Meh

No flag. But no vote neither.

(no subject)

Blame Tom, I said it was a crap completion but he is points hungry! Points hungry I tell you.

(no subject)

I defend playing for points. Not because I've made up my mind about playing one way or another, just that I've been thinking about it for a long long time now.

See, the thing about playing for points is if someone a) doesn't do a great job, or b) doesn't have a lot of friends/isn't very popular (face it, it happens) they at least have points to console them. One knows objectively g nmg (henry, on my lap, agrees) one knows objectively that what one thought was a lot of effort or personal risk or growth is worth at least the points. Points as i;ve said are the elephant in our living room--try as we like we see that player page first on the basis of score.

While not THE core or the MAIN focus of the "problem," points play a role in both the "Revolution Against the UofA" and "Charlie Fish's Manifesto." The Revolution was careful to take aim at "dilution of the praxis" but I have heard more than one player who later became a revolutionary murmur about the way the UofA is "winning."

Charlie Fish's amazing praxes have been far more about quality to simply write them off as "points mongering." We mustn't ignore that in his own words he "doesn't want to be on the losing side" and framed his manifesto in the language of score. That the results have been both jaw-dropping and score-worthy has been to the benefit of all, of course.

I think score and points are just fine to play for, especially if one has nothing else yet or has exhausted some of the other avenues for "making the connection" here. New players quickly learn (through attrition if nothing else) that if they want more comments or votes, then they have to step up and make it awesome. But really, until then can you name a single indisputable reason why accumulating points is an inherent wrong? Examples of players or tasks people dislike simply don't count as indisputable reasons (on the crrazy theory that, y'know, examples ≠ reasons. duh).

(no subject)

I couldn't agree more, sometimes you want to go epic, sometimes you want points. In this case, having dropped to third, I wanted points.

Anyone else seeing Interregnum Era on the players page?

interesting.

Anyway, I'm off to sleep. See you in the new era.

(no subject)

First of all, congratulations, Tom! You have amassed a great body of work in the last few months, and have risen impressively to my challenge of "Who's gonna stop me?" That's a lot of hard work and you've earned your place in Glasnost history.

Second, on this topic of playing for points, I'd say that the great thing about SFØ is that you can play any way you want to, for points or votes or none of the above. But the other great thing, for me, is seeing the amazing and inspirational things that many players come up with - the things I can't vote for fast enough. There are lots of online games which I can play obsessively in order to get tons of points, but none of them feature people doing plays on the Underground, making beautiful, impermanent, buoyant art pieces, or causing havoc in public whilst nekkid. That's what I love about SFØ. I encourage more of that.

Happy Interregnum, all!

(no subject)

Thanks, Mr Unit!

And yes, congratulations Tom. You have deserved every point.