= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Thinking like a super-villain is the wrong advice to give to this demographic since it will prime them for counter-productive patterns of behaviour that work in fiction.
In response to
31 Laws of Fun
Finally, this dire warning: Concretely imagining worlds much better than your present-day real life, may suck out your soul like an emotional vacuum cleaner. (See Seduced by Imagination.) Fun Theory is dangerous, use it with caution, you have been warned.
An obvious application of Fun Theory is its use in designing virtual worlds that suck out other people's souls for fun and profit! Then donating that to optimal charity to make up for disutility. Enslave the irrational for the greater good!
Roleplaying, and humour, is fun. And fun is tempting, especially on the internet.
I've been running campaigns for, wow, 16 years now, and I played intermittently even before then. Roleplaying is not something that is unfamiliar to me. One of the things I've noticed is that, for the most part, people play characters that think like they do. It is difficult for most people to play a well-developed character that doesn't largely agree with their own personal philosophy (playing a simple caricature is much easier, but Voldemort does not strike me as such)
If it's only an epsilon of evidence then my life is an absolutely ridiculous statistical anomaly o.o
(playing a simple caricature is much easier, but Voldemort does not strike me as such)
Why thank you, I do try.
One of the things I've noticed is that, for the most part, people play characters that think like they do.
Except for stealing everything that isn't nailed down you mean?
To step out of character, my regular account has 2000+ karma on LW and I don't think I've been acused of sociopathy before. I guess I'm just that good at hiding it.
In response to
comment
by
[deleted]
on
Antisocial personality traits predict utilitarian responses to moral dilemmas
I suspect that actual downvotes are because some people dislike the growing number of role accounts and are downvoting accordingly.
In response to
comment
by
on
Antisocial personality traits predict utilitarian responses to moral dilemmas
(Older well known RP accounts (ala Clippy) don't really seem to be attracting much attention from them though. Perhaps I should get myself a regular account?)
There are more malnourished people in India than in all of sub-Saharan Africa
At least in the IT and call centre industries in the United States, "India" is synonymous with "cheap outsourcing bastards who are stealing our jobs." Quite a few customers are actively hostile towards India because they "don't speak English", "don't understand anything", and are "cheap outsourcing bastards who are stealing proper American jobs".
I absolutely hate this idiocy, but it's a pretty compelling case not to try and use India as an emotional hook...
I'd also assume that people are primed to the idea of "Africa = poor helpless children", so Africa is a much easier emotional hook.
LW has a few role-playing characters identifiable by usernames, while others don't appear to be playing such games and don't use speaking usernames. So "Voldemort" is likely a fictional persona tailored to the name, rather than a handle chosen to describe a real person's character.
Correct, though I prefer to think of it as using another man's head to run a viable enough version of me so that I may participate in the rationalist discourse here.
I'm curious as to how you know "Voldemort" is a troll?
I hate to repeat myself but let me ease your mind.
Ha ha ha. I find it amusing that you should ask me of all people about this.
Only I can live forever. - is a powerful ethical argument if there is a slim but realistic chance of you actually achieving this.
...or perhaps just the raw materials for another horcrux.
Despite the risk of cluttering I even made a posts who's only function was to clear up ambiguity:
Ah, even muggles can be sensible occasionally.
I thought it was more than probable the vast majority of readers here would be familiar with me. Perhaps I expect too much of them. I do that sometimes expect too much of people, it is arguably one of my great flaws.
What are 28 mortal lives for one that is immortal?
Genuine question: would you push a big red button that killed 28 African children via malaria, if it meant you got free cryonic suspension? I'm fine with a brutal "shut up and multiply" answer, I'm just not sure if you really mean it when you say you'd trade 28 mortal lives for a single immortal one.
I'm just not sure if you really mean it when you say you'd trade 28 mortal lives for a single immortal one.
Ha ha ha. I find it amusing that you should ask me of all people about this. I'd push a big red button killing through neglect 28 cute Romanian orphans if it meant a 1% or 0.5% or even 0.3% chance of revival in an age that has defeated ageing. It would free up my funds to either fund more research, or offer to donate the money to cryopreserve a famous individual (offering it to lots of them, one is bound to accept, and him accepting would be a publicity boost) or perhaps just the raw materials for another horcrux.
Also why employ children in the example? Speaking of adults the idea seemed fine, children should probably be less of a problem since they aren't fully persons in exactly the same measure adults are no? It seems so attractive to argue to argue that killing a child costs the world more potential happy productive man years, yet have you noted that in many societies the average expected life span is so very low mostly because of the high child mortality? A 20 year old man in such a society has already passed a "great filter" so to speak. This is probably true in many states in Africa. And since we are on the subject...
There are more malnourished people in India than in all of sub-Saharan Africa, yet people always invoke an African example when wishing to "fight hunger". This is true of say efforts to eradicate malaria or making AIDS drugs affordable or "fighting poverty" or education intiatives, ect. I wonder why? Are they more photogenic?Does helping Africans somehow signal more altruism than helping say Cambodians? I wonder.
(nods) Yup, that makes more sense.
Ah, even muggles can be sensible occasionally.
View more: Next
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Don't most supervillains fail in fictional works?
They eventually do. But they often start with an origin story that makes little sense and during the story they often end up becoming stronger and stronger right up until the end.