Re: The Fifth Element. There will always be confusion.

Subject:

Comments:: Homatoboggan is easy enough (Dynamite is rock with a finger sticking out). Homatoboggan is like the action of paper going through a photocopier. (Pictures@ cakeinmilk.com) : For all its pointlessness, it's been an interesting and amusing debate. I have lived with Jim for most of my life, and so I know the nature of these fascinating arguments. Trust me, you'd stop talking about The Osbornes if you put it on TV. : : This is without question one of the most futile discussions I've witnessed in a while. What began as a discussion of RPS has spun into a myriad smaller discussions about war, sequels, technology, and the female physique. : : The concept of an RPS relative with five elements has appeared more than once over the years on this Bull Board, taking one of two forms: : : 1) In the first variant, the basic RPS triad is left intact, although the throw names vary from time to time (they occasionally get more violent), and two new throws are added. One defeats all three of the RPS triad. The other defeats only the super-throw. : : 2) The second variant sketches out like a five-pointed star. Each throw wins against two others, loses to two others, and ties only with itself. : : In the past the consensus has been that these games are interesting to study and can even provide insight into RPS strategy, but they are not, fundamentally, the same as RPS, despite the similarities. : : Now, let me attempt to address some of the other miscellany from this discussion. : : Both sides have carelessly tossed the word "progress" around, and it's clear to me that the sides do not quite agree on its definition. On the one hand, there is the notion that all new things are progress, in that they move the state of the world forward. On the other hand, the objective is to move toward a particular goal, and only that which moves in the proper direction is truly "progress". : : Both definitions are completely valid. The actual issue in debate (which is still tangential to the actual discussion) is whether all innovation and development is worthwhile. Breast implants, for instance, contribute to psychological attitudes that can be destructive to women. Nevertheless, a great many women elect to acquire them. Does the demand justify the product? Economically, yes, but some of us believe in a higher good than economics. Just because someone wants a thing does not make it good to acquire it. Most people desire fabulous wealth, but the few individuals I have known to acquire it have not been improved by it. : : Another fairly obvious barricade in this conversation is the notion of "improvment". On the side of the RPS purist, RPS is perfect and any alteration diminishes it. On the other side, more is better, pure and simple. : : Again, both points are not without their merit. The addition or alteration of rules to a game frequently refreshes interest in it for the seasoned player. However, it also typically makes the game more difficult for the beginner. : : RPS has a great many things going for it. It is extremely simple to learn. It includes only the baseline minimum necessary to make decisions based entirely on strategy and skill. The hand positions are simple and everyone can form them. The rules are easy to learn and understand (although we continually have to explain why paper beats rock). Most importantly, the game has been around since humans have had hands, which means that it is universal. It also means that psychological associations have formed with the throws, making rock "aggressive" and paper "subtle". : : Each of those points in favor of RPS becomes a potential critique of a five-element cousin. More throws means more to learn. Everyone will have to learn the game before it becomes widespread enough for worldwide competitions to form. In the past, five-element-style games have : : used hand positions that were either obscure, or difficult for some people to form. The rules explaining which throws beat which others were, at times, inscrutible. The student would be forced to memorize a list of throws and their attributes, whereas in RPS that knowledge is so ingrained it's almost genetic. : : You may have noticed that these similar variants that have been brought to our attention in the past received somewhat more calm and intelligent responses than this one. The explanation for that is simple: : : From the beginning of this conversation you have been arrogant and insulting. Your first post called Americans "fools". You proceeded to declare yourselves "Prophets" and "Gods" in two consecutive sentences, call the RPS Society "dogs", slander the Catholic faith, and so forth. : : You have entered the society of intelligent and resonable people, who quite appropriately expect to be addressed with basic courtesy and respect. As such, I am surprised that my colleagues have had the good grace to respond to your bluster at all. That they responded with some emotion is to be expected. : : However, I'd like to offer you the opportunity to start fresh. Please, if you would, describe the hand positions you use and the rationale behind which throws win and lose in what circumstances. Presumably you've played this game during development. What results have you had? : : I yield you the forum. Try discussing your game with some of the aforementioned respect and courtesy and I promise, on behalf of my colleagues, that you'll get more of the "constructive criticism" you requested than just merely "homotoboggan is a stupid name" (personally, I thought it was quite amusing). : : Arbiter : : Zone Captain, Media Brigade : : "Scissors for scissors' sake."

Optional Link URL:
Link Title: