As a plan/solution/strategy, though, it doesn't scale well: as you add more players, the odds go up that one of them will be unstable or short-sighted enough to fire theirs off to (try to) achieve their goals.
Taken to the extreme, like the situation before the apocalypse in the latest edition of Gamma World, imagine if every Something Awful goon, /b/tard, USEnet kook and Facebooker had the Bomb (or its kinetic, memetic, biological, or nanotech equivalent).
That's where my three points come in and my overall premise that it's not about not playing the game, it's about making the other guy not want to play.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
momijizukamori and
Re: The only winning move is not to play.
Date: 22 Jun 2010 18:50 (UTC)Taken to the extreme, like the situation before the apocalypse in the latest edition of Gamma World, imagine if every Something Awful goon, /b/tard, USEnet kook and Facebooker had the Bomb (or its kinetic, memetic, biological, or nanotech equivalent).
Re: The only winning move is not to play.
Date: 23 Jun 2010 08:56 (UTC)That's where my three points come in and my overall premise that it's not about not playing the game, it's about making the other guy not want to play.