[Forgive me, this is a temporary placeholder, I'm still dealing with how to present this post. It was a lengthy musing on the effects of being able to trade loot but it appears to have come off as spurious justification for previous behaviour, which was never the intention.]
26 comments to It felt so wrong, it felt so right… |
 |
|
Copyright © 2010 Righteous Orbs - All Rights Reserved |
|
I contemplated several comments I started and deleted on the other post.
It’s just not so easy as some black and white thinkers would like it to be to see ‘right’ and ‘wrong.’ Ironically, everyone or nearly everyone agreed your loot incident the other day was ‘wrong,’ – at issue was how evil Tam was, and what should be done about it.
Taking the chocolates back and/or paying for them later is something very few people would do, even if they agree it’s ‘wrong’ not to do so.
At any rate, that’s the point of moral dilemnas a la Kohlberg – get us thinking about the nuances of ethics, why we do what we do, and should we in fact make different choices next time round. Things aren’t really black and white in real life very often. If we’re honest with ourselves, we can hopefully learn from life, our mistakes, and others, and become better people.
Shoot, just the other day I had a situation with a patient that I reviewed with my resident and the resident said something to me that convinced me she had it right, and I wrong despite my earlier rationale, and I’ve decided to change.
In wow, and in life, this is the journey we’re on!
Thanks for sharing Tam.
I’m having to re-work this post because it apparently looks like “justification” for the previous post, which was assuredly not the intent. I thought it was intellectually interesting, I suspect I was wrong
The mage was cheated. Not the system. You are not morally off the hook here.
I’m pretty sure it still bothers you, thus the wall of text trying to get that bad taste out of your mouth.
I’m pretty sure the best solution involves not cheating anything or anyone.
I know, talk’s cheap. But that’s my 2p worth.
Go ahead, shoot me.
Of course I won’t shoot you. I thought my opinion on that particular example was clear in my previous post (yes, we did a bad thing and I feel bad). It hadn’t occurred to me that this post – which was about the ramifications of loot trading – would appear as though I was attempting to morally justify or excuse what happened. In which case I will re-write it before re-posting, if that’s okay with you.
Heh, I didn’t think you would but I like to cover my bases JUST IN CASE
As for the rewrite – I guess that might be good since it just IMMEDIATELY jumped out at me that way. It seemed (to me) that the thrill of “cheating the system” was getting conflated with the incident in some odd way that somehow make it sting a little less (which is a natural thing, but still.)
Thanks for not shooting me
I said I wouldn’t shoot you, I said nothing about drowning, bludgeoning, setting on fire…
I’ve re-written the post in a rather less rhetorical manner which, I hope, has solved the issues and made it less like me celebrating cheating some mage out of a pair of slippers. Also I suspect it’s more focussed and generally better now so, err, thanks for that
And since you posed some dilemnas, I’ll try my thoughts (and sorry you had to react to the trolls with moderation. Hopefully they’ll go away). You have a few dilemnas here, and I’m sure in posing them, you’ll get a few differing opinions
Here’s my thoughts.
1)
Yes. But only if no one else needed it either. (this is actually much more complex depending on who rolled, what the item is, and so on). But NO, not if someone else needed it – which I think was the real question.
2)
Yes. If you genuinely needed it and intended to use it, but you got a better offer, you are allowed to change your mind. If you rolled just to sell it, I don’t think that’s ok, unless 1) is true above, and someone else who would have had a higher roll isn’t willing to buy it (since personally I’d say they have a ‘right’ to buy if first heh).
See, this is where ep/gp or SK or some system is much better. You want to spend your points on loot you won’t use? Fine, you’ll lose your place in line for the next item. In need vs greed pugs, at least the common rule of ‘only one item’ needed unless no one else needs is a good rule – and yes, it should be explicit.
3)
Absolutely – if no one else needed it to actually use, and the seller met #1 above.
4)
Yes – as long as they’re the only other one rolling (which this scenario implies). Happens fairly often. I do think intention plays a role. If you weren’t aware it was a bigger upgrade when you rolled, your intentions were good. It’s always fine to roll on upgrades for yourself. If it turns out you’re willing to sacrifice personal gain for a bigger gain for others – more power to you.
5)
Gray. I’d say it’s okay – as in, not likely soul-damning, but a better way to handle it would be to say “hey guys, I realized both of you need this more. Roll again.” Or, you could just give it to the next highest roller on the first roll. Of course, in my mind, keeping it is just fine too.
6)
Keeping it is ok. Giving it to your pal… okay, since you won it. You have the right to give it away. However, I’d still recommend my previous suggestion. Most of these do also depend on what your intentions were when you rolled. Did you intend to keep the loot, but then realized it was better for someone else? If you rolled knowing the fact it was an upgrade for you ‘covered’ the legitimacy of your roll but you intended from the start to give it away, I have a problem with that.
7)
If you intend to give it away, I don’t think it’s right.
I feel as guilty as hell that you put all this effort in and I removed the post. But, as I say, it’s back now and I actually found your answers really illuminating. When I first wrote the dilemmas I hadn’t really decided what I thought and, well, I suppose there comes a point somewhere between 5 and 7 where throwing one’s hands in the air and going “shit this is complicated” seems to be the only possible answer. But if that wasn’t the case they wouldn’t be dilemmas.
As I said above, INTENT seems to be the keyword but then I think perhaps it’s more a distinction between what guilds and individuals choose to do is fine *as long as it doesn’t* negatively impinge on the rights of other individuals in the group.
Whatever that means =P
Heh, and all my work on responses…
I didn’t read it the way Grimm did, since you exposed yourself to more criticism. After all, I thought you indeed admitted to more wrongdoing which was clearly ‘wrong.’
Anyway, I’d like to at elast see your dilemnas again, but if not, feel free to delete my responses since they’re no longer pertinent.
No wai! I really liked reading your responses – I think they may have greatly informed my own (I included mine in the post re-write so it didn’t look like The Mighty Tamarind Seeks Your Opinion But Is Too Lazy To Give His Own). But then as I was writing them the first time, I hadn’t really worked out what I thought about then and I think you found the key here – INTENT.
I read the post before you removed it, and I thought you explained it all quite well.
Before the change to the way loot was handed out, it FELT dirty and nasty and mean to roll on something if you weren’t intending to use it. I mean, sure, you could come up with ways to justify it, but there was no denying the permanence and complete asshattery of what you were doing.
But the situation you speak of is different, because when it is happening, it doesn’t FEEL naughty. It isn’t this tangible moment of “oh my, this is definitely the wrong thing to do”.
Fulguralis and I are emailing back and forth talking about how relevant this topic is to lots of drama we had over the summer based on the same topic – and most of the problems we had were with people who were passing loot to others to HELP them, not to screw them over. It was usually one of those things where people rolled for something, and then realized it would better serve another raider.
I think what people may be missing is that you aren’t arguing that it’s okay to do what was done… but rather that the philosophy on looting has changed with the passable BoPs because it’s not as obvious now as before about when it’s wrong, since things are so much more flexible.
Good people can do questionable things and still be Good People – and the loot change has allowed Good people to do Questionable things with very Good Intentions, whereas before the loot change that was not as much of an issue.
I also got your unedited post through the feed reader (damn you google) and I think Miss Medicina’s nailed it. The problem with the new loot system is the shades of gray that it introduced… Not to say that certain behaviors are NOT sneaky and wrong. It’s sneaky and wrong for me to roll on tank plate and pass it to my personal Tankadin. Rolling on an item just to cheat another player out of it is sneaky and wrong as well. But some of the scenarios you just mentioned… well are they? I don’t really know.
I think the worst part of the solutions is that a lot of times to make a morality-based call on the sneakywrongness of an action, you have to factor in intent. And while I’m willing to trust you a fair way, just given my insights into your character from this blog, there’s many players I’m NOT willing to trust to roll with the right intent. When intent enters a mix that was formerly pretty black and white (you need it, you roll, you win, you get), you get problems.
And to complicate matters, having the right intent sometimes produces the wrong action. Helping a guildie gear up is a great intention, cheating a pug out of their loot to help a guildie gear up is a bad result. But it’s easy to lose sight of the pug when faced with your happy guildie and the warm glowy feeling you get from knowing you made their day. When you have to balance helping with fairness, it’s far easier to accidentally sway toward the people you already know than to remember that the person behind the pug is as real as you are, and likely to be hurt.
It’s tricky stuff.
I approve of the use of the word spurious, which is about all I can comment on until the post is released in full. . .
Yes, I’m a big fan of spurious… it’s one of those words I try to use lots. But the less-spurious version is now live. At least I hope it’s less spurious…
Eh…just go read my post where I trademarked your terms of Sissy Robe and WoWcock to you! I was just so excited to figure out that little “tm” symbol that I posted it anywhere and everywhere that I could!
And…it’s sorta, kinda, a fail pug story? Only…we didn’t fail. Uh.
I didn’t get a chance to read the post before it was gone
So I have no words of wisdom or advice to offer at this time. But I do reserve my right to have opinions when I get to see the post!
Wooo! I have trademarks
I have since sorted the post, I think, I hope…it’s kind of a wall of text now but then I’ve never been renowned for brevity. Like most things, I suspect it’s done better for being a second draft… at least I hope so.
Arrrgh imma intrigued!!
Feel like I missed out
I think I’ve got it fixed … although now I’m afraid everyone is going to be horribly disappointed =P
Oh arg, I wanted to link to this one and now it’s gone.
fwiw, I thought that was a great post, Tam. You explained your viewpoint very clearly, and whether or not what you did was right, it was very understandable and I bet loads of other people are thinking along those lines too. Also, if you do a PUG with two or more members of a guild, you will always be wondering if they have some private agreement about loot.
Sorry for dancing the hokey-cokey with blog posts. I generally try not to (publish and be damned and all that) but I think I managed to get the post more focused actually. It’s now an enormous wall of text but it was kind of like that anyway….
Well, I actually linked to this post which is no longer a post /fail.
In other news, I actually enjoyed this one just as well if not more than the first part since you’d time to reflect — it didn’t read as a ‘justification’ in my opinion.
Wooteth! I think I’ve got it sorted now anyway – and I think I prefer the second version. Or maybe it’s worse. But anyway. Loot in being controversial topic shocker
Drat… a busy day at work prevented my reading this… :-/
*le sigh*
I *think* I’ve got it sorted and re-posted. Debate ahoy!
[...] Okay, let’s see if I can get this sorted. Honestly, who’d have thought you could have third party loot drama. You can find all the interesting comments to my first attempt to write this post here. [...]
[...] at Righteous Orbs discusses the seedy dark-side of loot trading in his two part post (part one, part two) — covering the phenemonen of loot trades, why we do it, when it’s appropriate, and how [...]