a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
MultiLife wrote:Feminist=/=feminazi. Feminazi is a term used for people who are in the extreme side of the spectrum.
Feminazi is a term specifically used to silence and attack women's rights advocates, and those who support women or what is feminine. The goal is to delegitimize and demonize those who endeavour to achieve equality/equity for men and women by making the very idea of parity seem like it's extreme, irrational, crazy, or anything else akin to nazism (which I think most rational people would agree is the prime example of horrible human behaviour).
It's an absolute farce to say that the term is actually used to identify people on the extreme side, because it's not. This thread is a perfect example of that. Pein used it in this thread, which was innocently about a roleplay about amazons. There's absolutely nothing extreme or misandrist about that. And yet, he felt the need to refer to the OP as a 'feminazi', not because they were extreme, but because they dared to find value in a female society (in a damn game).
It is entirely common for people to attack a group they don't like by likening the entirety of that group to the extremists.
This means that those who have a problem with the feminist groups will openly try to liken them to the few misandrists within the group. This leads to them calling all feminists "Feminazis". Most people are able to tell the difference between the extremists and the well-intentioned though. This is shown by how both I and MultiLife recognized this term as describing the extremists, rather than the entire movement.
That being said, it was odd word-choice on pein's part. I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt since, if I recall, English isn't his first language. It is likely a person will learn the term "Feminazi" long before they learn the term misandrist and may not fully understand the meaning of either.
all rightbut my idea of a volcano is a huge mountain spewing lava my idea of a magma pool is a small area in a desert that has lava like a pond fulled with lava take the duck pond it is about that small i am making it as i am typing
Sounds cool!
And sorry about the miscommunication. I grew up next to a volcano, so I know quite a bit about them. I guess I forgot it wasn't common knowledge. My bad.
Magma pools are volcanoes as far as I know. Not all volcanoes are vastly different from surrounding landscapes.
Obsidian would be cool!
Would that mean that there are volcanoes as well?
Spawned in a Tarr town today. Had massive green biomes to both the east and west, and someone had gone through and selectively cut down every maple, must have taken several axes. Spawned there again a few hours later, town was doing just fine.
One of the towns I was in today had a similar problem. There was a very large green biome North of the city. Every single maple was cut with the exception of a few of the northernmost (griefer probably died before he could finish). Ironically, the town's biggest problem was the lack of easy water rather than the lack of maples.
Booklat1 wrote:I like how pein gets shit for caling people feminazies in game when that has actually being a strategy. It's not even like he is saying this about real life women, like wtf trick is it really him being toxic?
Is comparing people who advocate for equality to nazis and nazism toxic?
I may be wrong, but I thought that term was used when people display misandrist characteristics. They do not advocate for equality. Rather the opposite really. They are the extremists of the feminist group. I myself don't really like the term as it really has nothing to do with any kind of Nazi group. Misandry is misandry, and should be called as such in my opinion.
That being said, I think it is kind of silly to apply either of these terms to this situation. That is unless they were actively speaking out against men as a whole, rather than simply aming for a only-girl community (which game mechanics fully allow). These are very serious accusations. You shouldn't be surprised when using them lightly causes offence.
(Reading it again, the actions of Shelly were extremely suspect. Rape is never a joking matter)
helloworld wrote:Let me give u example of my perspective, please share ur example after so i can understand fully what ur trying to say.
Today for dinner you have three choice. You can eat mexican, asian, or European cuisine.
You want to eat asian cuisine, and u dont like the way mexican and european cuisine taste.But there is a rule, you cant choose the cuisine, instead ur randomly assign one. However you can press a button to get randomly assign a new cuisine.
Do you eat food you dont like, or do you press the button to till you get the food you want to eat.
P.s. on a side note there is no cool down or limit on how many baby a girl can have. ( or not that i know of) so if someone suicide as baby. It doesnt really change anything, because that person wouldve never existed to begin with.
P.s.s. Im only against ur idea of adding penalty to suiciding as a baby. If you think of a solution that doesnt punish ppl like me for just trying to play my game. Then more power to u and jason. Peace
To carry your analogy:
I prefer asian food. You prefer mexican food.
I get mexican food, suicide. Mexican restaurant goes out of business.
You get asian food, suicide. Asian restaurant goes out of business.
Only European food for everyone now.
This is why I personally don't like that babies can suicide without consequence.
This issue isn't as simple as you wanting a different play-style. By choosing this, you are denying a group of others the opportunity to enjoy the game themselves. This means that you are putting your interests above those of the group. I am sorry to say, but that is the definition of selfishness.
Now, if there are a lot of girls around, then sure, go ahead and suicide. There aren't many consequences to that. But if a place is in a desperate need for females, then by choosing to suicide as a girl, you are denying many others in that camp the opportunity you want for yourself: enjoyment in their one hour of play.
Now, putting my personal opinions on baby suicide aside:
This is why I believe Jason will have to choose a route in the future, if he hasn't already (valuing personal play more, or community oriented play more). Simply put, the player base is currently too divided in this regard. This is bound to cause contention and lessen the enjoyment for all. By choosing one he will temporarily loose some players, but they will be replaced by more of those who prefer the selected path. In the long run, this will create a stronger, larger, and more loyal following for the game. As it is, I am a little unsure what this game is trying to be.
i seen older sister having babies and i didnt any, or at least not until 34ish
This has happened to me at times as well. There was one time when other girls in the family were having tons of babies (at least 4 or 5 each) but I had none my whole life. Is this just bad luck or is there something that causes this?
You know, ultimately, whether or not baby suicide should be tolerated depends on Jason's vision for the game.
The main difference between the two views are whether the person values personal play and enjoyment over the community aspect, or vice versa. By taking one side, you will inevitably jeopardize the other at times.
As the game moves forward and becomes more advanced, one view will have to take precedence over the other. Jason has the ultimate say in which that would be.
I'm mixed with twins/triplet/quadruplets
In theory, a good set will be able to help the community immensely. I always raise them unless they give me reason not to. I just keep an eye on them after, to watch for griefing.
Like others mentioned, the problem I have is that I don't think I have ever had a group of twins+ live to adulthood. One always inevitably dies and then the rest suicide. It happened when we had a pair of twin last girls once. It can be really annoying.
It does make you question putting the effort into raising them in the first place. Especially because they cost so much time and resources to raise. I have had triplets/quadruplets born out of camp before. I usually try so hard to get them home alive and I somehow manage. And then one dies in camp and they all suicide. I mean, what was the point? I will try regardless, but still.
It would be nice if you could name your baby while pregnant too. That way, if the baby runs once born, you could curse him/her.
You would need a way to identify the number of babies though. Maybe different belly sizes?
Just a friendly reminder to make sure no one is around to steal your pack when you put it down.
I really like the idea of pregnancy!
There could be a problem with using it to track suicides though. Would the game be able to tell the difference between someone who quits and someone who looses connection? I would hate to be punished because my connection is iffy.
The only problem I see with tracking baby-suiciders, is that it wouldn't stop people from suiciding once they grow. So then you would have mothers who spend time and resources to raise a baby who just suicides the second they grow into a child.
Come to think of it, is it possible to track the movement of mothers and babies? You could track the common behavior of baby suiciders (such as moving far away from mother, while mother moves closer to baby, before baby death) and record the information. If someone shows this behavior often enough, you could then enact the penalty.
Suicide need to have a penalty (like making the next lives for one hour more harder) because suicide can ruin a village. I've see starting village where 4 or 5 baby go directly to suicide.
But it's hard to see the difference between a suicide and a natural death (Starvation, Killed by an animal, dead when trying to follow mum, ....).
It's not so much hard, as it is impossible.
If you are going to go this route, rather than a penalty system for suiciding, it would be a lot more feasible to have a reward system for living to an older age. Problem with this is that people would then prefer cities over early camps or eve runs and suicide until they get a suitable life. Maybe the reward could chain throughout lives, getting better with each late death in a row. This would make greifing even worse though.
I noticed that there weren't many people around today, at least in the lives I played. I saw 2 towns die out. There just weren't enough babies.
There was a tri-city I played in quite often. While there were always people there, there weren't nearly as many as you would expect from such a large place. No more than about 5-10 at a time. I've seen eve camps with more people. I thought that city was done for as well, but saw a newborn suicide-run past me seconds before I died of old age, so there was a girl somewhere. She was probably the only one though. I hope the line continued.
Such a system is already implemented in small communities (such as OHOL, small villages/towns, work-places, etc) by default. How? Everybody knows everybody. Everybody is already aware of everybody else's contribution (or lack thereof). Of course, everybody will judge differently and with the exception of work places they probably won't be recorded, but the concept is essentially the same.
There are pros and cons to such a system. I'm unsure how it would work in such a large scale and to such an extent, and therefore don't really feel comfortable giving my opinion in that regard. It does sound rather Big-Brother-ish though, which is scary.
As for griefer's rights, the real issue is that this game isn't moderated (I personally don't have a problem with this). That leaves it up to the community to take care of problems such as this. As far as I know, PvP was implemented as a tool to combat griefers. There are many, many ways to grief, and we needed a way to take them out of the community before further harm could be done.
Wow, have you actually had a problem with this in the past?
It seems like an odd thing to do: falsely name-dropping in an anonymous game. In other words, there is no reason to do this as a player's actions have no way to be tied to said player unless they mention who they are. The only reason I can think of is to spite/annoy you.
Too bad. Its definitely not a nice thing to do. It says a lot about those who choose to do this.
smithing can be time sensitive
So, when I was learning to Smith I asked if I could watch the smith do her job (I didn't want to get in the way). I stood as far to the side as I could while still keeping the Smith in view. After I thought I understood well enough, I thanked the smith and then went to practice in the tutorial a few times. When learning how to do something that is time sensitive, this can be the best course of action.
I remember once when I got lucky and found a perfect spot for an eve camp. It had the potential to become a big and thriving city. It had a nice dessert, more ponds than I knew what to do with (Enough that there was a never-ending supply of eggs), and grasslands with all the straight shafts you could ever need. It had Iron on the other side of the dessert. Rabbits were close too. It was better than any location I had seen before, settled or no.
I tried really hard to make this camp a place people would want to stay in. I got an axe, shovel and hoe, planted a farm, and basically did everything I learned a good eve should do.
But none of my girls stayed. I was so heartbroken.
I only suicide if I am a girl born to a traveling eve with another little baby girl in her arms, but even the I usually leave the decision up to my mom.
Now, I'm not trying to disprove you or anything, I am aware that this negativity towards new players is very common.
But I just want to add something.I joined back in April and maybe I just got lucky but I don't remember experiencing any negativity at all.
Perhaps players were just more patient back then when there wasn't a big influx of new players, but think it can have had something to do with the way I tried to learn the game.
I see a lot of new players just jump into the game and try to do everything they see others do, without asking anyone else.
Instead, I made sure to have the wiki up to check how to do things and, most importantly, I asked people "Ok, what do you want me to do?", "How do I do that?" etc. and I started out with the simple things like farming and then when I felt confident in that I started to learn the more complicated things.And I feel like people don't look up anything about the game before they start playing like the wiki and stuff so they have no idea what they're doing. So I think it's also the new players' responsibility to be "good" new players and *listen* to the experienced players, I don't want to have to teach someone who doesn't listen to me and tries to do everything themselves.
Now having said that, this post did inspire me to start helping new players more, maybe I'll start a school next time I play.
You do have a point.
Although, I did research the game quite a bit before I started getting into things. I only did things I knew how to do, and when I wanted to learn something new, I asked someone how. I always asked for a job, but was rarely given one.
I was very eager to listen but people at the time assumed I didn't want to. One of the problems is that people sometimes gave me conflicting info. One person would tell me to do one thing, and then I would get yelled at by another player for doing said thing. Then I would just get really confused and ask him to explain. Then they would get upset that I didn't just listen. So I would, then first person would come back upset, asking why I wasn't doing things the other way. So confusing... Again, there were a lot of new players and it was hard to know who I should listen to. I did learn in time though.
There was also a lot of in-game ettiquite I didn't find online. I had to learn those the hard way.
You are correct in that the experience of me and those others who started at this time seems to be uncommon for most. Like I said, I hadn't seen that degree of negativity since I joined. Patience with new players was just unusually thin. It could also be that those who were really stressed were just a lot more vocal. I'm not sure how many of this group of new players kept with the game. I only did at the time because I wanted my money's worth. I really do enjoy the game now though. I'm glad I stuck with it!
I posted my original post because at the time I wrote it, I noticed people were starting to get really frustrated with new players and their patience was ebbing. I wanted to avoid the possibility of others having a similar experience. People seem to be doing better now though!
And I'm glad you decided to try a school! I've been wondering if someone would start one as more and more players joined. Have fun! I'm sure those you teach will be really appreciative!
tr
Overall the toughest things are:
....
- explaining more abstract things like how only lambs should be fed and how farms shouldn't be expanded and how space should be left in farms etc., and overall just stuff that is good in moderation but bad when excessive.
These more abstract things and tricks I have learnt from videos.Yesterday there was an old man tending berries but he was just expanding the huge field, probably had for years, and I was preteen aged and couldn't explain the problem of the expanding to him very well due to the text limitation. After he was gone and I was older the city fell to famine as the soil had gone to the berry expansion so there wasn't soil left to fertilize the existing bushes. It's these kinds of lessons that are hard to explain when they seem good but bring trouble in the long run.
I agree, "abstract" things are a little harder. Rather than having a very simple single line of consequences like the carrot problem I gave an example of, the consequences of these abstract lessons are a little more complex, often branching into what could be considered a 'tree', meaning they have multiple consequences that need to be taken into consideration.
One thing that could be done is to choose the line of consequences most relevant to the current situation. Like with the berry problem you gave, you could say:
" Too many berries means no berries"
He will most likely express confusion at this to which you will reply:
"Too many berries means less soil,
Less soil means less berries or carrots
Less berries or carrots means less compost
Less compost means even less soil
Even less soil means no berries or carrots
No berries or carrots means no compost
No compost means no food
No food means mass starvation
Balance is important"
The problem is these end up being a little more wordy, making it difficult with chat restrictions, as you said, especially if you are young. It also makes it a little harder to remember. If anyone can think of a better way to explain that, please let me know.
If you are really short on time, you could just mention that first line. It shows that it isn't really helpful to make gigantic berry farms. It may make him curious enough to look into it himself too. It seems like an oxymoron, which while difficult to understand, actually makes it much easier to remember. (It has some repetition as well). Although, it could prove to be so unbelievable that he may just choose to ignore you. Maybe you could use both that first line and the last. It may prove more effective. It is always risky to take shortcuts though.
As for the sheep/lamb problem, maybe try:
"Both sheep and lambs make wool.
Only lambs make dung
Dung needed for compost
Compost needed for soil
Soil needed for food
Food for lamb means food for you"
Again, that last line will prove very easy to remember because of the repetition.
It makes me wonder if we should just make a bunch on 'lullabies' we sing to babies about common mistakes made by new members. If we can get a lot of people to use the same ones, the repetition will make it much easier for them to remember. They may even become ingrained in the OHOL culture. Maybe mothers, wet nurses, and elders could pass them on? It would be a big undertaking though...
Oh Id love an eskimo culture in the artic.
Thats all I had to say.
It could probably be done if we had caribou and ice fishing. Maybe ice we could build with or melt for water as well. We would also need some Arctic plants. The caribou dung could be used as fuel to start small fire. It sound like fun!
Okay, so there are a lot of lovely people teaching others on the forums. You all are awesome, but I do believe this could be done more effectively at times. So I am going to try to give you some teaching tips. I'm only doing this because a lot of the information you all give is really useful and I genuinely want what you guys are saying to have the best chance of getting through to people.
As a little background info, I work with a lot with children, and believe me, there is a whole lot of teaching involved with that. I'm not perfect but there are a couple things I've learned from experience that I think could be useful to keep in mind:
First: People don't learn if they become defensive. It only makes them stubborn and less willing to learn, even if they know you are right. It is human nature.
Anything that can be seen as a personal offence will make someone defensive (eg. Anything negative directed at said person). Some people may also become defensive if another person says something that can be seen as a personal offence directed at someone other than themselves.
Anything that seems all-inclusive will tend to make people defensive too (eg. "everyone/everyone-in-said-group does this negative thing"). I know that this might sound odd, but even if literally everyone does indeed do said thing, it is best to say something like "some people" instead.
Nothing that makes a person defensive helps said person retain the information someone is trying to teach. In fact, it has this funny way of doing the exact opposite.
Two: People have a harder time retaining information under stress. Anything that adds to a person's stress level will make their learning experience less effective. This includes things like becoming defensive, being pressed for time, being spoken negatively to, etc.
This is actually one of the reasons it is so hard to learn in this game. People tend to feel rushed because their life is so short. That is why I agree with what Tea mentioned earlier about letting new players take their time learning. This is also one of the reasons why it is so important to talk kindly to people you are teaching.
Many of the smartest, most well behaved children I have come across have been those with parents who know how to teach patiently, calmly, and kindly. It may seem counterintuitive to some, but it truly proves to be the fastest and most effective teaching method - for any age
Three: Repetition can be an excellent teaching tool, especially in the absence of non-verbal communication or visual references. Say you are trying to teach someone in-game why they shouldn't eat all the carrots. You could say:
"No carrots means no compost
No compost means no soil
No soil means no food
No food means mass starvation"
This is a very simple, concise way to explain the consequences of their actions that's fits well in the in-game chat. (Skipping the first part of all but the first sentence, starting with "means", would work too, if you are young and can't say much.) The repitition of words and phrases make it very easy to remember. This is why Dr. Suess's "Green Eggs and Ham" is one of his most popular books. It's the repitition. It makes it easy for kids to understand and remember, therefore making it an excellent tool in helping kids learn to read.
As a warning: Using repitition in excess with adults could sound patronizing as it is often seen as a teaching tool for children. So use with caution outside of the game. Inside the game, it is a very fast and effect way to teach if you are short on time.
Four: Many, many people learn visually or kinetically. Simply explaining isn't enough for people who don't learn well by reading. This includes reading on the forums. So show them by having them watch you and/or by doing it themselves. Let's say you are trying to teach someone in-game why they shouldn't feed other people:
Have them eat a berry. Then tell them to eat a different food, like a pie. (Berry in bowl might cause confusion) Tell them to look at bottom left of screen. They should see a +1 by their food bar. Tell them that is yum bonus. You get it when you eat a chain of different foods. They ate a Berry and Pie. The higher the chain, the less you need to eat. Now have them eat Berry again. They broke the food chain. Now the bonus is gone. Feeding others can take away their bonus, which isn't nice.
This not only tells them, but shows them why they shouldn't feed people, making it more effective.
Five: People tend to learn to exhibit the same behavior they are treated to. This is why physical punishment isn't anywhere near as useful as people would like to think. It seems like the faster method, but it tends to cause more trouble than it solves, and should be saved for extreme circumstances if used at all. A child who was often dealt physical punishment is more likely to become aggressive themselves. (Not to mention the phycological issues that go along with it... Please be nice to kids)
How does that translate to the game? Killing a new person who makes a mistake makes them more likely to become an actual griefer. There have probably been a few griefers who were born this way. In fact, killing at all for any reason makes others more likely to do it themselves. This is actually the greatest griefer recruitment tool. Do you want to prevent murder? Try to avoid killing anyone yourself. Again, this may sound counterintuitive to some, but please only kill if absolutely necessary (say, if someone else is already on a murder spree then you can kill him/her). Also, killing people causes them stress. See #2
Likewise, treating people well makes them more likely to treat you and others well in return.
I know these aren't perfect, but hopefully this helps. Feel free to adapt them how you wish. I can guarantee that people will be more open and receptive to your teaching if you follow some of these. Happy teaching everyone!