Changing the avatar assignment to a planet

It is still the last thing players need to be concerned with tbh..
If I am spending money on something, I'm allowed to be concerned about where the money goes.

If you donate money to charity, don't you want the money you donate to actually go towards the cause or into the CEO pockets?

For example "In 2022, the nonprofit organization in the U.S. with the highest paid CEO was Sentara Health, with an estimated salary of 33.22 million U.S. dollars. "

That is a non profit I would NOT donate to.

I can see both sides of it, and I'm not dismissing either side as both sides have a good reason.

But to say
And stop saying anyone is saying otherwise,
Is just false. There are people who absolutely Still support Ark and Rocktropia even while those planets don't support them. That NOTHING can sway their opinion no matter how horrible those planets are run.

Same can be said about peoples feelings towards certain CMs as well.

Either way is okay. People can support whatever planet they would like to for whatever reason. I just personally feel like we should be able to do the opposite as well.
 
In this case, because it's not your contract. You have no legal involvement in it. This is biz owner vs franchise owner, and you/me are simply a customer.
That's such a horrible example. Have you never talked about sports with someone? Cooking with someone?

You never said "Damn Messi makes fucking 80 million a year, let's talk about that contract compared to another players?"

That's like the people who say that if you aren't a professional chef, then you can't talk about cooking.

It's just kind of silly. Asking questions is literally how people learn.

Should I not learn about economics of a company because I don't have a stake in the company? What if that's the deciding factor for if I DO want to own a stake in a company.

For example becoming a Planet Partner.

Wouldn't I want to see the contracts of Previous PP and how they worked, how much they made, etc. to determine if this is something I am monetarily interested in?

Let's take it a step smaller in Entropia.

If I am contemplating buying a loot 2.0 weapon, don't you think I would want to see peoples tt returns, mu received etc with a weapon before purchasing said weapon?

I know I do.
 
If I am spending money on something, I'm allowed to be concerned about where the money goes.
Sweet! I'm 100% sure some of the money I've put into this game has gone into your pocket, so I insist on having a say in what foods you eat.

Come to think of it, I don't like where you live either and want to have a conversation about it. :devilish:
 
That's such a horrible example. Have you never talked about sports with someone? Cooking with someone?
I may discuss what I like or don't like about someone's play or whatever, but I don't go sticking my nose into their finances when I'm not involved. That's between them, not me.

Sure, it's nice to know details, but not ok to say "hey, I insist on being a part of the renegotiations for this thing I have no legal connection to".
 
Ark and Rocktropia even while those planets don't support them.
This is your opinion and I disagree with it. So do others. I do know Ark is active and tries to do stuff. It's just that it's stuff you don't like. They get increased or reduced activities depending how they perform, that should be enough... that equals with planets that are actively trying to supoprt get rewarded the most. The OP suggest in the lines of "if planet doesn't do what ever the fuck we want we will kill it".
 
Sweet! I'm 100% sure some of the money I've put into this game has gone into your pocket, so I insist on having a say in what foods you eat.

Come to think of it, I don't like where you live either and want to have a conversation about it. :devilish:
Absolutely, let's have a conversation about it. Is it the amount of times I eat? Is it specifically what I eat? I am VERY concerned about your feelings of this situation. Just as if a restaurant has a Survey Feedback, they are asking for their customers opinions.
 
"hey, I insist on being a part of the renegotiations for this thing I have no legal connection to".
I'm not sure where that was said. Please tell me where I said that.
This is your opinion and I disagree with it.
And that's perfectly okay. That's why we're having a conversation :)
The OP suggest in the lines of "if planet doesn't do what ever the fuck we want we will kill it".
Like I said, if it wasn't specifically OP who made this suggestion and worded it in not a completely mental way. This is a legitimate conversation.

But I do believe you and John have no clue how quotations work. As neither of those statements were said.

I've ONLY given my opinion and that is all.
It's just that it's stuff you don't like
No it was things I'd very much enjoy if it was done in not the dumbest way possible. The ideas and the concepts are great! Execution, not so much.

Which would be okay if they live and learn, but they just don't learn.

All that to say if that I've quite enjoyed reading other peoples perspectives on this hypothetical question. It helped part of my work day go by quicker.
 
I am VERY concerned about your feelings of this situation.
:LOL: Thanks for being a good sport about this.

This thread just pushed one of my buttons. Just because we spend money with a business, that doesn't give us the ability to dictate how that business is run or how they spend the money. Just like I really don't have any authority over your spending just because I bought something from you. And I really honestly dislike attempts to do this.

Sure businesses/people/entities can negotiate how certain funds are spent ahead of time before the money is transferred, and if that's what they want to do, then that's between the contract signers, not us observers. But people don't get to spend money then try to dictate things after the fact.
 
I think this whole conversation showed that not everything is so black and white and we can have a conversation about this without most of us having their feelings hurt.

Twas a fun time. I’m going to take my company mandated nap now 😍
 
No it's not. And you (we) don't have any saying in it except pressing "I decline" or "I accept". Playing the game is a privilege and no one owes you(us) shit. Understand that and your life will be much better, you will be free to create something sustainable for yourself rather than chase how your pec is split and who you support the most.


I hope you're not expecting any pension from the taxes you pay here :D
You don't seem to understand the different forms of governance.
 
Think of it this way what you are suggesting is effectively punishing a PP. Even if that is not your intention that's exactly what it will amount to. Say something like what you suggest is implemented then some players may and will make use of that for various different reasons and as a consequence some PP may gain new income and some PP may loose their income. The PP that loose income may already be fairly bad off which may be the reason for no new development and then they will be hit with...

Indeed that can be some kind of kick for some PP to rething what they are doing,
but also look at what push can be for PP that work hard, put own cash to keep it and grow,
its form of reward for hard work.

Look lets take +/-1200$ deposit that You will just simply burn. MA will take 600$, and next half can be given to Planet You got go with.
Instead MA will take also 600$, but Planet that you live and feel good there will have 300$, and 300$ goes to someone You simply dont want to give that cash.
For MA only fear can be Calypso born avatars that will change to PP as currently they got 75%, PP got 25%.

I aslo dont care about frebies or perks etc. I care that at least Devs or CMs get a reward in the form of recognition for hard work.
And who knows? maybe they will thanks to it quit side jobs, etc. and could focus more, hire new employees, etc.
Thats healthy. Saying no I should not care about them and pay to someone I dont want is is wrong.

And point that was missed by lot of you. POPULATION number unlocks more posibilites for PP.
That means more homes, more shops, adding new maps, locations, quests, items etc.
Why I cant care about having bigger Planet to play and dont care about Planet that dont interest me?

Thats why I think It should be possible, to make it healthy, after year from creation, ast that is good time to explore all Planets,
see how events look, how devs and staff act toward customer, in what direction lore is going. Just to know life of Planet.
Born in one country dont means You need to die there.
Plus adding some cost for transfer would also be fair as only real dedicated players would do this.
I would also then block posibility of change for some period lets say now 4 years.

That all will in fact put Devs on next dimension of reward for good made job.
P.S.
I dont think it will disconnect some PP, but maybe will lower "Wished" price for some,
so new blood will pump something to them, and who know build it so after that 4 years more join them?
Of course people that "Invested" in land, shops etc. will always say it can put destabilization, so they fear to lose.
But thats also wrong, as we already play on Planets we like, AND THIS TALKS IS SUGGESTION.
If MA dont do nothing, then what we can do?

Over all I think its healthy change for system.
 
Last edited:
Because this would be a breach of contract with the PP, plain and simple.
 
Please Teacher, teach me.
*sigh, ok

Government:
  • Located based on the country, state, city or district they oversee
  • Responsible for the laws of the land over which they can legally govern. Not able to make laws in places they have no jurisdiction
  • Paid in taxes, applied to certain actions taken within their borders
  • Can use force against those it deems are disobeying their laws or not paying their taxes
  • You have to follow the laws if you are a citizen or out-of-towner currently within their borders
  • Dies only when the government is unable to provide to the point of causing armed rebellion

Business;
  • Offers goods/services for sale
  • Depending on location/type business, may offer goods only locally or world-wide.
  • Those goods/services are paid for by customers who willingly do business with them. People are free to take their money and spend it elsewhere
  • Can not force anyone to do business with them. Can only send their account to a collection agency and/or stop doing business w/ a customers that refuses to pay for their service
  • Dies when they are unable to do enough business to pay for their expenses, or the owner closes shop voluntarily
In other words, laws, vs voluntary.
 
Government:
  • Located based on the country, state, city or district they oversee
  • Responsible for the laws of the land over which they can legally govern. Not able to make laws in places they have no jurisdiction
  • Paid in taxes, applied to certain actions taken within their borders
  • Can use force against those it deems are disobeying their laws or not paying their taxes
  • You have to follow the laws if you are a citizen or out-of-towner currently within their borders
  • Dies only when the government is unable to provide to the point of causing armed rebellion

Business;
  • Offers goods/services for sale
  • Depending on location/type business, may offer goods only locally or world-wide.
  • Those goods/services are paid for by customers who willingly do business with them. People are free to take their money and spend it elsewhere
  • Can not force anyone to do business with them. Can only send their account to a collection agency and/or stop doing business w/ a customers that refuses to pay for their service
  • Dies when they are unable to do enough business to pay for their expenses, or the owner closes shop voluntarily
In other words, laws, vs voluntary.

  • Both business and government have leadership and organizational structures.
  • Both have a set of rules and regulations to follow.
  • Both aim to provide services to their respective "customers" or "citizens."
  • Both generate revenue through various means (taxes for government, sales for business).
  • Both have a budget and financial management system.
  • Both have a hierarchy and division of labor.
  • Both are subject to scrutiny and accountability.
  • Both have a responsibility to their stakeholders (shareholders for business, citizens for government).
  • Both can be affected by external factors such as economic conditions and competition
  • Both have the ability to adapt and evolve to meet changing needs and demands.
Business and government are more alike than different, especially when viewed through the lens of a game development company overseeing a virtual world. Both entities have a structure, goals, and a system of rules to ensure smooth operations.

A game development company has a hierarchy of decision-makers, much like a government. The CEO or lead developer would be the equivalent of a president or prime minister, while the development team and support staff represent various departments and agencies.

A game development company aims to create a successful and engaging virtual world, akin to a government striving to build a prosperous nation. Both entities must manage resources, provide services, and maintain order to achieve their objectives.

A game development company establishes a set of guidelines and terms of service to maintain a fair and enjoyable gaming experience, much like a government's laws. Players must abide by these rules or face consequences, just as citizens must follow the law or face penalties.

There are certainly differences between business and government, their similarities become more apparent when viewed through the lens of a game development company overseeing a virtual world. Both entities share a common goal of creating a successful and thriving environment for their constituents, whether they be players or citizens.

In other words, they operate the same and the way MindArk has setup their business structure it resembles more of a government than a traditional goods/service business. They control the supply/demand, they tax their customers, they have terms/policies (aka laws of their platform), they provide/control a currency, they are the rulers of Entropia Universe; a virtual world akin to a location. Let's not forget they attempted to implement a political system within the game...
 
Hmmm, looks like JohnCapital beat me to the punch on some of the points I was typing! One more thing to mention is that the role of a game (or even an Entropia Universe) is much more obviously utilitarian in first principle than a government, for which no particular first principle has broad consensus. Games exist to generate entertainment value, and while Entropia extends into the realms of business, investment, trading, and (not-)gambling, it still falls under the umbrella aim of generating utility for users. It doesn't make much sense for Entropia to exist for the purpose of, say, protecting rights, although the establishment of constructed rights within the universe surely furthers the utility-oriented objective.

I still think an analogy between a software developer and a government can be helpful in some contexts, but it's important to be careful that things like exit rights and first principles are accounted for explicitly to avoid porting inapplicable conclusions from one to the other.
 
You completely and utterly skipped the biggest difference. Force vs mutual agreement

I HAVE to follow the laws for the location I am in. I can't say "right, I prefer the laws Sweden has, so I'll remain living in this house, but decide to ignore my local government and just use Sweden's laws instead.
If I fail to follow government laws, they can use deadly force against me, if such is warranted, no matter how much I may disagree with them.
Also, they do not get to choose who follows their laws. It's forced upon by virtue of location.

I do NOT have to do business with any specific company (excepting when forced by certain laws within my government, but even then, I usually have choices and not government mandated monopolies)
Also, they can, if they want, refuse me service.
No legit business can come to my house and force me at the point of a gun to use their product/service.

Pretending business and government is similar means one of two things.
  1. Your world-view is highly messed up
  2. OR you are just trolling for the LOLs
Either way, moving on. :wave:
 
If I fail to follow government laws, they can use deadly force against me, if such is warranted, no matter how much I may disagree with them.
They delete your avatar, effectively dead inside the virtual world.

MindArk has made it so you cannot pack up and leave without years of tedious selling (30 limit auction listings) and a mountain of money to buy the empty skill implants to offload the trapped value. They cash in on the fallacy of sunk costs quite heavily to keep you here, the same as you'd find with poor people living in squalor who would rather stay where they're born, have family and routine than pack up and venture to a new land that is ripe with opportunity and better living conditions.

If they didn't psychologically force your hand in this way there would be hardly any population left here... It's by design.

:wave:
 
They delete your avatar...
Yes, a business can stop the voluntary exchange between them and myself, should they choose. They can close my account. Just like I can decide to make no deposits, or log in, or play, or withdraw, or anything. I can walk away right now, if I wanted.

And they aren't allowed (by any government) to come to my door with guns to make me play.
 
Yes, a business can stop the voluntary exchange between them and myself, should they choose. They can close my account. Just like I can decide to make no deposits, or log in, or play, or withdraw, or anything. I can walk away right now, if I wanted.

And they aren't allowed (by any government) to come to my door with guns to make me play.
Perhaps in the western world, sure.

You don't seem to understand the different forms of governance.
Go visit a dictatorship, communist, socialist or oligopolist driven country.

---

MindArk 100% governs over Entropia Universe and it's participants. They have implemented ways to force you to stay. Not saying they are holding a physical gun to your head but they do toy with the psychological ones.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top