I want to preface this that feelings are real, and are complicated.
Sometimes we know things without knowing them, which is why I agree so
whole-heartedly with snail and so desperately want em to earn a degree with
this thesis. That being said, there is a lot of feeling here in this thesis.
Despite eir simple claim to relative contextlessness, and there being no
common thread or theme, there are definitely two to be found: the
distinction between silly and serious, and the distinction between past and
present, with a focus on the past. Most of the messages are from 2008, with
a majority being "silly". What I think this thesis is trying to do is point
out how Agora, at least in the past, was a game, and as it has aged, it has
lost some of that special touch.
Most of the silliness comes from Ivan Hope and ehird in 2008. However, we
can contrast this to the mostly seriousness of omd's message, the serious
but indulging nature of ais523's message, the duality of R.Lee's message,
and the serious but silly undertones of Iammers message. With regard to
chronology of the work, the more serious messages come after the silly ones.
Additionally, this art was made in the current time period: there has been
a relative seriousness and lull since the repeal of sets and boatloads: We
see artifacts of this in the ruleset that taunt the past: For example, The
Fountain and The Parade both exist as monuments of the past, enacted by
dictators/oligarchs during less secure times, wherein those same
dictators/oligarchs maintain the status quo and claim democracy (at least
in my opinion) to keep the monuments standing. I would also like to
particularly note that snail and I were not players at the time these rules
were enacted, and have not otherwise been given the historical context for
those rules.
(Additionally, per my own recent analysis, I estimate Voting Strength is
only used 10% of the time to influence an otherwise democratic decision. It
remains to be seen the culprits of that 10%, but this is beside the point).
Overall, the work is an advocacy for a return to silliness. As a persuasive
work, it naturally omits details that would advocate for seriousness, such
as messages that are purely serious. It may also find such messages
unnecessary, as the social context provided by the current gameplay and
ruleset may be sufficient. Overall, to upgrade this to a Bachelor's degree,
I would like to see messages that contrast with these two themes: both
serious and recent messages, which would really highlight how Agoran
culture has changed.
Finally, a summary of the messages in my own words:
{
Ivan Hope CXXVII
May 18th, 2008
A definitively silly action to point out a serious flaw.
Ivan Hope CXXVII
later May 18th, 2008
A serious and silly action in a silly context.
November 4th, 2008
ehird
A definitively serious contract under the silly terms of the time.
V.J Rada
8 Sep 2017
A serious commentary on how everything is "broken" because of language not
being specific enough in the context of super specific language, which uses
silly language after identifying the problems.
Ivan Hope CXXVII
May 3rd, 2008
A serious and silly internomic contract dealing also with the player
shenanigans of the time.
ehird
A purposely silly apology that potentially and purposely doesn't fulfill
apology requirements of the time
Jun 7, 2008
& the CFJ on whether the silly apology met the criteria
ais523
Jun 7, 2008
omd
Nov 13, 2011
A serious fix to a serious problem
ehird
Sep 24, 2008
playerhood begins falling apart and going wrong
ehird
Jan 26, 2009
A silly CFJ as a response to a silly fight. A snapshot of a silly drama.
Iammars
Apr 10, 2008
Serious stuff happening despite player shenanigans occurring, with silly
commentary alongside it.
}
--
4ˢᵗ
Uncertified Bad Idea Generator
