The Starting Move

The object of the game  is …
to make null expand.


Anyone can play the game

or even change the game board null

 

This is a #CooperativeGame … null ... ?

Comments


See, that’s the way people have been structuring this question for several thousand years now. At it’s root is the idea that “love is spawned from outside”. So we try and create structures that foster love. So many structures have been tried … and so many have equally failed, because …

Love is a state of being. It is something we do “inside”. When we “turn on” love inside, then we bring it with us to the table and whatever game we choose to play. Love is something we have inside that we either pour out into voids devoid of love (those things that we experience as fear and distress) … or we don’t.

It is possible for something outside to stimulate a pouring of our “love state of being” from inside … but those things will always be transitory and unreliable. A beautiful person, or a giggling baby, we adore may, for instance, often stimulate us to enter the state of being called love … but never always. Sometimes we will not see them or the things they do so lovingly. Entrusting the “state of love” to external things and circumstances is a fickle way to live, even though humans have been living that way for a long time.

Once we recognize that love is a state of our own being … then we can foster it whenever and wherever we wish, regardless of the circumstances outside, and that will always turn the tables in a loving way. That is how to make love expand!  

still and all your play above was nullnull awareness directed to my creation. 
do you suppose that will increase the nullnull on the board?

Hey, play the game !!   create it working.   The board is symmetrical between you and i.
Hey, you can even change the board.  I’ll clone it in test. 
What you cannot do it make it asymmetrical.

My treatment above is simply “what is”. Acceptance of it and then trying it until success and skill are obtained will reach the goal of “how to make love expand”.

… however, since you are looking for some particular outside thing, in this case the way I communicate, to be the source that stimulates a more loving state of your being … then you will continue to have the exact fickle experience you are right now having.   

If you want to experience a more loving state, both inside, and reflected back to you from the outside, do only one thing … tune your state of being to love. That’s all there is to it, the ego’s desire for control and pain notwithstanding (see Eckhart Tolle for more on that).  

nullnathan looser !!

hint … you are trying to make the game board asymetrical to favor youself. 
that will never work.

The ancients (~ 5-7 AD) invented Chess as did the Chinese & Indians on a different system. Both were metaphors of WAR.  Simple minded others invented checkers. 

In jr. high I taught Payne Wong how to play chess.  He eventually learned to beat me since he already had learned to play the Chinese “version”  .  Note the game is listed in the Wikipedia as abstract strategy games.  IMHO the only way to solve real world problems is to get in the real world & interact with real people; abandoning strategies & being present & authentic to what IS!


The Japanese game of GO apparently is older ~ 2500 yrs old.  It is a game of surrounding territory. Apparently they are still playing it in the real world. null N. Korea is losing so they want to tip the board over.  

this game is a bit different … in that
one plays to increase the total null on the board …
not just one’s own total. 

Note the differences between the traditional #ZeroSumGame …
see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory

also different in that a player can change the board in any move.  
The only rule that cannot be broken is that symmetry between players must be preserved. 

We have yet to start keeping score. 

Also note the complete arbritraryness of what the object actually is.  Create whatever object you want … hopefully such that the game will thrive and the love on the board will increase. 

I’ll watch from afar. I don’t believe love can be quantified.  Maybe heart icons (null) can, who knows ?

hint … you are trying to create a game where all the players play with cards face up on the table. That will never work. It is no longer a game, it is just a conversation about a game.

Hey I get it. Playing a real game with others is a risk. You might loose. It is easier to have a conversation about games with others, to chart it out, to think it through and make maps of it. That mental work can be fun. Actually diving in and playing a game is messy. Your feelings might get hurt. You might even hurt someone else’s feelings. Staying in the place where you only have nice, loving, conversations with others about the games people play is so much less stressful.   

well “heart” are easy to count … don’t forget that the count in some play is just a representation of whatever is happening in our hearts … it is not what actually is happening in our hearts. 

play the game or not … or watch or not … your life … your choice … your heart … can you feel me?  


 on the boardnullone plays to increase the total 

There is only one way to truly increase total love. That is to tune one’s frequency of being to the state of love … thus the love flowing out, to both self and others, increases exponentially. Triggering the appearance of love by manipulating the game pieces is like playing “wack a mole” … it’s a never ending prospect of going after the  that is already in the game.
 

sigh … #shucks … nathan just added a  null twards the object “one plays to increase the total null on the board”  decreasin the total null on the board by 1.  

Can you manifest “tune one’s frequency of being to the state of love ”  on the board?  


The real game of Life (not Conway’s)  is dense & complex enough for me! Thanks! nullnull
Free yourself & get rid of beliefs ! Don't be a BELIEF robot - M.R.

me too mark … and what we do with each other here at fastblogit is part of “the real game of life”. 

What exactly is it that that we do with each other here at fastblogit, eh? null

Since I generate  with my own state of being, that is not my experience.

Since you generate  based on what others do, what you are reporting as your experience makes sense.

your last one seems odly asymetrical.

nathan gave himself +1

nathan took one away from seth -1
in response seth took one away from nathan -1

net loss of one.

a direct answer to mark

well one thing we do to each other here at fastblogit is #MakeShitUp about each other.  
how do you think that is effecting the love that we are experiencing in our hearts?

+1 for mark’s asking a great question
+1 for  seth’s  answering it directly
____
+2 heart  net gain


note the mechanics of the game does not require each individual to have their own personal score.
for that score is irrelivant to the game.  this is not a competative game.  this is not a #ZeroSumGame . 

rather it is synching to null

+1 for nathan for throwing “synching to love” onto the board … that was a great null idea.

I’m not part of your scoring system since I use fastblogit as a note-taker & digital memory & occasionally to gather my thoughts – like G+ only different.  Obviously you two want to change each other’s behaviors by a game. Both of you are gamier than I am. null

well mark, (1) you also make comments on others thoughts, and (2) throw your own thoughts into our awareness … (3) that is what you create … whether you score it or not.  and i am pretty sure that (4) those actions effect your feelings … whether you acknowledge those effects or not. 

Such a game (5) can represent the effects of what we are actually doing here … (6) and their effects on our hearts. 
(7) albiet not in much detail … certainly not in the detail that exists in our earts.  
(8) What you do here has effect on others, whether you take responsibility for it or not.  
(9) Such a game can make that effect explicit. 

(10) it can score how you are synching to love in this domain. 

Yeay, you are talking about other people as if you know what they are thinking or diss’n . There is a cartoon about that somewhere here. 

mark, can you deny any of my propositions?  honestly!

i’ll put numbers on them … so that we can talk about each one specifically.

#SoTheFuckWhat #AlreadyAlwaysArguing suck some more #pellick

note, this is a #CooperativeGame 

Note: this is your circus & your monkeys & I am NOT playing your game. 

not a problem mark … not a problem at all  null

but null sorry, you are playing the game in your heart  … 
whether you score it in the game represented by this thought
… or  not.  

Nope! … just you & Q are on the same page.

well i know that because there is an emotion represented in almost every transaction you create. 

You are #AlreadyAlwaysArguing – your endless game (not mine!)  Others will recognize that as the #RWG, but we won’t mention that any more.

well #RWG is a #ZeroSumGame … whereas this is a #CooperativeGame … it feels quite different to the heart. 

well okay … it feels quite different to my heart.  

How do the two different games feel to your heart? ← a direct question.

None of that, sorry. Your still trying to play a game with all cards face up.

Nathan “generated” +10  and filled the board coffers with them.

Seth shuffled those new ‘s around, apperently leaving himself at -1, or so he says he feels.

When Seth generates his own ‘s on the board and Nathan keeps generating ‘s, soon the board will be overflowing … no matter what Seth personally partakes in for himself.  

 

You, seth are so totally caught-up in the world of Abstractia – you may never come up! Adios!

null

well #shucks that is #NotWorking …. i can not observer your +10 null … it is totally hidden from me.
but i sure can feel your  -10 you did by #MakeShitUp about me null … i certainly can feel those .

maybe figure out how to make your creations public so that they show on the board.  
or maybe  make sombody’s positive awareness public.  
hint you cannot just imagine that happening inside yourself … such will never sync with others on the board.

adios null

Yep. When you place your life experience inside a dog-eat-dog world box like that, like is represented in the thought above, then you obtain that kind of experience. Is it any wonder why you see the craziness you and others see in the main stream today?

When you start generating love on your own, by changing your own state of being to the frequency of love, then you will see all the love around you pouring from others, which is always there. You can only see what you are a vibrational match to. Whatever you see right now? It’s exactly what you are tuned to.

I see, and feel, something entirely different.      

fact: the game in this thought is not dog-eat-dog … it is explicatively stated as a #CooperativeGame.

Perhaps learn some game theory & maybe not waste your beautiful minds.  Probably need more than 2 people to play, though …. null
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_game_theory 
null


i think the game stratagies that Nash studied dealt with one binary choice  (defect, don’t defect).   i’m not sure how general the transactions values studied could be.  

this particular game above deals with two  values ( +, -)… or named (null ,null) … of even perhaps (null, +, -).    but of course one can respond in an infinite number of ways … even with substantive propositions or questions not directed at another person in the game, but rather directed at some inquiry.

note, that if everybody responds null in all situations, then this game objectives are trivially achieved.  which is hardly a game at all.   so we have yet to actually define a game.   interestingly though, me thinks we are already playing a game … a very complex one … one in which we make up the rules as we go along along with the objective of the game … and yet have no idea what the game is. 

But i don’t think we need to learn game theory”,  rather i think as human beings we already instinctively “know game theory”.   The particular play i came up with here stemmed from wanting to grasp the difference (to which nathan allued) between “being asked to do something for another person” versus “being asked to experience something for another person”.  The former feels good, the latter creeps out – see Mocha and Macaroons at Roy Street Tuesday (comment 77388).  I did not see a way to get at that by playing the usual right wrong game which we semingly were playing.   For me that game gets in the way of grasping subtle distinctions this deep in human interaction.  So i thought that a #WinWin game (aka #CooperativeGame) might be better to get at it. 

and, yes mark, i think it requires at least 2 people to play … as is the case with many games, it cannot be played alone.   but #WhoKnows maybe there is a new hybrid  #RWG / #WinWin which we humans have yet to invent.

tag #ExperiencingFor #games #rackets #GlassBeadGame
notice the game (dialogue) played on the changeable game board ending here Current Game Board (comment 77495)

Game theory is a mathematical abstraction of games & strategies – just like you are doing. Too much real competition, eh? null

abstraction is a useful thinking and communication tool.  if you suspect i am using abstraction (generalization same thing) wrong, then ask me for an example of my abstraction.  If i can’t come up with one, then i am using it wrong.  if i can, then at least we have the start twards a  meeting of minds.

#abstactia #abstract

Well, I never said anything about “being asked to do something for another person”.

I said living for another, or living for self. Quite a different thing. The idea of “asking” was never involved in anything I was talking about except your own question to me.

yeah i know … it was i who brought up comparing “doing something for another”  versus “living for another” so that i could grasp what you were talking about.

Asking another to “live for me” would be seriously fucked up.  I can’t remember ever doing it.   Nor would living for another work for me … yet i do things for others all the time.   Sorry, maybe you weren’t accusing me of anything like that.  Perhaps i got confused.  #nbd 

Ok

Update: 

Google AI beats Chinese master in ancient game of Go 


Chinese Go player Ke Jie puts a stone against Google’s artificial intelligence program AlphaGo during their first match at the Future of Go Summit in Wuzhen, Zhejiang province, China May 23, 2017. REUTERS/Stringer
(***) ← Reuters Article .   An interesting thingy also is that China finds the need to block information & news coming in from the Internet.