher order thinking skills required for the top of the hierarchy: morality, lack of prejudice, respect, self-esteem, etc.
Leif_Syverson (271 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
@ Mafia..

While I did post a troll version of this as a new thread just to get the likes of certain other characters on this site spun up, I must say that if I took the political connotation away from this study, that the results make a lot of sense. Conservative thought (in completely non-political terms of preserving status quo, resistance to change, acceptance of the norm) is of sorts, a kind of survival tactic, preserving a comfort level and avoiding risk. Thus it makes sense that such thought would be "lower-level" thought, in the sense that its more related to preserving existence.

However, the implication that (political) liberals use higher level brain function and are thus smarter than (political) conservatives is very much a false conclusion from this article (not to mention needlessly divisive).

Simply because a political position takes more effort to construct and hold doesn't mean it is the better position. Using a scientific study to make that correlation is preposterous.
redhouse1938 (429 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Hi I'm redhouse

Ph.D. student
100% conservative.

My friend Bill O'Reilly wants to know if you can explain that.
2ndWhiteLine (2736 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
Thinking gives you wrinkles.
Invictus (240 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
I've found that you see who a person really is when they're drunk. If you get in fights when you're drunk then you're really a violent person at some inner level and booze exposes it. I'll try to find this wonderful article about drinking alone and "finding your monkey" which talks about how you're only really yourself when sauced. I mean, with every inhibition gone what's left but your core?

Maybe this study just shows that lots of people deep down really are conservatives and liberal opinions are a result of inhibitions imposed by our culture. Or, more likely, this is a silly experiment which just recorded the stupid, ultimately inane things people say when liquored up.
Mafialligator (239 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
"liberal opinions are a result of inhibitions imposed by our culture." - That's certainly not universally true. I'm become even more left wing when I'm drunk.
Also your own inhibitions are lowered when you're drunk, but the idea that all social conditioning disappears is completely false.
Invictus (240 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Then we agree. It's just a silly experiment which really tells us nothing.

I don't know why people assume that every scientific endeavor, even when done completely right, is useful or tells us anything worthwhile. For every ten wonderful academics doing important research to expand human knowledge there must be at least one or two who just keep themselves busy to justify their position before tenure kicks in. I'm inclined to believe that this case is the result of work by the former group.
Mafialligator (239 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
I agree that studies like this are extremely suspect. I'm certainly not drawing any conclusions from it. Also I assume you mean "latter group".
Leif_Syverson (271 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
+1 Invictus

Entertaining none-the-less.
redhouse1938 (429 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
I love the first part of the study

"Our subsection of the population: bar patrons"

Yeah, that's a good random subselection of society.

Keep up the work Einsteins.

All social science is BS
Mafialligator (239 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
@ Leif - "Simply because a political position takes more effort to construct and hold doesn't mean it is the better position. Using a scientific study to make that correlation is preposterous." I didn't say that it did, did I? That certainly wasn't my intention though obviously my own biases may be coming out in my word choice.
Putin33 (111 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
"All social science is BS"

Oh the irony of natural science supremacists making broad brush statements with no evidence while whining about the supposed lack of rigor of sciences which actually involve human beings instead of objects.
Leif_Syverson (271 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
@ Mafia, sorry that wasn't directed at you, and no you did not make that statement or claim.
Leif_Syverson (271 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Are you contending redhouse that masters degrees and Ph.D's in social science don't exist? Only bachelor's degrees?
Putin33 (111 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
That was a kneeslapper Leif.
redhouse1938 (429 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
I know Putin. It was a cheap shot, I apologize.

Actually what I do is a little bit BS too from time to time. Rigorous, sure, but not always very groundbreaking, to say the least.

How's the studying coming along?
Putin33 (111 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Slow. I need data on the banana industry in Somalia.
redhouse1938 (429 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
http://www.banana2008.com/cms/details/acta/879_89.pdf

There ya go
Meher Baba (125 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
I like the idea of low effort thought. That would be the kind that flows naturally as one is in the moment or close to that. You don't have to do the thinking so much as just sit and watch your own thinking. Then something else is putting the effort and I can just sit and enjoy the ride. When a good thought comes along I can keep it and take notes. I like this idea of conservatism. I can conserve the good thoughts. :)
Mafialligator (239 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Well you certainly must be conserving the good thoughts, because you clearly aren't sharing them here.
Mafialligator (239 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Sorry, that was unnecessarily mean.
Mafialligator (239 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
You just set it up so well.
redhouse1938 (429 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
One reason for the outcome of the study could be that Conservatism is not so much a system of thoughts like liberalism or communism, but more of an attitude. I can imagine "attitude" being a human quality that is less sensitive to alcohol than "thinking".


40 replies
Putin33 (111 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
The Irish Property Tax
Anybody involved with the movement against this?

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-04-03/is-irelands-property-tax-revolt-the-end-of-austerity-dont-bet-on-it
0 replies
Open
Yonni (136 D(S))
03 Apr 12 UTC
WebDip Triathlon
OK, I think I'd like to formally invite people to sign up for the WebDip Triathlon.
I'll explain more inside.
58 replies
Open
Andrew Wiggin (157 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
New Game, Battle for Middle Earth lll
Hey guys, looking for more players to join in on a game I just made. 24h turns, 20 D to join!

Thanks!
0 replies
Open
Sandgoose (0 DX)
10 Apr 12 UTC
Your Favorite Afternoon Snack With Sandgoose
Ladies and Gentlemen, tell me...what be your favorite snack? Could be pop-tarts...beans...crispy cream dodo's...ANYTHING! :)

respond within:
25 replies
Open
ODaly (236 D)
10 Apr 12 UTC
Scumbag?
Not looking for recompense or anything, but... (story inside)
54 replies
Open
SpeakerToAliens (147 D(S))
11 Apr 12 UTC
People actually complained about this TV advert made for the British Heart Foundation!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ILxjxfB4zNk

Thoughts?
4 replies
Open
AverageWhiteBoy (314 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Look, idealists and ideologues, I don't hate you guys, but
I'm a nihilist and you're all full of shit. ALL of you.
8 replies
Open
Gobbledydook (1389 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
EOG: Over the Mountain
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=85764
1 reply
Open
dubmdell (556 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Don't blame the free website for Tettleton's Chew
A free website is a website where a party may sign up for completely voluntary and free goods and/or services.
Any posting or trolling in the forums by a 3rd party is not a free website transaction. You muting a Tettleton's Chew after work is a free website transaction.
0 replies
Open
President Eden (2750 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Shock and Awe: Invisible Children spying for Ugandan government
WikiLeaks cable: http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/06/09KAMPALA587.html

Violated their nonprofit status. Oh boy.
1 reply
Open
Leonidas (635 D)
10 Apr 12 UTC
new recruit
Introducing a friend to the game, I have set up a low ( 10 D ) entry game for him to get started in, 19 hrs till it starts, three places to fill, looking for newbie tolerant veterans, who feel like participating in a training exercise, kinda like a dummy hand of cards, except end result sticks...

PM me for password if you're interested
2 replies
Open
NigeeBaby (100 D(G))
10 Apr 12 UTC
Interesting .......???
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17446831
1 reply
Open
yebellz (729 D(G))
09 Apr 12 UTC
Just wondering why
What's the use of arguing about politics on a random internet forum?
93 replies
Open
largeham (149 D)
06 Apr 12 UTC
Look, Americans, I don't hate you guys
I mean, you had the IWW, Emma Goldman and Hemingway. But I'd rather you didn't station Marines in Darwin and UAVs on the Cocos Islands.
114 replies
Open
Draugnar (0 DX)
10 Apr 12 UTC
This came up in tha Admoin Smackdown game.
Important matter that needs the sites input.

See inside.
18 replies
Open
jwalters93 (288 D)
10 Apr 12 UTC
One thing.
If you could pick one thing to be totally amazing at, what would you choose, and why? (Yes, it has to be a real thing.)
25 replies
Open
CrazyCanuck (100 D)
10 Apr 12 UTC
Guinness record for longest convoy?
I'm in a World Diplo game, and we are almost done. A 4 way draw in this very, very long game! I'm wondering if anyone knows the World's Record for longest convoy. We are trying one that will use 25 fleets! If that's the record, please let me know, ASAP, as I can ask us to change it to use 26 fleets.

Thanks!
0 replies
Open
Leonidas (635 D)
07 Apr 12 UTC
Cancer Research Conspiracy
Had a discussion about whether a cure for Cancer is locked away in someone's deep pockets or not.
12 replies
Open
acmac10 (120 D(B))
04 Apr 12 UTC
Need Some Fantasy Baseball Participants
So as you may know, we're doing a fantasy baseball league for WebDip on Yahoo. If you're interested please PM me or krellin. Thanks
22 replies
Open
redhouse1938 (429 D)
08 Apr 12 UTC
EoG : "Skyfall" gameID=77069
Slot reserved! Post your EoGs here everybody!
13 replies
Open
jwalters93 (288 D)
09 Apr 12 UTC
Wow.
I made a game titled 'No Idiots Allowed.'

The game was cancelled because not enogh people joined.
2 replies
Open
YadHoGrojaUL (330 D)
10 Apr 12 UTC
EOG Live Gunboat 190
6 replies
Open
Page 892 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top