@SoggyShorts, I could agree but would prefer to require the trades to 2* or 3* to have that option. Just dont want to see the parasites try to take advantage of it
The word "parasite" is a moral judgment of another player. You, no doubt, have your own standard of fairness but to label another player a parasite is, I believe, problematic in itself. Here's my reasoning.
The operative word in this discussion is "fair." Since the standard of "fair," is either what each individual thinks is fair -- a reflection of their current assessment of the value of the trade -- or a measure provided by the trading system (the "authorities.)" If the "authorities" have provided a system of "fairness," it has to be based upon something or it is arbitrary. In either case though, that system will not easily respond to the psychological and dynamic measures of those using the trading system. It will, therefore, be often out of alignment with the perceived value of the various items being traded. In other words, the measure of "fair" will not reflect the sense of "fair" of the players at the time.
The problem is then judgement. When we declare a trade to be "unfair," we are making a moral judgment. We are declaring one player has violated a standard of fairness and thus is not to be considered a "good and blameless person." We might even call them a "parasite." At the same time we imply that the one taking the trade is either ignorant or being taken advantage of, making that person the "victim."
Now of course, there may be limits. Sometimes a system needs a "governor." In this game one method is the wholesaler. The wholesaler provides a limit to the market by setting how much a limited amount of goods will cost. If a good were to become more expensive to purchase from other players than the wholesaler, people would purchase from the wholesaler. But, so far, I've never seen that happen. This puts an effective maximum price on goods.
Another limiter is the ratios allowed by the system. You can't post more than an 8 to one trade. This sets an effective limit on values. Within these ranges the price of items can fluctuate.
But here's the thing. The star system is supposed to tell you what's "fair," but it's a limited measure of fairness. Why is that? Because it uses the production costs alone. In other words, by using the production cost of each good. And if value were determined strictly by cost of production that would be fair. But that's not the case. Trades may be done by the players based upon an assumption that the cost of production is the only or at least sufficient basis of determining the fairness of a trade, but other things are also part of the valuation the players make. Things like an over supply or a shortage. Things like what is going on in the individual traders situation. The star system is not dynamic and does not respond to changing conditions and thus, many times is not a good measure of if the trade is fair or not. It does not take into account the sense of value of the player in his/her particular situation at the time. It does not take into account the fluctuations in supply/demand. And those items are
to the player sometimes more important than the production costs. And since it's the player making the trade, the star system may not reflect the players evaluation of the fairness of the trade.
From this we note several things: First, since the star system does not participate in the trade itself, it is unfair to judge the trade's value by that system. Only those making the trade can decide if the trade is fair to them or not. Second, imposing moral standards and judging people to be "parasites" because you would never make such a trade, is reaching too far in our evaluations. We can say, honestly, we would not have made that trade, but that's about as far as we can go. And if we were to evaluate the trade based upon all the conditions of the trade -- including the circumstances, desires, and goals of the ones making the trade, we might find that we would have made the trade! And finally, if the reasoning of this is correct, perhaps we ought to go a step farther and stop using social pressure and rules to enforce what are, essentially, our own, personal, reactions to trades we consider "unfair."
AJ
Dear forum visitor,
It looks as though you have not registered for a forum account, or are not signed in. In order to participate in current discussions or create new threads, you will need to register for a forum account by clicking on the link below.
