On 2009-04-15, Christopher Kubasik wrote:
Marshall, I'm going to see and raise you!
There is a huge difference between a moment of judgment between an aesthetic call (which is what the Humanity/Fan Mail/Spiritual Attributes) and a how-are-things-really judgement ("If the tree trunk is four feet high and my guy is fighting with weapon X and and the troll has weapon Y do I have the high ground?")
I suspect that for some folks this is going to be a squishy point, but it isn't for me. Anyone who watches those Britain's Got Talent videos that go viral every six months knows that groups of people recognize aesthetic quality pretty fast.
Arguments about what is "real" can go on a while. (cf. String Theory)
There are different KINDS of Moments of Judgment. The aesthetic kind; the "this is what is real" kind; and the Referee Rules kind. (I think we all see where I'm going, yes?)
Each is judged using different standards, and each judgment made offers a different payoff. By prioritizing one kind of judgment, I've noticed things tend to go better and faster.
For example, I have happily left big issues about "reality" in the dust. Reality matters in the games I play, but my focus (my priority) is aesthetic judgements. I find the games roll faster because of this. There's no more arguing (none!) and this kind of focus reinforces the other aesthetic pleasures of the gams I play.
Vincent is suggesting (I think) that the whole "real world" moments of judgment tied to "sports referee" moments of judgment can be dragged successfully back into a kind of mix that works. I don't doubt it—because he's really smart!
From my little corner over here I'm just offering to keep in mind that the "real world" judgment that Vincent opened his post with is of a different order of judgment from the "rules win" judgment from quote from Jonathan to the kinds of judgments one makes about Fan Mail.