Remove ads

Paths of Civilization

Reader mode
Kiba said:
I don't think that is what we did. Probably nothing came of it, law of regression to the mean and all.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The exact quote was "There were even a few who were whispering that perhaps they should see to breeding her like a sacred cow or war horse" and we did end up picking the option that corresponded to that. If nothing came of it, that's fine, but I wanted to double check.
 
SeptimusMagisto said:
The exact quote was "There were even a few who were whispering that perhaps they should see to breeding her like a sacred cow or war horse" and we did end up picking the option that corresponded to that. If nothing came of it, that's fine, but I wanted to double check.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's unlikely to have happened, because the hero king thought it was immoral to think of her that way.
 
Umi-san said:
as in, cannot afford the care or cannot afford them to not be working or cannot afford to spend money to send them to the hospice?
By definition, in any place where the population is dense enough for there to be a slum 0 of these are true.
We have a socialist economy where people are fed and medical treatment is, afaik, free and relatively widespread: 1 & 2 are not applicable. 3 is not applicable because travel within the city, even on foot, won't take the week+ that prevented farmers from sending their kids.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If there are families who cannot afford to send their homosexuals to the temples to become a high status priest...there are going to be families who cannot afford to send the guy who sees demons crawling everywhere to a hospice.

Hospices are necessarily urban due to their dependency on elite labor to maintain, but those in rural areas cannot afford to send people to them, while the urban poor do not have the connections or knowledge to properly identify that there IS a problem and that they should send people with problems to hospices(or, for the matter, that the guy with a problem has any friends or family who can afford to lose the coins earned from his menial labors).
 
veekie said:
Hospices are necessarily urban due to their dependency on elite labor to maintain, but those in rural areas cannot afford to send people to them, while the urban poor do not have the connections or knowledge to properly identify that there IS a problem and that they should send people with problems to hospices(or, for the matter, that the guy with a problem has any friends or family who can afford to lose the coins earned from his menial labors).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We weren't talking about urban hospices being impacted by non-urban residents, so non-urban non-elites don't matter.
 
Umi-san said:
We weren't talking about urban hospices being impacted by non-urban residents, so non-urban non-elites don't matter.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Which still doesn't change that the urban poor are very unlikely to want to take advantage of hospices, between a combination of lack of trust in the government/involvement in petty crime and poverty making it too costly in terms of lost income to commit their relatives. Furthermore, these are also often a lot of refugees who don't know and don't believe in such facilities.
If they can lift a barrel, they can work.
So what if they don't understand a word?

Keeping in mind our hospices have to check for people who are just shirking, and that it is more likely for the poor to be identified as lazy rather than mentally ill(culture wise, they are supposed to be poor because they aren't industrious and talented enough, though in reality, people are more likely to take the patrician's child at their word than the unconnected hobo).

As such, while our poor have better standards of living than most of our neighbors, and even the half-exiles have some guaranteed rights(deliberate starvation is culturally the worst crime)...don't overrate our living standards
 
Last edited:
veekie said:
Which still doesn't change that the urban poor are very unlikely to want to take advantage of hospices, between a combination of lack of trust in the government/involvement in petty crime and poverty making it too costly in terms of lost income to commit their relatives. Furthermore, these are also often a lot of refugees who don't know and don't believe in such facilities.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Our cities are the most responsible areas with the least amount of abuse toward half-exiles and refugees.
I don't see why involvement in petty crime would be a factor.
Our government is socialist, food is subsidized; lost income in an urban city where appeals to government are relatively easier due to easy access to government officials is not an issue.

If the urban poor live near hospices because hospices are near the poor because it's cheaper/less unsightly, as you had previously stated might be the case, there will be less of a barrier for the poor to access the hospices.
If the urban poor do not live near hospices it would be because hospices are founded by the wealthy who only build in rich areas or gentrify the location. In such a case access to the hospice would have been a barrier to the poor. Except for the fact that half-exiles serve as attendants, are poor/friends with the poor, and are thus more likely to be comfortable with using the hospice's provided services and encouraging their friends to do the same.
 
Last edited:
Chess isn't in the actual olympics, but there is a league that is recognized by the International Olympic Commission, so it is sort of. But yeah, probably a little early, it was never in the old olympics (which actually predated chess, I think.)
 
ExNihilo said:
Chess isn't in the actual olympics, but there is a league that is recognized by the International Olympic Commission, so it is sort of. But yeah, probably a little early, it was never in the old olympics (which actually predated chess, I think.)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Cool!

Well since your Senet omake was made into a Sidestory and thus given some legitimacy I would expect there to be some amount of board games in our society and thus what might be happening is that board games are a popular thing to do as spectators to the Lancosh for all the higher nobility while they wheel and deal.
 
I'll admit-it started as Metaphor Chess (a game of chess where the moves represented current events etc), but then I realized chess hadn't been invented yet, and one rabbit hole later I resurfaced with Senet.
 
ExNihilo said:
I'll admit-it started as Metaphor Chess (a game of chess where the moves represented current events etc), but then I realized chess hadn't been invented yet, and one rabbit hole later I resurfaced with Senet.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Neat.

Funny how we have to pause and then realize "oh wait that thing hasn't been invented yet" rather often. :V



In other news I've been thinking about what may be happening over in Not!China based on where we are in the real life timeline. Considering AN's formula of 4000 BCE + 15/threadmark we are about in 1930 BCE. In real life the mysterious time of the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors which is supposed to exist according to traditional Chinese history would have ended about a century ago now and the unconfirmed Xia Dynasty would be in full swing with a hypothetical land area like this:



By my admittedly poor flailing on Google Earth I figure that this area was about 565 km across.

Our core is about 226 km across. There is a lot of different geography in play between the two, with the Xia being a more extended river valley people while we are more crescent shaped. This puts a lot of fuzziness into these measures.

Anyway my main point is that we are now around the time of Ancient Chinese History, and we have existed for two thousand years as a mostly contiguous polity up to this point. That's kinda mind boggling to me. We are old.
 
Last edited:
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top