Moral dilemma question

GeorgeSkywalker

Mutated
Joined
May 20, 2007
Posts
11,574
Location
England
Society
Freelancer
Avatar Name
George Ace Skywalker
This is a purely hypothetical situation i.e. completely made up so you need to use a bit of imagination.

What if the BBC (a tv company in the UK) called you for an interview about this game because they thought you did really well in it. In fact so well that it exceeds imagination. You suspect the BBC may have got this info from MindArk but the BBC refuse to talk about their source for confidentiality reasons and refuse to talk about exactly how well and what it is that you did.

So in short because of the fact that the BBC asked you for an interview for doing well it confirms that something you did in the game must have been very significant although it is unknown exactly what. You can only guess on that.

So the dilemma is since you inadvertently know as a fact you have done something major should you stop playing the game since you now have an unfair advantage over other players? a self imposed ban on logging in? or log in a little bit to buy some key things then impose the ban yourself a few days later? or continue playing as normal?


Again this is a completely fictitious situation and contrived to see how players would act and what they consider ethical...
 
I would tell everyone what I did, let them ruin it, and then go figure something else out because I am smarter than them all :D
 
(...)
So the dilemma is since you inadvertently know as a fact you have done something major should you stop playing the game since you now have an unfair advantage over other players? a self imposed ban on logging in? or log in a little bit to buy some key things then impose the ban yourself a few days later? or continue playing as normal?
(...)

Why should i consider something "unfair" if i achieved in a fair way? Just having advantage does not mean it is unfair.

I am not sure if i understand hypothetical situation you have described.

If i understand it right - i would join the interview and would try to explain major mechanics that lead me to sucesss but would skip any details.

Falagor
:bandit:
 
it's harder dilemma than those shown at mexican telenovels. Seems you guys are so bored with EU gameplay if you create scenarios like these :laugh:
 
Why should i consider something "unfair" if i achieved in a fair way? Just having advantage does not mean it is unfair.

Well, unfair in the sense that other people never had the opportunity for same kind of info i.e. the interview request would confirm to you for definite you have done something well which is different from before when you could have only guessed. So although you have arrived at your position in a fair way would it not be unfair on other players to continue playing because they have never had any confirmation?

it's harder dilemma than those shown at mexican telenovels. Seems you guys are so bored with EU gameplay if you create scenarios like these :laugh:

Well it's good exercise for the brain
 
I would not grant an interview with ANY media (especially the well known very biased BBC), they will only twist your words, quote you out of context and insinuate wrong doing on your behalf.

Not worth the hassle and mud slinging that would surely follow. :wise:

*disclaimer: I worked in commercial radio for many years.
 
So in short because of the fact that the BBC asked you for an interview for doing well it confirms that something you did in the game must have been very significant although it is unknown exactly what. You can only guess on that.
It doesn't necessarily follow that what you did was good for yourself. This might as well mean you were a good and significant milking cow for MA. Or that you hold the record for most PED paid for a completely useless item. Or something like that.
 
By this logic, any Olympic champion should immediately leave the sport upon being awarded. Hell, they should leave right after their first win in a local competition!
 
<removed>

And to George, why should anything i do outside of the game, like giving an interview, stop me from enjoying playing the game?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
im wondering how it is possible to do something really well that you are not aware of, or that other have not taken note of. its even less likely that MA would approach the media about you, rather than you directly as part of their general PR. though this is MA so cant discount anything. the other conclusion to draw then is if you've been aproached by the BBC for something more mundane than you think.
 
I'd give the interview. There's no reason not to. The only negative reasons I see stem from personal paranoia.

I would not stop logging on, unless of course I believed in the ethics behind Communism. After all, everyone starts at the same place.

I'd use the interview to market myself, stating merely that I were featured on BBC.

I'd accept that some players would be upset at that, and cry conspiracy. Mostly because players are upset by everything, and are always crying conspiracy.

The real moral dilemma is this: When opportunity knocks, do you answer?

My answer would be: Yes.
 
I would give the interview on the premise we have a written contract that would explicitly say i have to see the full lenght cut interview they are to air and i have to ok it before it airs.
Then i would log on and keep playing :D
 
I would give the interview on the premise we have a written contract that would explicitly say i have to see the full lenght cut interview they are to air and i have to ok it before it airs.
Then i would log on and keep playing :D

You have never given an interview, I take it? No journalists will ever agree to something like this.
 
By the Swedish low the witness can be secret and he who accuses you of something can lie but if it becomes a trial so in a court must the witnesses to come forward because the Swedish law does not allow secret witnesses in court and in the court you must speak truthfully by the law.
 
TSN Asked me for an interview. They figured all my jumping up and down and mashing the keys like a lunatic was "sports worthy".... Then I explained the "loot system" and they decided they could not turn their episode into a "Jerry Springer" episode.

In lieu of the fame it WOULD have gotten me... they offered to pay for a shrink for 6 sessions... I haven't played EU since.

Menace
 
I'd only do an interview with BBC if I was able to be disguised. A bit like this:


If video doesn't work, YouTube "Cassetteboy talks to BBC News" ;)
 
Several assumptions in the OP, but the biggest one is that being receiving a request for an media interview (even if the suggestion DID come from MindArk) can be equated with having some 'unfair advantage'.

Think of some players who have given interviews in the past:
  • Deathifier
  • Nevedie (when he was just a player, not a PP)
  • Skalman
  • Da
They're just names I can think of off the top of my head, that I've personally seen/read the interview, without any research. (I'm sure there's been others, but the names just don't spring to mind right now.)

Did anyone expect any of these players to immediately stop playing because their interview was proof of some 'unfair advantage'?
 
<removed> About the BBC interview well, why not do it? :cool:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would go on TV shouting all manner of awesomeness about the game and try and bloody get some new players. I have no doubt in 30 seconds of airtime even the most retarded player could attract more new downloads than MA > :(

What happen to the $6 million CLD revenue explicitly used for markting MA ,,, common ? give us some answers !:wise:
 
What happen to the $6 million CLD revenue explicitly used for markting MA ,,, common ? give us some answers !:wise:

Only part of it was to be used for advertising and from what I recall, it was so effective that the flood of new players completely bogged down the Port Atlantis/Camp Icarus server area.
 
Only part of it was to be used for advertising and from what I recall, it was so effective that the flood of new players completely bogged down the Port Atlantis/Camp Icarus server area.

Seems there is a new banner campaign going on at the moment... Seen a ton of them on other forums, YouTube and other places :) not the same as during last time either
 
Seems there is a new banner campaign going on at the moment... Seen a ton of them on other forums, YouTube and other places :) not the same as during last time either

Jups... i noticed that too.
Have seen em on the forums and other community gaming websites.

Seems like they went into a more agressive advertising campain.
 
Let me guess, the new cargo transport system is going to utilise Hangars and you own most of them and suddenly they are really valuable?
 
Presuming no cheating was involved i am surprised anyone would turn down an interview.

If it was cheating, then i presume everyone would turn it down

Rgds

Ace
 
Did anyone expect any of these players to immediately stop playing because their interview was proof of some 'unfair advantage'?

Let me guess, the new cargo transport system is going to utilise Hangars and you own most of them and suddenly they are really valuable?

Presuming no cheating was involved i am surprised anyone would turn down an interview.

If it was cheating, then i presume everyone would turn it down

Rgds

Ace

No offense but I think your missing the issue I was trying to address. The particular issue I was interested in was you gaining additional information in real life through the action of others and in no way linked to your actions. Since such actions by others are in no way influenced by you it can't be cheating. To my mind your only responsible and accountable for your own actions.

Now in the scenario presented in OP you gained additional information by the very fact BBC asked you for an interview and stated your success i.e. you now know as a fact something you did was successful. Would that in itself be enough to warrant you to impose a ban on yourself due to additional info gained? i.e. advantage

The moment you realise your successful as a fact from the actions by the BBC what you do next is very important as now you would be accountable for your actions from gaining additional info which may be considered an advantage over others.
 
No offense but I think your missing the issue I was trying to address. The particular issue I was interested in was you gaining additional information in real life through the action of others and in no way linked to your actions. Since such actions by others are in no way influenced by you it can't be cheating. To my mind your only responsible and accountable for your own actions.

Now in the scenario presented in OP you gained additional information by the very fact BBC asked you for an interview and stated your success i.e. you now know as a fact something you did was successful. Would that in itself be enough to warrant you to impose a ban on yourself due to additional info gained? i.e. advantage

The moment you realise your successful as a fact from the actions by the BBC what you do next is very important as now you would be accountable for your actions from gaining additional info which may be considered an advantage over others.

Just because someone out there thinks that im successfull doesnt influence any of my actions and i wouldnt take any interview either if its not clarified in advance on what it is about.
Deemed to be successfull by others doesnt mean that someone had an unfair advantage it merely reflects how others perceive you.
Some people change who they really are when they start thinking to be 'someone' or to have 'made it' the most important thing though is to stay true to oneself.
 
Edit: Reread OP.

No. I wouldn't do the interview and I would keep playing the game. Simply because until my success has been guaranteed I don't think of it as success. It might as well be a misunderstanding.

Basically, your saying that fictional George has got a phone call telling him he is successful, but fictional George is really clueless why. All he can think is that BBC knows something he doesn't because they called him.

So Fictional George must connect it somehow to his recent investments. But why would MA contact BBC? Marketing purposes? Doesn't sound like a good idea until the success has been guaranteed. The follow up story if you failed would look really bad...
 
Last edited:
Notional opinion:
It's scam.
Give yourself the traditional kick in the bollocks and inhale to recover.
Underline fantasy in your thesaurus.
Enjoy captions within any comic.
and
Enjoy Sunday :tongue2:
 
Back
Top