I can understand where you are coming from but please, I am more worried about in-game retaliation than any moralistic licence. Don't harm the game by accident.Funny thing is, I'd have just changed my vote if I wasn't repeatedly and extensively pinged while unable to reply.
At present, it's being kept more or less because of the approach.
Guess what? The rest of the questers do not want you to be intentionally making the game interesting like this!It's not harming the game. It will likely make thing a touch more "interesting" in the "halping" kinda way, but it's not voting to go shoot up the PRT or commit suicide.
It should also be rather polarizing. If after the coming updates shenanigans you don't have 2/3rds vote to ban slaves then it's very clear you don't have sufficent backing for it.
The slave miner ban isn't about morality, it's about how it screws us over.
Besides, you would think that slavery would automatically be something that would be banned, wouldn't it?
I was the one who did the first ban vote and I didn't do that.Really? Because the ban was first started by a guy who was like "I'LL RELEASE THE SLAVES SO THEY WILL WORK WILLINGLY FOR US!" instead of say, TALKING to the guy that had that vote up in a respectful manner.
The rules didn't ban us using projections.
We cannot release the slaves nor kill them, they are there in the quantum state or whatever it is regardless. Every day they would return. So why not use them?
They aren't citizens of this world. They have no legal standing here.
And I'm changing my policy vote back because the anti-slavery crowd isn't getting the message. If you can't understand you did bad and be respectful, well, things happen.
I was the one who did the first ban vote and I didn't do that.
The fact that some voted for it because of moral reasons, does not mean that many do not see the use of our slaves as a liability.Really? Because the ban was first started by a guy who was like "I'LL RELEASE THE SLAVES SO THEY WILL WORK WILLINGLY FOR US!" instead of say, TALKING to the guy that had that vote up in a respectful manner.
The rules didn't ban us using projections.
We cannot release the slaves nor kill them, they are there in the quantum state or whatever it is regardless. Every day they would return. So why not use them?
They aren't citizens of this world. They have no legal standing here.
Guess what? The rest of the questers do not want you to be intentionally making the game interesting like this!
Just because people agree that slaves need to be banned doesn't mean they agree with the reason.
Bullshit. Seriously you guys are just being petty fucking dicks to half the fucking voters because one guy ruffled your fucking feathers.
We lack the ability to seed or control the spread of Tibet at this time.We really should've gone for a Tiberium Economy.
No worries about slave miners being useful in any capacity there, they'd have been forgotten about.
So because one or two people were being disrespectful, few people are now intentionally going against them even in the face of highly probably repercussions?I didn't want to use slave miners at all. But now it's where I have to stand with the people for it because the people against it have been utterly disrespectful and moved to try to teamkill and take options away instead of talking it out peacefully.
There was ONE slave miner vote before friendly fire was attempted. And it was doing a job. And Veekie himself would've been willing to change...
If people hadn't gone about things the COMPLETELY WRONG WAY.
Admit faults, change and do better and who knows what might happen? I heartily suggest it.
Because, preaching at me and others about how we're going to ruin everything? We know how that's going to end.
Normally riot-voters are actually attempting to improve things, not intentionally sabotaging the next turn!Mm. And I disagree with some choices that other quests make.
Welcome to questing, that's how things roll.
Welcome to Riot questing, where that's how things roll that much harder.
People vote for things and make decisions you dislike.
A 2/3 voting count could invalidate the votes you dislike. Looks like it's not happening this chapter (but very likely next chapter. If not, despite the silly things that will happen this chapter, clearly 2/3 don't agree with you.)
Deal.
It sure seems that way. Of course, maybe if any of you tried to actually talk to the people with the slave miner votes, request they change, politely, without yelling about how they're ruining everything?So because one or two people were being disrespectful, few people are now intentionally going against them even in the face of highly probably repercussions?
I had no idea what I was thinking when I made the non-voters against the vote. They should have just been counted as abstained.Well, seems the thing is moot now. Majority abstain or vote against it, so you probably win!
Probably thinking about people missing an important policy vote that started midway through voting not finding out about it until it's over or even jerks trying to push through a policy by starting it up when few people are paying attention.I had no idea what I was thinking when I made the non-voters against the vote.
It sure seems that way. Of course, maybe if any of you tried to actually talk to the people with the slave miner votes, request they change, politely, without yelling about how they're ruining everything?
Well, seems the thing is moot now. Majority abstain or vote against it, so you probably win!
Try to avoid preaching at people in the future to avoid such close calls. Spite is a powerful force.
Heh, so if I ask you, politely, to not go for Cyborg as a means to unleash Tiberium on the world you would comply?