My Twitter profile - Past Surveys
This survey question is about the absolute biggest moral dilemma in all of EGS. There are those who would consider the acceptance of homosexuality and all that to be a moral dilemma, but I consider that to just be common sense.
In any case, there is potential for great good and great horror depending on how the magic in EGS is used. Used benevolently, it could usher in a golden age. Used malevolently, it could have the potential to literally destroy the world. Note the "literally" there. I'm not talking Fallout games "life goes on" sort of end of the world here (although I really like Fallout 3).
In short, the consequences of it being common knowledge are unknown, which is in part due to the limits of magic being unknown. Odds are some dude with magic can't blow up the planet, but who knows for sure?
With all that said, here is how I originally presented the question (in the interest of full disclosure, I said nothing about "destruction of the world" potential prior to compiling the results):
You can prove magic is real. Public knowledge would irreversibly change the world, possibly making it worse. Do you keep magic a secret? http://www.egscomics.com/?date=2010-12-06
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Saturday, December 4, 2010
EGS Twitter Survey for December 1, 2010
My Twitter profile - Past Surveys
I have issues with cable news. Not a specific channel, mind you. My issue is with news running 24/7. Sometimes, there just isn't anything worth reporting, or there's just nothing new to say about the latest big news. If you're a cable news network, however, not only do you have to fill that time, but you have to fill it with things that attract viewers away from other networks. It leads to less than objective, and less accurate, reporting.
That said, even if I don't agree with the hosts, I fully approve of editorial shows on those networks. So long as it's clear that the content of that program is editorial, it reduces the amount of air time devoted to trying to fill the inevitable news voids with sensationalized news.
Granted, I don't watch any of those editorial programs and I've heard bad things about many of the ones that do exist, but I still say that having shows on news networks that aren't desperately trying to fill every moment with shocking up-to-the-minute news could theoretically help keep cable news honest. That said, the survey question:
All you have to go on are the internet cell phone videos. You've just seen Arthur say it was real on a cable news program. Your response? http://www.egscomics.com/?date=2010-12-01
I have issues with cable news. Not a specific channel, mind you. My issue is with news running 24/7. Sometimes, there just isn't anything worth reporting, or there's just nothing new to say about the latest big news. If you're a cable news network, however, not only do you have to fill that time, but you have to fill it with things that attract viewers away from other networks. It leads to less than objective, and less accurate, reporting.
That said, even if I don't agree with the hosts, I fully approve of editorial shows on those networks. So long as it's clear that the content of that program is editorial, it reduces the amount of air time devoted to trying to fill the inevitable news voids with sensationalized news.
Granted, I don't watch any of those editorial programs and I've heard bad things about many of the ones that do exist, but I still say that having shows on news networks that aren't desperately trying to fill every moment with shocking up-to-the-minute news could theoretically help keep cable news honest. That said, the survey question:
All you have to go on are the internet cell phone videos. You've just seen Arthur say it was real on a cable news program. Your response? http://www.egscomics.com/?date=2010-12-01
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)