Law on Fri, 14 Apr 2000 22:05:56 +0200 (CEST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> pacifism in video games

I disagree, although the same though presented itself. Of course, your
idea for group action is excellent.

My first reaction was, what a wonderful action to take. 

My second reaction was, yes but it is a useless action.

My third reaction is that this brings cyberspace to a level of reality
that makes me uncomfortable. 

I think change cannot happen without engagement. The fact that this
action made me uncomfortable means that it succeeded as engagement.

Intentions are important. I don't think it is useful to call something
misguided because it doesn't work. Not taking this action because you
will only get blown away and only undertaking this action if you know
you won't get blown away are two sides of the same coin.  I think
action like this is more useful if it is not attached to a specific
outcome. Present the players with the opportunity to *get it*.

Jim Law

On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Joshua Goldberg wrote:

> How misguided.
> Civil disobedience and pacifist action only works in the context of making
> the violent and repressive forces ashamed of their own actions.  By
> sitting and meditating in UT fragspaces, all you do is provide easy
> targets and ways to increase their ngStats. 
> Even if it was for more of an artistic reason than a social one, it's
> still hollow.  Who's going to know it's art?  Who's going to care? 
> Now, if you managed to get together a group of say 100 or so people
> playing UT who all signed on to public servers at the same time, with
> coordinated skins and actions, you could do something that people would
> notice.  They might not even blow you away. 
> They might even play along. 
> I think that THAT'S a good idea.  People interested in doing this- for art
> and NOT to Stop The Violence- should drop me a line. 
> jmg

    <nettime post deleted>

Nettime-bold mailing list