A Matter of Trust

[mahnmut]

Hey, my beloved procrastinators! It's been a while since we had our last installment of ridiculously over-simplified and unbearably polarized hypothetical situations, inspired by the NationStates online game - you know, that place where you're the benevolent ruler of your own fictional state, which you're completely free to shape as you please,

Comments

[luvdovz]

Cut a tongue for lying, cut a hand for stealing. That'll teach'em.

[sandwichwarrior]

Is this really a controversy?

This one of the few nation states scenarios where one of the options seems, in my opinion at least, 100% reasonable and correct. Please explain to me why I should trust someone who is obviously untrustworthy.

Lets face it the whole point of "the rule of law" is that is that rules apply to everyone, even the rulers. What we have now is a state of de-facto anarchy where some people adhere to the rules because there are rules and those people end up being at a severe disadvantage when dealing with those that don't follow the rules. Especially when those people suffer little to no consequences for their flagrant violations.

[mahnmut]

Please explain to me why I should trust someone who is obviously untrustworthy.

For the lulz?

[sandwichwarrior]

Fair enough :D

But that really was a serious question.

[mahnmut]

It was also a rhetorical one.

[peristaltor]

None of the above. See Were You Born on the Wrong Continent?, can't recall author, but starts with a G.

[anfalicious]

Start out saying #1, transition in to full blown #4 whilst planning for #5.

If I want to stay in power that is. Hell, as long as I stay at the top I'll throw in #3 for free.

[sandwichwarrior]

True that,