> I *think* you are assuming that both sides are friendly. If one side is > a person, or group of people, then this is definitely not guaranteed. > I'll grant all your points if both sides are friendly, and each knows > the other to be friendly. Otherwise I think things get messier. So > objective measures and tests are desireable.
Most of the stuff in the post that you were replying to *did* assume that both sides are *declared* Friendly. I'm trying to set it up so it is OBVIOUS to any UnFriendly entity that *declaring* Friendliness without actually being Friendly and then being declared UnFriendly has enough automatic penalties to offset any advantages such that it will almost *NEVER* be worthwhile (i.e. Friendliness has a *serious* vested interest in ensuring that declarations of Friendliness are genuine. It will seriously encourage and attempt the (hopefully restrained but not constrained) pummeling and minor abuse of any offenders). If a Friendly is dealing with an UnFriendly, then it will constantly attempt to convert the UnFriendly by a.. calling attention to the fact that it *has* to raise the prices of it's services/interactions to cover protective measures (against the UnFriendly itself), the extra negotiating and verification costs necessitated by dealing with an untrustworthy UnFriendly, and any/all other similar additional expenses incurred by dealing with an UnFriendly; b.. by threatening to go (or actually going) somewhere else because the cost of business is cheaper elsewhere after UnFriendly covereage costs are included and because Friendlies are *preferred customers/partners*; c.. by constantly pestering the Friendly about how much better the UnFriendly's life would be if he were Friendly; etc., etc. The two things which a Friendly would *NOT* do is allow an UnFriendly to take advantage of him *OR* be UnFriendly when it isn't necessary -- but if UnFriendliness *IS* necessary, the Friendly is *VERY* likely to have *A LOT* of assistance because all the other Friendlies know that it could be them in that situation and it is (all together now) in their long-term best interest to help. = = = = = = = = = = "Play the game" by *assuming* that you are a Friendly and asking yourself what you would do to protect yourself without breaking your declaration of Friendliness. It's fun and addictive and hopefully will lead you to declaring Friendliness yourself. (Yes, I really *am* serious about spreading Friendliness. It's my own little, but hopefully growing, cult and I'm sticking to it.) ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=95818715-a78a9b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
