Sign up for the 2019 Masters Tournament, one of the most prestigious online Diplomacy tournaments here.

If you need your games paused due to a natural disaster, please email webdipmod@gmail.com. We will pause all of your games for as long as you need without question.

Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 267 of 412
FirstPreviousNextLast
Hamilton Brian (807 D (B))
19 Aug 15 UTC
Sources of Tension
An exploration of those positionings that test an alliance. Feel free to add your thoughts, views, observations, etc. If you shit though, clean up after yourself.
5 replies
Open
Ogion (4375 D)
14 Aug 15 UTC
Welcome back party!
Friends,

I've been away for the last six months, and I thought I'd throw myself a little welcome back bash.
30 replies
Open
ckroberts (3548 D)
05 Aug 15 UTC
The Mountain Game 4 rules discussion/sign up thread
The Mountain Game 4 will commence soon.
56 replies
Open
Rodgersd09 (100 D)
17 Aug 15 UTC
"A good games" was cancelled - Do any players know why?
Damn - I was enjoying it as well!
3 replies
Open
Constitutional Rights for Embryonic Americans?
In the GOP debate last Thursday, unsurprisingly, abortion was a point of discussion amongst candidates. Obviously they were all pro-life to some extent or another, but Mike Huckabee went so far as to say that abortion was already illegal, because unborn children have the rights to equal protection under the law and due process. Right from conception, they have constitutional rights, he argues.

Regardless of your position on abortion, is this a valid argument?
91 replies
Open
Jamiet99uk (35 D)
12 Aug 15 UTC
(+3)
Mafia
I'm getting sick of muting Mafia threads. Can someone launch a separate site for them or something?
44 replies
Open
ssorenn (3242 D (G))
14 Aug 15 UTC
(+1)
Changes to site policy--
With this gunboat tourney going on, I think there should be a change to a site policy. ----see inside---
106 replies
Open
orathaic (1009 D (B))
15 Aug 15 UTC
sex slavery in IS
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/middle-east/sex-slavery-adopted-and-codified-by-islamic-state-1.2317309
11 replies
Open
2ndWhiteLine (3375 D (B))
12 Aug 15 UTC
(+4)
2015 Gunboat Tournament
See inside.
250 replies
Open
DeathLlama8 (524 D)
15 Aug 15 UTC
What do people use to adjudicate F2F games without a board?
Fairly self-explanatory, really. Backstabbr doesn't really work for me.
15 replies
Open
Eadan (454 D)
15 Aug 15 UTC
We need someone to step in as Egypt
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=164461#votebar
1 reply
Open
King Mischief (108 D)
15 Aug 15 UTC
world take over-4
come join world take over-4. I'm some what new to the game so, it could be easy $$$.
3 replies
Open
Stubie (1817 D)
14 Aug 15 UTC
Cutting Convoys
Is it possible to stop a supported convoy (where the fleet convoying is supported) with a supported attack of equal support, thus not dislodging the convoying fleet?
10 replies
Open
Lebosfc17 (20 D X)
14 Aug 15 UTC
To The Mods
Does anybody remember DC35?
17 replies
Open
Fluminator (496 D)
14 Aug 15 UTC
I need help with a research paper!
It's due tomorrow night and I have to do a 12-15 page paper on how the internet of things and the third industrial revolution will affect society and more importantly the work force and employment.

I'm up to around 10 pages and I have no idea what to write for the last 2.
And no, increasing the font size of each period isn't allowed.
41 replies
Open
4-8-15-16-23-42 (339 D)
14 Aug 15 UTC
Question- Help
See below.
16 replies
Open
general (100 D)
13 Aug 15 UTC
Quick live game
Join my quick live game: http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=165983.

Haven't played in years and want to get back into it :)
1 reply
Open
orathaic (1009 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
Messed up, two 13 year olds tired as adults
m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7979942?cps=gravity_5540_1138476008340655834

So teenagers brains are different from adult brains; that is a reason why we don't let them drink or drive... The frontal lobe which controls will-power and executive function ( ie decision making ) continues developing until about 25.
fiedler (1293 D)
13 Aug 15 UTC
Maybe you should give them both oral sex, ora.
MrcsAurelius (3051 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
(+3)
Interesting discussion point Orathaic. I think brain maturity differs in males and females. Males are fully developed late 20s and women early 20s. If you extend what you are implying you should not try anyone as an adult until they are thirty. However, do you truly need full brain capacity to comprehend that stabbing someone 19 times to honor a fictional internet character is not something you're supposed to do?
Randomizer (0 D)
13 Aug 15 UTC
It depends upon the crime and that one was more adult in nature in intent and action. The judge had more information than the report on what the teenagers were thinking and likely to do.

Besides if you argue that immature brains are an excuse, than Trump and other frat boy mentality guys could justify their actions as never having grown up.
orathaic (1009 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
I did not make the claim that at 25 adults suddenly gain responsibility for their actions. It is clearly a fluid development over years, and we have various milestones in our culture of 21 or 18 or 16 for good reasons. ( even if they are arbitrary cut off points )

Some countries allow driving or drinking or voting at 16. Other delay until 21. I can't run for election to be President of Ireland until i'm 35...

But the biology should be used to inform our decisions about what is culturally appropriate. Science based policy. Doesn't mean you jump to conclude that a 17 year old who murders someone the day before their 18th birthday should be tried as a child an released on their birthday.

So please don't jump to conclusions and then claim they are mine. Your strawman doesn't undermine the biological facts i raised.

The question is HOW should you use these facts to inform, whereas your answer seems to be, lets just ignore biology entirely!
semck83 (229 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
(+4)
orathaic,

I have some problems with your line of argument.

As you say, we have cultural age cutoffs for a reason -- we've always known that teenagers on average have some maturing to do before they have the responsibility to act as adults.

Yet we've also long had the ability to try teenagers as adults for some crimes. You seem to think that one of these (drinking / driving laws, etc.) shows recognition of biological reality, while the other shows ignorance. I would put it to you that both show understanding, and at a much finer level than mere neuroscience can show.

Neuroscience shows that the teenage frontal lobe continues to develop till 25? Great. Long experience and crime statistics show that vanishingly few teenagers take their friend into a woods and try to kill her to impress a fictional character. That's empirical data too, and it shows that the rough (and broad) correlation you're talking about simply does not extend far enough to explain this behavior. The law recognizes that a severe moral deficiency was at issue here, and that requiring teenagers not to kill each other is a perfectly reasonable requirement that should not receive blanket special treatment due to their age.

In other words, nobody is ignoring biology, and nobody ever has. Rather, you're ignoring that the long experience of the human race is, among other things, *biological* experience, and trying to pretend that the only biological knowledge is that gained under a microscope in the last few decades. In truth, at most that gives some rough correlational guidance in interpreting things we already knew (and there are severe correlation/causation issues there, as well). It has relatively little to tell us about how teenagers behave. We've known that for a long time.
orathaic (1009 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
@smeck: thanks for your analysis; i am talking about protecting children of course, and the slippery slope arguement would let me ask you where you draw the line? Is a 9 year old to be tried as an adult? What about a 6 year old? And a 3 year old who kills their sibling (i feel certain there are examples of this, unfortunately) Now slippery slope arguements tend to be bullshit, so i am merely asking - where should you draw the line.

And do you agree that we should use neuroscience to help inform that decision.

Now to your actual example - you're right in saying that most 13 year olds don't act this way. In fact this leads me to the alternative question of whether these girls are mentally ill. A court could decide to forcibly commit them with no chance of ever being released (whether tried as an adult or not, i suppose)

If this example (of behaviour) was premeditated, then self-control not being fully developed doesn't really come into it. They were not stabbing someone in a fit of anger - i wasn't there, i don't know if they simply lost control or if they thought it was a game and things went horribly wrong... But the story you are telling makes it sound like they have serious issues with reality and not just morality.

How their issues will develop as they grow up ( assuming they don't get the death penalty, is that possible? ) should determine whether they will ever be safe for release into the public again.
orathaic (1009 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
And how they develop will depend massively on their environment. Whether it be a juvenile detention facility, an adult prison, or a secure mental health facility...
semck83 (229 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
@orathaic,

"But the story you are telling makes it sound like they have serious issues with reality and not just morality."

Well, to a degree that's true. And I agree that they should be evaluated psychiatrically. But one must distinguish children's poorly developed epistemology from their morals, which should be better developed.

For a 13 year old to believe that Slender Man was real would be unusual, but not unheard of. But for that thirteen year old to decide to kill her friend to impress Slender Man would be evil (assuming she believed Slender Man real, and assuming she was not crazy). It is morally similar to an adult killing her friend to impress another (real) friend.

"Now slippery slope arguements tend to be bullshit, so i am merely asking - where should you draw the line."

I wouldn't draw the line hard and fast, but would leave it up to judges in the gray area, which is exactly what the legislatures have largely done.

"And do you agree that we should use neuroscience to help inform that decision."

I'm not opposed to that in principle, but I'm dubious that neuroscience has anything of value to say here; at least I have not seen it to have so. Of course both legislatures and judges should take such things into account in forming their decision, but it's just important to remember that we all know much more about human behavior from being people than we ever will from being scientists.

No, they can't get the death penalty.

Finally, I agree that both judge and jury should take into account whether the killing was premeditated or not, and should take into consideration all the available evidence, including the defendants' age, when making that determination.
Jamiet99uk (35 D)
13 Aug 15 UTC
@ orathaic: "The question is HOW should you use these facts to inform"

Well, actually, to start with, you didn't ask that question. You posted a link to the story and declared that trying these young people as adults was "messed up", suggesting you'd already made your mind up about the right answer to any question that might be raised.
MrcsAurelius (3051 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
(+1)
I wonder how Psychiatric evaluation is going to benefit society much though. To stay on topic, it is evident that these girls, when released, will have gone through very different mental development compared to 'ordinary people'. On top, they already have some wrong wires to begin with. Is that repairable? Maybe its only of academic interest to evaluate them. Can you expose society to such risk?

I must disagree with you Semck, that we know much more about human behavior from being people than we ever will by being scientists. The whole practice of psychiatry operates on the reverse of this postulate. By administrating certain chemicals you can significantly alter human behavior. Thats just medical science, if we include social sciences, one can infer much more from large dataset analysis on human behavior, then just by walking around and using your own experiences as a compas. I challenge you to go to a tiny chinese village in the hinterland and gauge 'how much you know them by being a person'.
Jeff Kuta (2066 D)
13 Aug 15 UTC
You're under eighteen
You won't be doing any ti-i-i-ime.
Hey-EY-ey!
Come out and play!
semck83 (229 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
@Mrcs,

" By administrating certain chemicals you can significantly alter human behavior. Thats just medical science, if we include social sciences, one can infer much more from large dataset analysis on human behavior, then just by walking around and using your own experiences as a compass."

How does the point about medicine relate at all to what I said?

As for what you say about large datasets -- that's also irrelevant. I didn't say that you don't know more about people if you use science. I said that a large majority of what we know comes from "being a person." That includes interpreting and using that data, making sense of it at all.

Finally, I (of course) don't have the time or resources to go to "a tiny Chinese village in the hinterland," but I'm not sure what your point was supposed to be there, in any event. If I had such time and resources, the major question would be whether I spoke their language. If I learned their dialect before I went, I would expect to be able to interact successfully with them, although there would doubtless be a large number of cultural misunderstandings for quite some time. Just what was your point? That I would have to MRI their brains to ever have a chance of understanding them?
MrcsAurelius (3051 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
"That includes interpreting and using that data, making sense of it at all." That is cheating a bit ;)

You said: "that we know much more about human behavior from being people than we ever will by being scientists." You already tweaked what you said by now adding: "I said that a large majority ... etc"

I interpret your original sentence as saying you know more about a person by just being the same animal, than studying that animal. I think we will know more about an insect than an insect knows about himself just being an insect. It's a fallacy in my eyes. I think I will know more about human behavior in the tiny chinese village, where I've never been to, by reading a book by social scientists, than you do by just being people.
semck83 (229 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
"I think I will know more about human behavior in the tiny chinese village, where I've never been to, by reading a book by social scientists, than you do by just being people."

And I think you would know much more about it by living there your whole life than you would by reading a book by social scientists.
MrcsAurelius (3051 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
Haha but that's not what you said. And actually I also don't think I agree with that statement. I think a (social and natural) scientist (certainly in the future, as you said in your original comment) may be able to better predict human behavior within the tiny chinese village than the villagers themselves who have lived there all their life.
semck83 (229 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
Moreover, even ignoring the fact that your analogy is bad, your claim is still wrong.

I know a lot about the people in that remote Chinese village. I know that their first couple years of life are spent becoming accustomed to the world and learning to walk and talk; that it takes several more years before imagination and reality are fully separate, and that they say funny things a lot in the meantime; that they love their parents and learn an enormous amount from them, viewing them as approximately infinite sources both of authority and knowledge; that they enjoy the company of people their age as they grow, and enjoy the experience of friendship with other humans; that they experience love, anger, rage, jealousy, sympathy, empathy, pain; that they look at the stars and feel strongly; that they mostly enjoy music; that they make jokes and laugh at them; that they experience hunger, and that much of their life is ultimately organized around sleeping and eating; that they know their way around their home, their neighborhood, their village; that they grow to know romantic love and desire, and to start families of their own; that they smile to see young children; that they feel sadness and loss and probably cry when their parents die.

I could go on almost endlessly, and these things I know by being alive and a person and by knowing people. Only because I know them will the social scientist's book even make sense to me, the book that lists efficiently for me the few, perhaps important differences that divide me from these people.
semck83 (229 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
"Haha but that's not what you said."

It's the correct analogy to what I said.

"I think a (social and natural) scientist (certainly in the future, as you said in your original comment) may be able to better predict human behavior within the tiny chinese village than the villagers themselves who have lived there all their life."

He may be better able to predict a few isolated types of behavior, and so he will claim to be better able to predict things generally, by the usual move wherein science fanboys define whatever science is poor at studying to be unimportant. But would he be able to better pass himself off as a local? Even assume he could learn to speak the dialect flawlessly, do you think he could do such a good job pretending to be a local that they would never guess he was not from there?

If not, can he really predict their behavior better than they can?
MrcsAurelius (3051 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
You cannot go on endlessly with the basic observations that you have enumerated. And those basic observations will also not make you able to explain why two 13 year olds stabbed another girl in the honor of a slender man. I have no doubt that in the future (this inclusion makes your original statement unholdable) science is able to flawlessly explain why they did this. In the end we are just a collection of single cells that collectively try to adapt and survive in an ever changing environment. There is nothing unquantifiable about us as an organism. This can at some point be used to explain and predict human behaviour scientifically.

But lets switch back to the present, why not use the scientific tools that we have already, to mend and/or adapt jurisdiction? Law, I feel, is in great need of some proper science as it is much to arbitrary and underspecified. As an example, I think DNA investigations has greatly improved sentencing, in a way that absolutely wouldn't have been possible if we still relied solely on your enumeration of basic human knowledge in court.
semck83 (229 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
Marcus,

Your beliefs about the future of science are silly and (more to the point) both unproveable and unscientific. I grant that, if they were true, my point would be wrong. But I also think they demonstrate a vast ignorance of the world and of science.

Anyway, on to your second paragraph: in what way have DNA investigations improved *sentencing* specifically?

Also, please note that I was not arguing against using scientific knowledge in court. I even said so. Any knowledge we have should be brought to bear in court, which is one of the wonderful things about a court. I'm just dubious that there is any present knowledge of that type that is of relevance in this case. Feel free to present a counterexample if you feel you have one.
semck83 (229 D (B))
13 Aug 15 UTC
Sorry to be rather curt, Marcus -- I was in a hurry, but that's a poor excuse. I do think your remarks show unfortunate lack of exposure to much of the richness of the world. But to call you ignorant and not suggest improvement is unhelpful. Scientifically, I would suggest that our increasing understanding of nonlinear systems (popularly called chaos theory). Vastly complex systems like the human brain cannot be fully predicted or even postdicted, even if one believes they are completely deterministic. We can study their qualitative properties and the essential modes in which they function, and that is what neuroscience and literature have both been doing for a long time, in their different ways. Literature is well ahead at this point.
steephie22 (182 D (S))
13 Aug 15 UTC
"I can't run for election to be President of Ireland until i'm 35..."

Well that sucks! I hope that's not the case in the Netherlands, because that would ruin my plans..
Randomizer (0 D)
13 Aug 15 UTC
I remember when they first arrested, this wasn't a spur of the moment decision, but one where they planned out the crime and selected a victim. There have been other cases with even younger juveniles killing a person which were either accidental or spur of the moment where they were treated in juvenile court.

Unlike cases where bullying or other behavior which causes a death, but they could argue that they didn't know it would happen this case was premeditated murder. They might get a reduced sentence from psychiatric problems, but there isn't a question of guilt.
bo_sox48 (4844 D Mod (G))
13 Aug 15 UTC
"However, do you truly need full brain capacity to comprehend that stabbing someone 19 times to honor a fictional internet character is not something you're supposed to do?"

I don't know if this line has been pointed out yet because I didn't bother reading the rest of this thread, but are you not aware that in any adult that would probably garner something like an insanity plea? The fact that they aren't trying to rehabilitate these children like they would a criminally insane adult is pathetic. Rehabilitation isn't forgiveness for your crimes; it's a chance at redemption. They're 13, they deserve that.
abgemacht (840 D (G))
13 Aug 15 UTC
(+2)
"Well that sucks! I hope that's not the case in the Netherlands, because that would ruin my plans.."

Steephie, when you run for president please promise to only come here for all your campaign and policy advice
steephie22 (182 D (S))
13 Aug 15 UTC
(+1)
Don't be ridiculous.







I'll be running for Prime Minister.
steephie22 (182 D (S))
13 Aug 15 UTC
The best part is that none of you really know whether I'm joking or not.
abgemacht (840 D (G))
13 Aug 15 UTC
(+3)
I can see the headlines now: "PM under investigation, moved all government sites to personal web host"
steephie22 (182 D (S))
13 Aug 15 UTC
No that's too obvious. The plan is to host clients on government hosting space.
steephie22 (182 D (S))
13 Aug 15 UTC
(+1)
Of course, that's a joke. When I become PM, no fraud or anything.

It's all about becoming a really young PM making the worldwide news, so the whole world googles my name and finds my site. Then they buy my boardgame, get my webhosting and learn about everything else I'm up to and what they can buy.

Then I'll be set for life and I can focus on leading the world to better times for the rest of my life.

Plain and simple.
jmo1121109 (3797 D Mod)
13 Aug 15 UTC
Pretty much in complete agreement with semck83 on this. Being tried as an adult should be saved for crimes that show stunningly disturbed, even sociopathic, desires. Which premeditated attempted murder to honor and impress one of the most disturbed video game characters around would probably fall under. Unless someone could absolutely prove that those people were 100% cured and rehabilitated, and I don't find that likely, it's safer for everyone for them to be locked away.
orathaic (1009 D (B))
14 Aug 15 UTC
@jmo there are different ways to lock someone away.

An adult prison where they will be preyed upon by other inmates is one option.

Juvenile detention is another.

A secure mental facility is a third.

Obviously some kind of hunger games style island is the extreme alternative.

@Jamie - yes, i did answer the quesion before starting. And then i explained in the thread where i was coming from to get to that answer. Smeck made some valid points which allow my analysis my position and consider changing my mind. Have you a problem with any of this? Isn't it how threads are supposed to work??
Randomizer (0 D)
14 Aug 15 UTC
Juvenile detention isn't safe in some states where the problem isn't other inmates but the guards.

Secure mental facilities usually just drug up the inmates because it is cheaper and lets them deal with more people.

Generalizations aren't really any help for deciding a specific case. You need details on the specific facilities that are available for that state. For instance Arizona had to close a private prison at Kingman due to prison riots that destroyed most of the place. The prisoners rioted because of prolonged mistreatment by guards. You can't generalize it to all private prisons as doing the same thing, but adds to the statistics that private prisons aren't as good as state and federal run prisons.


32 replies
orathaic (1009 D (B))
11 Aug 15 UTC
Risk taking
http://youtu.be/vBX-KulgJ1o
Great video, but the first thing i think of is relationships, (and given that i was recently dumped, this is no surprise) Naturally you could also apply this to diplomacy; but the probabilities get a little messed up, and in Dip not taking a bet means taking a different course, which may also be risky.
14 replies
Open
orathaic (1009 D (B))
10 Aug 15 UTC
Snowden Interview
Recent interview with German tv, apparently not shown in the US and not available on youtube?? m.liveleak.com/view?i=f93_1390833151

He makes some interesting points...
49 replies
Open
fulhamish (4134 D)
12 Aug 15 UTC
Climate change - another feedback loop
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/08/150805140254.htm

Time to recalibrate those models..........................again
30 replies
Open
Jamiet99uk (35 D)
13 Aug 15 UTC
(+4)
The death of the republic
http://diprepublic.net/?reqp=1&reqr=

Oh no. How sad.
9 replies
Open
Tru Ninja (1016 D (S))
05 Aug 15 UTC
ESPN Fantasy Football Signups
For those that will play only ESPN league, post interest here. List your preferred draft day (I prefer late preseason Saturday or Sunday around 1 p.m. Central Time

1. Tru Ninja (Sat Aug 29th or Sun Aug 30th)
81 replies
Open
Thucydides (869 D (B))
04 Aug 15 UTC
GRE scores
What's a good score? Share your score too, if you feel comfortable. I just took the test this morning
65 replies
Open
alulahello (0 D X)
12 Aug 15 UTC
(+2)
halloween costumes 2015
I know, 3 months early blahblah. But I'm bored and I want to talk about Halloween.
Some people are into crazy Costumes and go all out to make them. Brainstrom ideas for costumes and how to make/obtain them. What are you thinking of going as?
1 reply
Open
goldfinger0303 (3050 D)
11 Aug 15 UTC
Opposite Gender Friends leads to Lower Academic Performance
Interesting paper I'm reading right now. Not completely done with it, but its methodology seems sound.

http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/app.20140030
37 replies
Open
ssorenn (3242 D (G))
12 Aug 15 UTC
(+2)
this is interesting--watch the video
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/08/10/everyone-fails-to-ride-this-bike-you-would-too-this-is-what-it-tells-us-about-the-brain/
6 replies
Open
P13ANATOR (100 D)
12 Aug 15 UTC
Hi I am new, quick question
I am starting a game with some friends, can you play with less than 7 people? If so, is anything different compared to a full game? Thanks :-)
8 replies
Open
ND (879 D)
20 Jul 15 UTC
(+12)
MX: All Star Game
See inside for details
5191 replies
Open
Valis2501 (2057 D (G))
10 Aug 15 UTC
MAFIA XI: Confirmations
I know some people may not realize sign up thread is also confirmation thread so let's make that ultra clear:
Starts 8/11/15, 6 PM EDT
140 replies
Open
Page 267 of 412
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top