5 ms·

Playing by the rules favors those who the rules were set up to benefit. Are you poor, "ugly", unlucky, "stupid", uncoordinated? Cheating is your chance to win

Playing by the rules favors those who the rules were set up to benefit. Are you poor, "ugly", unlucky, "stupid", uncoordinated? Cheating is your chance to win when our "just" society tells you you must lose. The transgression itself feels right and good.

willis936 7y ago
No one forces, or even pressures, anyone to play multiplayer video games.
- furyofantares 7y ago
  Right but if you spend your day resenting the rules you're expected to obey, you might spend your leisure time disobeying rules that have lesser consequences.
- ianleeclark 7y ago
  > No _one_ forces This assumes a subject is required for coercion. It might be that multiplayer games are the only way for someone to escape.
  - willis936 7y ago
    You’ll need to make a hell of an argument to make that sound reasonable.
    - ianleeclark 7y ago
      > You’ll need to make a hell of an argument to make that sound reasonable. I don't think this is really as difficult as you imagine. People in poverty have the decision to work or die. Poverty is a form of objective violence. Therefore, people are coerced by objective violence that doesn't depend on any sort of task master whipping them into action.
      - willis936 7y ago
        It’s the last sentence that is in need of a strong argument. Contemporary society hasn’t morphed in the past 30 years to make the only apparent reasonable escape be multiplayer video games. In fact, there have never been more options than ever for escape. And if they all seem too much and it’s the options that weigh on you, making a habit of going on walks outside has not gone anywhere.
        ianleeclark 7y ago
        > Contemporary society hasn’t morphed in the past 30 years to make the only apparent reasonable escape be multiplayer video games. I don't think that video games need to be the only form of escapism for my argument to hold true. It's a form of escapism that people are taking a part in to avoid the whatever boogeymen exist in the day-to-day. So, while individuals could find themselves in different forms of escapism--drugs, cults, &c.--they may still be finding themselves there after not having been coerced by any other person. I'm responding to specifically you saying "No >one< forces," someone to play video games, but the "video games" isn't the important part. The important part, to me, is you saying that there needs to be some subject coercing another subject. Why is this an important distinction? The same or similar forces are likely causing the individual to cheat, so there has to be some serious consideration into how culpable the cheater actually is.
        willis936 7y ago
        I have no argument with that. My issue is with the justification of cheating in video games because of some thing perceived as owed to some players and not others.
        mnowicki 7y ago
        I don't think he means it's a valid justification, just a rationalization that is sometimes used, whether valid or not
- rectang 7y ago
  The more you say it's wrong, the more right it feels.
  - willis936 7y ago
    It’s petty justification for violation of the golden rule. Nothing deeper.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - jessaustin 7y ago
      The golden rule doesn't apply, because none of the cheaters would complain that there are also other cheaters cheating.
      - willis936 7y ago
        The golden rule always applies. There are not exceptions in criminal law for people who want specific crimes committed against them (ie sexual assault). To further argue the point: if all players were cheating then there would be no competitive advantage to cheating, which eliminates the only reason a subset of players cheat in the first place. Even by skewed standards it violates the golden rule.
        saagarjha 7y ago
        > There are not exceptions in criminal law for people who want specific crimes committed against them (ie sexual assault). Uh, what?
        jessaustin 7y ago
        Do you know what "the golden rule" says? Literally, "as you would have them do". The cheaters really don't care that other people also cheat. That is, they cheat and they would have others cheat too. That is a totally logical position. You'll need to expectorate some other hoary old maxim to support your cantankerous old argument.

willis936 7y ago

No one forces, or even pressures, anyone to play multiplayer video games.

furyofantares 7y ago
Right but if you spend your day resenting the rules you're expected to obey, you might spend your leisure time disobeying rules that have lesser consequences.
ianleeclark 7y ago
> No _one_ forces This assumes a subject is required for coercion. It might be that multiplayer games are the only way for someone to escape.
- willis936 7y ago
  You’ll need to make a hell of an argument to make that sound reasonable.
  - ianleeclark 7y ago
    > You’ll need to make a hell of an argument to make that sound reasonable. I don't think this is really as difficult as you imagine. People in poverty have the decision to work or die. Poverty is a form of objective violence. Therefore, people are coerced by objective violence that doesn't depend on any sort of task master whipping them into action.
    - willis936 7y ago
      It’s the last sentence that is in need of a strong argument. Contemporary society hasn’t morphed in the past 30 years to make the only apparent reasonable escape be multiplayer video games. In fact, there have never been more options than ever for escape. And if they all seem too much and it’s the options that weigh on you, making a habit of going on walks outside has not gone anywhere.
      - ianleeclark 7y ago
        > Contemporary society hasn’t morphed in the past 30 years to make the only apparent reasonable escape be multiplayer video games. I don't think that video games need to be the only form of escapism for my argument to hold true. It's a form of escapism that people are taking a part in to avoid the whatever boogeymen exist in the day-to-day. So, while individuals could find themselves in different forms of escapism--drugs, cults, &c.--they may still be finding themselves there after not having been coerced by any other person. I'm responding to specifically you saying "No >one< forces," someone to play video games, but the "video games" isn't the important part. The important part, to me, is you saying that there needs to be some subject coercing another subject. Why is this an important distinction? The same or similar forces are likely causing the individual to cheat, so there has to be some serious consideration into how culpable the cheater actually is.
        willis936 7y ago
        I have no argument with that. My issue is with the justification of cheating in video games because of some thing perceived as owed to some players and not others.
        mnowicki 7y ago
        I don't think he means it's a valid justification, just a rationalization that is sometimes used, whether valid or not
rectang 7y ago
The more you say it's wrong, the more right it feels.
- willis936 7y ago
  It’s petty justification for violation of the golden rule. Nothing deeper.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - jessaustin 7y ago
    The golden rule doesn't apply, because none of the cheaters would complain that there are also other cheaters cheating.
    - willis936 7y ago
      The golden rule always applies. There are not exceptions in criminal law for people who want specific crimes committed against them (ie sexual assault). To further argue the point: if all players were cheating then there would be no competitive advantage to cheating, which eliminates the only reason a subset of players cheat in the first place. Even by skewed standards it violates the golden rule.
      - saagarjha 7y ago
        > There are not exceptions in criminal law for people who want specific crimes committed against them (ie sexual assault). Uh, what?
      - jessaustin 7y ago
        Do you know what "the golden rule" says? Literally, "as you would have them do". The cheaters really don't care that other people also cheat. That is, they cheat and they would have others cheat too. That is a totally logical position. You'll need to expectorate some other hoary old maxim to support your cantankerous old argument.