Dinner Analogy (Allan's topic cont'd)

Let us continue Allan’s topic, “Limit Slow Players”. To be fair, let us modify my previous dinner analogy slightly.

A group of friends and Tim Shih went to an All-You-Can-Eat restaurant for dinner. Hence the rule of the restaurant “All You Can Eat” is equivalent to the rule of LG, “You can play as many games as you wish, 36 hours per move”.

These friends also agreed, prior to the dinner, that they would go to watch a video tape of soccer game afterwards, although the time of starting the tape watching was not pre-determined. It could be 8pm, or 10:30 pm. But most of the friends looked forward to this activity. Hence, tape watching is equivalent to the next championship tournament at LG.

At the dinner table, Tim started hoarding 6 T-bone steaks, 5 pork chops, and 4 chicken legs. When most of the friends had finished their meals, Tim still took his dear time to chew his food. This hoarding is equivalent to players playing > 100 games.

In the subsequent postings, let me attempt to continue to use this analogy to respond to Ronald's, Marius', and na_wspak's messages. :)

First, let us address Ronald's message.

Is it nice for the friends to openly discuss Tim's behavior at the dinner table?

I think so. Tim's feelings may be hurt, but on the other hand, Tim may suddenly realize that his behavior is self-centered, and decide to change thereafter. So the discussion led to short pain but long gain for him.

What are the other alternatives? Let us see.

(a) to discuss BEHIND his back?

(b) to keep quiet, but harbor impatient feelings in their

hearts?

(c) to keep quiet, pretend that nothing has happened, and

harbor absolutely NO impatient feelings in their

hearts?

IMO, (a) and (b) are not better than discussing openly to Tim's face. For (c), even if nobody did mind, why should Tim alone single-handedly make the majority of the group wait for him?

Next, let us address Marius' message:

It is better to set up clear and specific rules.

OK, Tim started to tap the table leg with his foot. Customers at the same table were annoyed, and reported to the manager. The manager quickly came out and posted a sign, "Please do not tap table legs with your feet".

Seeing the rule established, Tim stopped. But he started to hum "Amazing Grace", loud enough for others to hear. His broken voice annoyed customers again. And the manager quickly posted another sign, "Do not sing at this premises, please."

Tim, however, remained indignant. He further challenged the sign by asking,

"Beyond how many decibels am I not allowed to sing? The sign is not sufficiently clear and specific to me."

The story obviously can go on and on. This little example suggests that human beings simply are UNable to cover all the details by rules/laws, if not impossible.

Finally, let us address na_wspak's message:

If we do not like these players' behavior, play at other sites.

Hypothetically, na_wspak, :) let us say that you have a girl friend who takes 3 hours to wash her hair. Will you then try to find other gfs, simply because you do not like this possible shortcoming of hers?

We ought to realize that nobody is perfect on earth, and that nothing is perfect on earth. We ourselves are not perfect, hoarding players are not perfect, and neither is LG.

But facing the truth, and trying to improve is the key to quality life for everybody. :)

well if that was the only disadvantage of that girl id definitely stay with her and wouldnt even say a word not to offense her:P

For Seinfeld or "George", it might be reason enough to break up. :-)

There's a flaw in your analogy: No one looks forward to watching a taped football match. Taping a football match sounds like an idea from my girlfriend when she wants to see something on the other channel while I'm watching football! Ridiculous!! :-)

Let me suggest a slightly different analogy:

A group of friends are watching a video tape of a soccer game. Prior to starting the tape, they agreed that they would go to an All-You-Can-Eat restaurant once they had watched the tape.

Hence the length of the tape is equivalent to the rule of LG, "You can play as many games as you wish, 36 hours per move." Furthermore, eating at the restaurant is equivalent to the next championship tournament at LG.

One of the friends is bored by the game, and fast-forwards through the tape, so that he can eat sooner. Despite his friends' annoyance at this, he feels that he is justified, because his desire for speed is more important than their wish to take their time.

OK, T. D. and Klaashaas, we will modify the tape of a soccer tournament to that of a movie, entitled, "Nothing, Absolutely Nothing". :) Did not realize that American stuff, good or bad, has diffused so deeply into Norwegian market.

Hi, BuilderQ, your analogy almost received an A+ in my book, :) except that this impatient friend did not really get engaged in any actions, such as fast forwarding the tape. He merely brought the discussions up among the friends.

And also, for your analogy to be valid, the majority of the LG tournament games must be still ongoing. However, it is not the case. The fact is that, the majority of the games have been finished.

In my original analogy, Tim could hoard as much as he wanted if he managed to finish his food in time in accordance with the majority's pace. Then nobody would have complained.

The two key elements "hoarding" and "the majority rules" did not exist in your analogy. Nonetheless, your analogy is impressive. Thank you. :)

Oh, you'd be surprised. In recent years they have even tried to introduce Valentines' day here (only to make money from suckers, of course). Luckily, my girlfriend is sensible and lets me get away with not "celebrating" it.

There is possible to make rules which are more specific, in order to specify all possibilities (like you would do in a tax law), or you could create more general ruels, which would apply better to Tim's case.

Typical rules are "no rude language", "no racistic/sexist remarks", etc., and it is up to a manager ("referee" or "judge", if you will) to decide when someone breaks these rules. This is how the rules are handled at OKBridge, where I play bridge online.

I'm a great fan of explicit rules as opposed to diffuse codes or assumed acceptable behavior. I simply refuse to take any hint - I will have everything told to me explicitely. Again, it's my personal opinion, but it is by no means impossible - or even difficult - to impose such rules rather than a "common ethical code", which, when push comes to show, is not so common after all...

Marius

bump