Interactive Composer Game (Voting Thread)

[Wanderer]

A dissent from a non-voter.  It's just as well you don't play the game - game spirit seems to elude you.  Winning while having fun is what it's all about.

"Game spirit" does not consist only by what you deem to be fun. Some people find manipulation of the sort you seem to imply distasteful or undesirable and one can be strategic without stooping to reality-TV tactics. And people still can just play for fun, without the need to "win". 

Your preference only makes sense for polls.

False. It's just that my preference does not need to be the same as your preference.

Anti-gamers like to cast shade, but it's much better to cast votes.

Is this a quote from William McGonagall?

[Baron Scarpia]

"Game spirit" does not consist only by what you deem to be fun. Some people find manipulation of the sort you seem to imply distasteful or undesirable and one can be strategic without stooping to reality-TV tactics. And people still can just play for fun, without the need to "win". 

False. It's just that my preference does not need to be the same as your preference.

Is this a quote from William McGonagall?

It is a game whose objective is to advance your favorite composer. The "manipulation" which you find "distasteful" is the very essence of a "game," choosing your moves with a view to how they interact the likely response of other participants. By your definition, if I was playing checkers it would be "manipulative" to do anything but move my pieces uniformly forward without regard to moves of the other player.

[Sammy]

Is this a quote from William McGonagall?

No, it's a quote from Sammy Satz.  Why don't you start up your own games with your own rules?  I'll even participate in it without criticizing your mode of operation.

[Wanderer]

It is a game whose objective is to advance your favorite composer. The "manipulation" which you find "distasteful" is the very essence of a "game," choosing your moves with a view to how they interact the likely response of other participants. By your definition, if I was playing checkers it would be "manipulative" to do anything but move my pieces uniformly forward without regard to moves of the other player.

It's one thing being strategic and another one being manipulative. It's the attitude of some "players" that I find disagreeable, not the concept of the "game" itself which, as I mentioned, can be fun in its own way - and without any need to stoop to the level of reality-TV tactics. You keep your view and I'm keeping mine. And, as far as I'm concerned, analogies with actual games do not apply here.

[Wanderer]

No, it's a quote from Sammy Satz.  Why don't you start up your own games with your own rules?  I'll even participate in it without criticizing your mode of operation.

I hope you don't take it personally. Aren't we all here to have fun?

[Baron Scarpia]

It's one thing being strategic and another one being manipulative. It's the attitude of some "players" that I find disagreeable, not the concept of the "game" itself which, as I mentioned, can be fun in its own way - and without any need to stoop to the level of reality-TV tactics. You keep your view and I'm keeping mine. And, as far as I'm concerned, analogies with actual games do not apply here.

As I understand it, it is an actual game.

[Wanderer]

As I understand it, it is an actual game.

Is it, though? 

[Sammy]

I hope you don't take it personally. Aren't we all here to have fun?

I think you're here to do a little derailing of the game.  I'm done conversing with you.

[Wanderer]

I think you're here to do a little derailing of the game.

Fake news! An exchange of opinions after the "game" has ended is most certainly not a "derailment".