ForestBoard

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:

A very erudite reply!

One thing I'd comment on here is the idea that if someone is willing to pay for something, it must have some productive value.

That assumption is definitely a side effect of capitalist thinking, in my opinion, and can be used to justify a large number of morally worthless activities.

Let's take that button, and put it in a real world context. Say now that the button now creates trades on the stock exchange, and can be pressed once every hour, day or week. Say that the button presser is a churner who makes trades for the benefit of broker commission rather than because he believes the investor will profit. Or let's say that the button presser is at the top of a pyramid scheme, and each button press is a metaphor for selling the scheme to dupes.

Here we have economic activity that is legal but unethical, and which generates the movement of money. Does it still have productive value?

Or to put it another way, a bloke nicks lead off the church roof, makes £100, but does £10,000 of damage. From a personal profit point of view, he's engaging in (admittedly illegal) economic activity.

So the fact that an activity makes money does not automatically mean it has productive value.

Legality and productivity are distinct entities, which can both hold in several combination. Churner and Bloke are engaged in illegal and/or unethical activities**, but are so engaged precisely because they anticipate the activities to be productive nonetheless. Their judgement may prove incorrect (investments fail, the securities exchange authority comes knocking, or the local vicar just got his new shotgun license...) but the anticipation is productivity of some sort.

Plus, there appears to be a built in assumption in these examples that the productivity we should be concerned with occurs at the macroeconomic level. However, I'd suspect that most individual-level economic decision making considers mostly (if not exclusively) micro/individual level factors instead. The production of macroeconomic productivity en mass is not all that miraculous a result, since the vast majority of individuals end up choosing moral/legal ways of being productive (just as a vast majority of people aren't serial killers, etc). But yes, macroeconomic productivity is the, well, product, and not so much the opening premise.

At any rate, the question was whether I would push the button, so the primary criteria for evaluating that question is benefit to me. Thus, if I'm of relatively shaky morality, then immoral/illegal means are on the table. Unfortunately.

--

** We can argue about how trading in securities is or isn't ethical. For the moment, my retirement accounts are probably invested in things I'd find distasteful, however, they must be so if I am to secure even a chance at a sufficient return that will fund my dotage. Am I acting unethically?

Ownzone wrote:

I personally prefer the term "labor" (=the amount of physical, mental, and social effort used to produce goods and services in an economy) over "work".

I prefer "labor" over "work" because the former stresses the nature of that which is actually being traded. Labor is not just some widget that one pulls off a store shelf (although, this is largely how the owner class see it). Labor, by definition, is a direct product of my physical body; ergo, purchasing my labor means necessarily purchasing my person and my freedom. That is what is being traded when I am paid a wage by a member of the owning class.

Thus, why the owning class should not be surprised when the workers band together to get the best deal possible. Those are the stakes, and, frankly, it would be inexplicable if we didn't.

Meropis wrote:

18 $/hour is theoretical upper limit.
Machine with built-in clock could keep close to perfect timekeeping, but a human would probably struggle to keep it above 10-12 $/hour for any extended period of time.
Then the taxman would come (and we all have different taxmen)...

But for how long would you force yourself to do this debilitating task if rate was 1$/click? What about 10$/click? 100$/click?

I would click like a madman for $100 per because capitalism. Not a happy thought, but that is the way (most of) the world works.

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:

So here's a hypothetical situation, intended to spark some discussion on what "work" is and our perceptions of that.

Imagine that there's a button that is easy to press, and which can only be pressed once every two seconds. Aside from that, it does nothing useful.

Imagine now that someone -- probably in government, but maybe an eccentric private individual with a button kink -- is willing to pay you to press that button, at one US dollar per hundred presses, to no maximum amount. You have to manually press it though, you can't use a machine or automate the process.

In case you're doing the maths, that's effectively up to $18 an hour.

So here's the questions:

Would you press the button for money? If not, why not? If that's not enough money, is there a higher wage that you WOULD do the job for?
How many hours would you be willing to put in?
Would you try to subcontract? At what rate?

Now the harder questions:

Would you consider this to be "work"? Does the answer change if its a private individual paying you because he really enjoys watching you press buttons? Does the answer change if you're not being paid?
Would you consider this to be productive economic activity? That is, is this work good for the economy?
If you got paid $18 per hour regardless of your number of presses, but were told that your job was button pressing, would you still press the button? If so, how often?

Couldn’t I just press the button in my free time, like just absent mindedly tap away while I’m doing something else like driving to taco bell, smoking a blunt, or making love to my woman?

This is just a test to see how my new flag will look on an RMB post.

Has anyone seen the show Mindhunter on Netflix? It's the first show I've 'binge' watched in a while, and I was honestly fascinated with it through both seasons. If not, are there any other good shows worth watching on Netflix that someone can recommend to me?

Ownzone wrote:

Although a nice "accomplishment" in itself it says very little about our activity and the "eco-friendliness" of the region. Let us be honest here an overwhelming piece of this "growth" has been accomplished through what I call "zombie nations". Puppet nations that have a purpose for certain side aspects of NationStates but have little added value outside of that purpose and generally do not
propel a region forward in its functioning. Our average "eco-friendliness" has gone down from over 8.000 (will everyone resist the temptation to reply with a meme?) to a little over 3.500 now. Except for a little period around Z-day in 2018 that is probably the lowest average in the recorded history of our region. We don't even register in the top 1.500 of most "eco-friendly" regions anymore. Personally I would like to see more involved "eco-friendly" players entering our region instead of zombie puppet nations that artifically pump up our numbers or are just here because we are big and players not involved in our region want to keep a tab on what is happening over here. Nonetheless I believe Forest has done great things in creating awareness and I hope it somehow has a beneficial effect on the real world outside.

This!

I have been checking our Regional Poll • "Do you approve of the proposed amendment to Article 6 of the Forest Constitution?" and there are only 22 votes. Comparing this fact to 605 nations in the Forest it tells you something.

Luvas wrote:

I-I'm too young to see my disposable income drop below 20000.
there are only 98 WA nations in Forest.

Yeah, not too many WA nations and also only ~25 % of WA nations voting on a matter that involves our constitution. It's ok not to be a WA nation, but still lots of puppets, sleeping nations etc.

Turbeaux wrote:

I liked the first season but not the second. I recommend Ozark, Wild Wild Country, American Vandal, and How to Make a Murderer if that was up your alley.

Your new flag looks just fine on the RMB!

I use to watch How to Make A Murderer back when it first came out, but never watched past the first season. I’ll add it to my list! I haven’t even heard the other names you suggested, so I’ll do a little research into them.

Also, thanks! I like the transparent background.

Verdant Haven wrote:

My wife watched and enjoyed Mindhunter, and recommends Criminal Minds as a follow-on. Where Mindhunter follows the early days of the Behvioral Sciences Unit, Criminal Minds is a long running series set later in the unit's existence. It is different - Criminal Minds is entirely fictitious (it's a procedural drama), but she said it was an enjoyable follow up - especially its earlier seasons.

I’ve caught a few episodes here and there while just casually watching TV, but I never have watched in a coherent viewing of multiple episodes in a row. This will also be added to the list.

Love and Nature wrote:

Yeah, not too many WA nations and also only ~25 % of WA nations voting on a matter that involves our constitution. It's ok not to be a WA nation, but still lots of puppets, sleeping nations etc.

Joining the WA is voluntary and many have perfectly good reasons for not doing so. Plus, due to the way game defaults are set, you can get so many crap telegrams a day that it pushes everything else down. I think there should be a notification for region polls that doesn't require you to get a telegram like how new RMB posts are alerted to you.

Lousykitty wrote:

Joining the WA is voluntary and many have perfectly good reasons for not doing so. Plus, due to the way game defaults are set, you can get so many crap telegrams a day that it pushes everything else down. I think there should be a notification for region polls that doesn't require you to get a telegram like how new RMB posts are alerted to you.

Naah, you don't get too many telegrams. I only blocked out recruiting stuff and it's really quiet.

Love and Nature wrote:

Naah, you don't get too many telegrams. I only blocked out recruiting stuff and it's really quiet.

Yeah, you get more compliance telegrams for being in the WA than recruiting and lobbying stuff. I resigned from the WA with this nation just a few months after I first created it as I didn't like it affecting my stats against my consent. I keep it going with another nation though so that I can endorse Ransium and vote in WA only regional polls.

Sean fiobha wrote:

What exactly does an ambassador do?

We haven't yet solidified the "job description" officially, which is basically "duties as assigned," but the tasks one would expect are:

- Regularly visit your embassy region's page and keep current on any notable discussion in their RMB or forums
- Introduce yourself, and occasionally chime in to say hello, add a comment where it's appropriate, and respond to any inquiries about Forest
- Notify the region when Forest has an event that our allies are welcome to join, and notify Forest when the ally has an event we can join
- If something major goes down (positive, negative, or just especially interesting), pass along word to Forest's government so we are aware of what is going on.

Other minor tasks may come up, but generally speaking, it is a social role focused on maintaining pleasant relationships with our friends in other regions.

Sean fiobha wrote:

What exactly does an ambassador do?

Don't listen to Verdant Haven, we mostly host extravagant parties and abuse diplomatic immunity while we have our underlings handle the tasks that he listed. ;-P

Verdant Haven wrote:

~snip~ representing the formal re-establishment of embassy allies in new regions.~snip~

We really should get an embassy with Evergreen Conifer up and running. They are the legitimate successore to Conifer and have a stable government. I would be delighted to handle that ambassadorship using Forest Breeze as it appears that Seagull's ambassadorial puppet has CtEd.