S03 E12 - "Games Ponies Play"

[tacobob]

So Ms. Peachbottom isn't her cannon name?

[RarityDash]

hi hi

Well, I boiled it down as far as it can go. I guess the only other option is to ramble at length and make a much bigger deal about this than it rightfully deserves. Enjoy the ride.

There may be some circumstances where turning different groups of people's hardships into a competition for "who has it worst," is a good idea, but this isn't one of them. Why should little colts and fillies today have to suffer because of something that happened before they were even born? The Crystal Ponies lost a thousand years, but so what? Everyone misses out on all sorts of things, both from the aeons when they're not alive, and all the things that happen when they are. (Even if they make a bunch of clones of themselves, they're still going to miss out on a well neigh infinite number of experiences.) This kind of shared hardship could be the common ground that brings them together, rather than keep them distinctly separate.

Fairness can be subjective. I don't know if it's fair to give preferred treatment to the Crystal Ponies because of their history, only that with that statement early in the episode that Rainbow Dash announces that she does. I would remind that the "bad news" Rainbow Dash mentions includes more than missing out on time. They were in some kind of stasis for that thousand years, but this is the same population of crystal ponies that was conquered and enslaved by Sombra. They've experienced real injustices in their own life times. It's ancient history for the ponies in the other city, but for the Crystal Empire it isn't.

If disappointment is truly a bad thing (in the context of Rainbow Dash's perspective and nobody else's) and is something that needs to be minimized for anyone, then ignoring the feelings of other ponies in other places that she does not know constitutes a dramatic lack of empathy. That makes sense for her, because she often is portrayed as callous and vain, but the same is probably not true for all of her friends, and it doesn't make for something I can relate to or be interested in.

As I said before, Dash makes it clear that her focus is on the Crystal ponies. Her sympathy is with them as she feels they are the ones that deserve this. Perhaps she does have a lack of general empathy for others, but she is motivated by sympathetic emotions for the Crystal ponies in particular. And perhaps that does constitute a shallow attitude on some level, but I think that is at Dash's core character and is also a realistic way for people to view things.

And I'm not just talking about Affective Empathy, you can close your eyes and not pay attention to other people in other places and just assume everything will be fine if you want to fool yourself. I'm talking mostly about Cognitive Empathy, about not treating people as individuals, but as labels. Labels like "Crystal Pony," or "other," which is not only degrading to the others who are not present, but to the ponies in the Crystal Empire as well, as it ignores who they actually are. There was a time in our world when slavery was considered a normal, appropriate part of civilization. The feelings of out-groups were not considered. The people in charge weren't emotionally invested in them, they didn't care, but this carelessness also degraded those who were privileged.

This seems like a very odd tangent. Crystal ponies are the ponies who live in or come from the Crystal Empire. It's a pretty solid classification to make. As a label it's kind of hard to ignore, especially as it also seems to be a particular type of pony just as pegasus and unicorn are in addition to referring their home/place of origin. It's not a classification I can see as being degrading, and the label of "other" here just refers to ponies who live in another town. I don't think most people feel marginalized or degraded when you simply point out what town they live in. Comparing this kind of thing to slavery seems like an incredibly alarmist and bizarre reach. The situation in the episode happens in real life; the Olympic games come up, multiple cities vie to host them and only one ultimately wins; for an outside party to favour one city winning the bid over another to host based on their personal history or feelings about the options does not strike me as anything but entirely rational, natural and normal behavior.

And if you don't think that is a fair comparison, because its too serious, then perhaps you can understand why I am unable to take Dash's motivation seriously. In my opinion, she is making a big deal about something that is trivial and frivolous, while completely ignoring anything that makes competition positive. You can give someone something positive without hurting others. Thats fine, you can't be everywhere at once, and there's nothing wrong with preferring those who you share a connection. However, if someone is getting hurt, being pals with the guy who lucked out does not relieve you of the responsibility of trying to prevent the hurt in the first place.

It's not trivial and frivolous for her though. Cloudsdale lost and she was terribly disappointed by the fact. It resounded with her deeply in a way she still remembers now. She now sees the Crystal Ponies, whom she has an invested interest and a great deal of sympathy for, faced with the same disappointment. Her sympathy has her want to protect them from sharing what happened to her. Is it at the expense of the other city? Maybe, but so what? Dash isn't trying to prevent all hurt everywhere. She just knows what this loss feels like and wants to shield this group of ponies she prefers and thinks deserves to win from feeling what she felt during that loss.

[Ginger Mint]

hi hi

I don't know how many more volumes I can write to convey what I'm trying to say. Yes, its not trivial and frivolous for Dash, for some bizarre and in-explicable reason. Because, as you said, the Olympics selection is a real thing that happens in our world that is perfectly normal and rational, and nobody is so put out by losing that it is unbearable.

In fact, the Equestria games selection makes even less of a difference than the Olympic games selection does. Anyone can just hop on a train and go to the Crystal Empire in like, a day. And its not like there is abject poverty that could be alleviated by a boost in tourism, even the continually cash starved farm pony can make the trip.

You don't need to alleviate all hurt everywhere. Alleviating hurt at someone else's expense, however, is wrong. Period. It's not hard to imagine that missing out on the Equestria Games isn't going to hurt anyone, just like in real life with the Olympics, which is what makes Dash's motivation so bizarre.

[Cadabra]

This is the episode of Faulty Towers that this episode is based off of:

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=-T2r39NoTsk&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D-T2r39NoTsk

Unlike Basil Faulty, Twilight Sparkle handles the situation with calm, which I found hilarious.

Dashie acts more like Basil at times. The window moment seemed like something out of nowhere, almost BBC like humor.

By the way, I'm a huge John Cleese fan.

[SteelEagle]

I don't see Rainbow Dash's motivation as odd. It worked for the character- got all charged up for the biggest athletic event in the nation as a filly, it didn't come, it hurt, Given the task, the job, of ensuring the games came to the Empire. Uses her hurt as a filly to fuel her determination.

It's a competition. Someone has to lose, and when someone/some team/some city loses, people are going to be hurt. They're going to be sad. Anyone who is competitive made peace with that before they started competing. Victory for the side you support at the expense of others is, when boiled down, the outcome you want in any competition. Dash has been hurt. Dash has hurt. It's competition.

[RarityDash]

hi hi

I don't know how many more volumes I can write to convey what I'm trying to say. Yes, its not trivial and frivolous for Dash, for some bizarre and in-explicable reason. Because, as you said, the Olympics selection is a real thing that happens in our world that is perfectly normal and rational, and nobody is so put out by losing that it is unbearable.

In fact, the Equestria games selection makes even less of a difference than the Olympic games selection does. Anyone can just hop on a train and go to the Crystal Empire in like, a day. And its not like there is abject poverty that could be alleviated by a boost in tourism, even the continually cash starved farm pony can make the trip.

You don't need to alleviate all hurt everywhere. Alleviating hurt at someone else's expense, however, is wrong. Period. It's not hard to imagine that missing out on the Equestria Games isn't going to hurt anyone, just like in real life with the Olympics, which is what makes Dash's motivation so bizarre.

Hmm... I guess I see what you're getting at to an extent... still I don't know.

People can get disappointed by this kind of thing. It's an honor and a source of excitement for a city. People get worked up over it and indeed get disappointed when it falls through. I know that Vancouver, where the show is produced missed out on an Olympic bid a while back, and I wouldn't be surprised if the real lingering feelings about that didn't trickle down along the line from somewhere and spark the idea for this episode. Perhaps Dash's reactions are exaggerated, but it's a show designed for the primary purpose to entertain; exaggerations are expected everywhere. That doesn't mean the core emotions; disappointment at a missed opportunity for her city, a drive to help spare a city she wants to see win the same disappointment and satisfaction at making that happen aren't entirely grounded. I'm convinced they are. Maybe she takes it all a little too seriously, but I think her motivations are entirely rational and normal given what is presented in the episode.

As for your point about alleviating hurt at someone else's expense, I really don't see it here. In this case a victor must be decided and the victory a can only go to one side and one side only. Throwing your help and support behind the side that you personally favour in such a case is not fundamentally wrong. It's entirely rational and expected behavior.

[SteelEagle]

This really is a weak comparison. Theft is serious. It's a breach of law. You're taking a piece of property that someone else paid for fairly and taking it without giving up anything in return. It's morally wrong. Favoring one town to host the games over another isn't anything like that at all. No one is doing anything illegal. it's assumed that the other contenders are putting forth the effort just as the Crystal Empire was. If we're talking rings, a better analogy would be if a jeweler has one ring with two parties interested in purchasing it, one of which is your friend. Both have the money and means to get it, but you give your friend a ride to the jeweler so they can get it first. No one expects you to do anything for the party, even if, yeah, they're left disappointed with the result.

Alternatively, it could be compared to a supporting an acquaintance in a job interview over a stranger or just rooting for your friend's favored sporting team over some other team. What we have here is a completely normal, healthy sort of bias. It certainly isn't any kind of theft. People care more for people they know then people they don't. As long as they're not being malevolent, I really don't think there's anything wrong with that either.

Incorrect to an extent. A better analogy would be the following:

Someone finds a ring on the ground. They turn around and announce they have a diamond ring and will give it away to a couple of his choosing who are getting married. Ten couples step up, state their cases, he chooses one.

Every couple can have their own support network, every couple can make their case. You can argue that some can call on the big guns better than others, but that's life- Washington, DC can make a better case for the games than Cairo because of the weight it can put behind a bid. But in the grand scheme of things, it comes down to a choice that will make one couple/city happy and the rest unhappy. There is no other outcome. I don't see why we dishing on the support network that does as asked when called in with good intentions.

Dash is a competitor. Part of being a competitor is the understanding that your victory may cause someone else sadness, and that your defeat can do the same. Arguing that Dash's motivation was bizzare doesn't make sense considering the nature of competition, and arguing that what she did was wrong is akin to saying that basic competition is wrong. You may believe that, but the tight rope you're walking Ginger between saying that competition is wrong or that competition is okay only if there is something for those that lost that ease the pain of defeat seems to imply a relative inexperience with the nature of competition. What defines positives for the defeated party? Is it financial? That doesn't soothe the hearts and minds of those who are most saddened by this, often the athletes and fans. (Ask Notre Dame if the money they got for making it to the NCG soothed the pain of that whooping any).

Self-Improvement? Well, that happens regardless in this situation. Ponies work hard to repair their cities and open up grand new facilities. If they follow any RL example, new crime measures, education measures, health measures, and city design measures are brought up and worked on to improve the city. End result? The city is better. The ponies of the cities that made it as far as the Empire did live in better cities than they did before, and it is because of their hard work.

Enjoyment of the moment? So in the eye of the beholder. Seahawks fans certainly didn't enjoy Superbowl 40. 49ers fans certainly are sour over the outcome of the Superbowl that just ended. Teams that lose Game 7 in the World Series or get swept often are grumbly too. Players are soured. Coaches sour. For Olympics, there is generally far less sadness when a bid is declined. Some, to be sure, but there isn't really a moment to enjoy unless you win the competition and there can only be one winner.

Personal experience? Eye of the beholder. Maybe losing this bid helps cities make future bids.(Often, cities that lost bids in the final round of selection are given notes as to what flaws were found in their bid) Maybe it makes cities think that their time and effort are better spent elsewhere. This is so nebulous an incentive for a losing side that I'm not sure how it can be applied to a selection situation except in those ways.

Social bonds? Well, I guess this ties into self-improvement. On a national, international scale, the cities that make it to the end of the process get to flaunt their very best. Even losing bids tend to attract tourism and good publicity and improve that city's standing amongst her peers.

So, if your argument is that the selection process is unfair or cruel because the losers get nothing, you're incorrect. If you believe it is wrong because it causes sadness from somepony, then you are saying that competition itself is wrong- it's a belief you can have, but you have to stand by it that way. If you believe it's wrong to support one side in a competition because other sides will lose and it will hurt, then again you have to say that all competition is wrong because the side you support winning will cause hurt to someone else.

But then again, maybe the losers really do get nothing out of losing this. That's a shame, but the same can be said of just about any competition-

rewards are in the eye of the beholder.

I think you're a fantastic debater and a very intelligent individual Ginger, but you are way off base here. Dash's motivation and actions made sense as a competitive character.

[elsporko]

Ginger, I know you seem to be unable or unwilling to be objective when looking at motivations of the characters, and feel that any character who doesn't directy do what you personally want is wrong, but I really hope you undestand why somebody could have a personal bias towards one group or another. Dash has thrown her hat in with the crystal empire, that doesn't mean cheering for them means she is trying to rob other ponies of happiness

[Rosewind]

Don't forget, Ginger, that the journey also has more merit than the destination. A city preparing for the games and placing a bid is cathartic in a huge sense, and allows the place in question to look at its core values as a place to live or host something important. It evokes change. While some places were left out, they weren't excluded from a process that was beneficial to them in some way. By that same extent, competition is healthy because it inspires growth or hopefully (positive) change. It's seen in nature as animals compete for food; athletes push their personal boundaries to improve their bodies to compete; businesses must produce better products or services to compete with other companies that sell similar products.

Is it unfair for one business to make a sale over another because their product is better or cheaper? This is one of the core principles of competition, which is positive. While the short term may be disappointment for some unseen city, I hardly think it is unfair. It's a fundamental law that the strong/prepared should survive or have the advantage.

With that said, I would like to thank everyone for keeping this debate civil and respectful. You're all the reason this forum and community are wonderful.

[Ginger Mint]

hi hi

There is absolutely no need to get personal about this. I'm honestly confounded, but since its my lunch break, I might as well try again. And if you don't believe that I have at least some experience when it comes to competition, then I present to you the length of my posts as solid evidence that I am at least familiar with it. (My folks may be big on marathons and triathlons, but I guess I'm more into debate.)

I absolutely can understand why someone could have a personal bias towards one group or another. I've highlighted some examples of situations where that can be a good thing even. I'm also aware that there are times when people can have reasons to be biased that are unfair and unjust.

Yes in-group bias is very common. Normal you might even say, but it is also one of the fundamental causes of a number of equally common problems, across all levels of seriousness in our increasingly interconnected global society. The notion that "everyone is doing it," may have some value as a heuristic in a pinch, but its not really valid as an argument.

---

The analogy of someone finding a ring on the ground fails because of one thing: Opportunity cost. There is no real loss in this scenario, except perhaps the brief time investment that everyone took to state their cases. They are still capable of purchasing any number of other rings, because their capability hasn't diminished.

A more apropos analogy, I think, would be another formulation of Carneades Plank, which I referenced earlier.

Say you're driving in a caravan, a bunch of people in a few cars on an otherwise deserted road. One of the cars gets a flat tire. You don't have the tools to fix it, and there's just not enough room for everyone no matter how you squeeze. Someone is just going to be out of luck. By the time anyone can reach them, they'll have missed out on whatever event they were going to. Right then and there, you have no alternative, someone has to be left behind.

However, the next time you are driving along in a caravan and a car gets a flat tire, the question becomes, "Why didn't you learn your lesson from the last time and prepare for this possibility?" Rainbow Dash has felt that disappointment before, so why has she not done anything about it? Could it be that it was not really a big deal? (Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.)

I'm honestly surprised that nobody tried to call me out on the ethics of imprisonment for crimes, after such a hasty and resolute declaration like, "Alleviating hurt at someone else's expense is wrong, period." I did prepare for that though, so I'll just go ahead and pre-empt it.

In the case of legal punishments, it is important to remember that the impetus for the intervention is started by those who break the law. Those who are, allegedly, harming others. This is important because it highlights the limitation of options that people face. People are forced to choose between further potential harm from the lawless on one side, and on the other side, the kind of vigilantism that inevitably devolves into tribal feuding if allowed to reach its endgame. The rule of law strives -though it does not always succeed, on account of mistakes or sabotage- to minimize harm to all parties, including the guilty. However airtight the legality may be though, it still does not excuse people from the responsibility of trying to prevent it in the first place.

However, since extreme examples didn't work, (I was being rhetorical for the sake of clarity, not because I thought they shared the same moral gravity.) I'll try an example that is more basic.

Lets say that little Timmy and little Jimmy are both fighting over a toy. You like one of the two, and don't have any opinion about the other. Their caretaker is approaching and is planning on resolving the fight, but you have an opportunity to distract the caretaker and make sure that the kid that you like gets the toy. Some might consider that meddling, but ask yourself which is better: making sure that one kid loses out, or making sure that whichever one kid who will inevitably lose at least has something?

Conversely, imagine that the toy is something that Timmy and Jimmy can share, and that the only thing they are fighting about is which side of the room they want to play on. If your favored child is forced to get up and walk across the room, would you think it is normal to jump into the air, shouting "Nooo!" before collapsing to your knees in pain and frustration? Or would it seem reasonable to say "Well, its no big whoop sugar cube, at least you get to participate."

(Which is what happened in the end, like I said. It all worked out in the end, and I enjoyed that about the episode. Yes, the hand-waving of the selection process was cheap and rushed, on account of the inspector doing the worst inspecting in the history of inspecting. ((Seriously, double tangent here, but would you accept a single data point from a total stranger concerning their tour of the facility when you were inspecting something actually important, like say an airplane? But thats ok, because nobody is perfect, and besides, everyone got to share the idiot ball this episode.))

It all worked for Rainbow Dash because, as I said, it fits her character to not care about these sorts of things. However, I do, so what was confusing to me was that the narrative didn't provide a counterpoint for more than 10 minutes. Usually those kinds of conflicts are worked in right away, like when Applejack said simply "Its all in good fun," in Fall Weather Friends. In the end, it all worked out. Rainbow Dash learned her lesson, and we once again get an example of how Polsky likes to write things into the subtext of the episode in order for them to make sense.)

---

Empathy isn't just about understanding the down and out, its about understanding all sorts of different positions and making sense of them. One of my favorite quotes comes from T.S. Eliot, who was perhaps ahead of his time when it came to understanding the self through reflecting on the world around us.

"We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started, and know the place for the first time."

How can anyone say that they are the better, more worthy candidate if they do not understand their competition? It would be like saying you are the most capable basketball player, even though you've never played a basketball game before. You might be, its true, but until you prove it, you'll never really know for sure. If Rainbow Dash had said something like "Stalliongrad hosted the games last time, and if we fail, they're going to get them again. They don't need them twice in a row," something that explained why the competition would not feel as bad as the Crystal Ponies, then it might have made more sense.

---

(This seems awfully tangential, but I would like to point out for the record that if we follow real life examples, the Olympic games are not all medals and roses for the cities that host them. There is no small number of people that will argue that the cost of hosting the Olympics outweighs the benefits, especially for the poor who pay the highest costs in taxes, loss of living space through gentrification, and who have the least to gain in terms of entertainment value and increased revenue. Competition has the potential to be bad or good, depending on the circumstances.)

Have no fear Rosewind, I'm keenly aware of the value of the journey. As I said, there are a "zillion and one reasons to help." As I am about provide some excellent reasons why competition can be helpful, along with a few statistical tidbits. I honestly wish that they had emphasized the journey as part of the motivation, as doing so would have made the conflict more relatable to me.

The statistics show us very clearly that the uncertainty about who's team will win is one of the biggest indicators of a sport's popularity. The chance of losing is critically important to the excitement of the event. If you know who is going to win before it starts, there is no reason to watch. The better the opponent, the more epic the match. Superbowl 40 tagged an estimated 90.7 million viewers. Regardless of who won, they watched it and were entertained.

Statistics also show that people who participate in sports in school (especially girls) have on average statistically significantly higher levels of self confidence, self esteem, and general physical health. By necessity, the majority of teams will lose. There are 32 teams in the NFL, only one of them won the superbowl this year, and yet it continues to be highly profitable, prestigious and popular. (Don't even get me started on Cubs fans.)

So, if your argument is that the selection process is unfair or cruel because the losers get nothing...

I am glad you agree with me on something, because that was never my argument, quite the opposite in fact. My argument was that because the selection process is fair, Rainbow Dash deriving motivation from the unjust suffering of others makes no sense.

If you believe it is wrong because it causes sadness from somepony, then you are saying that competition itself is wrong...

This is also something that I have not suggested. Not all sadness is a bad thing, there are things that can make it worthwhile. (Clear as day, I listed some examples.) Romantic Tearjerkers are wildly popular, for another example.

If you believe it's wrong to support one side in a competition because other sides will lose and it will hurt...

Its a good thing that I never said I believed this, and in fact argued contrariwise. I said that if the motivation for helping one side against the other is to avoid loss and hurt, then it is at best poor sportsmanship and at worst dangerously insecure. Her actions were not inherently wrong at any point, but without a motivation, it is harder to be motivated to care one way or another.

Its really easy to take for granted the ways that competition can be beneficial when we live in a society that has benefitted so much from competition. Its easy to ignore the ways a competition can be hurtful and destructive. Fall Weather Friends covers this brilliantly, but if you need an extreme example, then you can pick any number of tragedies brought about by modern warfare. In some competitions, everyone loses.

Rewards are in the eye of the beholder, yes. Absolutely. I may not think that some particular circumstance is so bad, but the cause doesn't change much when a person is feeling legitimate anguish. As I said multiple times already, if you cannot accept losing, for whatever reason, then you should not be competing.

Don't blow your life savings on a game of poker. Don't wager the mortgage to your house in blackjack. Don't take the chance if you are likely to suffer crushing defeat and you can't handle that. If you think it will be worth it in the end, win or lose, then go ahead and knock yourself out. Pushing yourself to be more worthy of victory can still be a good thing, even if you lose, you're better off where you started.

TLDR: In a nutshell, as a situation gains seriousness, the actors involved also gain responsibility.

[SteelEagle]

Before I get to the main point, I wanted to discuss this:

No one bothered to ask you about the ethics of imprisonment because it has nothing to do with the topic, which is Rainbow Dash's motivation. You construct a case but so little of it actually touches the subject. A problem with your case is that so much of it seems like misdirection or smoke and mirrors that deciphering what your actual message is can be difficult. You have a problem with her motivation but then say it makes sense, make a point of listing some possible benefits for losers that apparently don't matter whether or not applied to this...basically, your problem is you don't like the message, but you almost never just say that.

Let me ask you this, Ginger: If everyone else can understand Rainbow's motivation and it makes sense to them, is it possible that you're looking at this from a fundamentally flawed perspective? I ask because most of the time I believe you make very strong cases but this time, I am literally not seeing it. I feel like we're discussing six things, you're discussing twenty things, and we're sharing one topic in common. Yet you use your twenty topics to try and support the one topic we have in common, but for the most part we aren't seeing what the relation is.

So I guess in summation Ginger, help me understand what it is you have an actual problem, because it seemingly started off with you believing Rainbow's motivation was bizarre and didn't make sense and seems to now be that it wasn't countered?

(Also, as someone who watched Superbowl 40, who was a fan of one of the teams in Superbowl 40, who follows closely the team and league, I can tell you that it was a black mark on the sport, widely viewed as one of/the worst Superbowls, and loathed by fans of one of the teams in it and more or less swept under the rug whenever the NFL discusses games of the past. We weren't entertained, we were angered immensely, many fans I know would rather have lost the previous game and never went. It was a waste of my time and money and I know more than a few who haven't watched a game since. I suggest you do some research on that game, because it goes beyond simply winning and losing.)

Also, on the topic of debate: My debate teacher wouldn't have liked the earlier extreme examples or philosophizing without facts to back it up. However, my philosophy professor would have enjoyed it.

[Ginger Mint]

hi hi

Oh, come on. I even provided a TLDR... Lets try simple again, if thorough doesn't cut it. I am looking at multiple perspectives simultaneously.

• Just because someone has a reason to do something, doesn't mean the thing they are doing is right, or the reason is a good one. "I want it," has never justified stealing, but is common and understandable.

• Actions are not the same thing as motivations.

• Rainbow Dash's motivation makes sense from the perspective of someone who could save a mare who is falling to her doom, but would rather sign autographs until the last second.

• Rainbow Dash's motivation does not make sense from the perspective of another mare who might, for example, befriend Discord, chastise her friends for their prejudices, or lop off a part of her tail for a stranger.

• Rainbow Dash's motivation does not make sense from the perspective of a protagonist, to whom I can relate and wish to succeed.

• Because I didn't care whether or not Rainbow Dash succeeded, the question of whether or not they would be able to convince the games inspector did not create any suspense for me.

• Characters don't have to be perfect, so having a flawed motivation is not necessarily a bad thing, in and of itself, and doesn't mean that the episode is necessarily bad.

• Everyone in the group of friends basically agrees with each other, and the actual dramatic question of the episode doesn't get asked until over 10 minutes into the episode.

• The question being: Will they impress the right pony? (With the added bonus of wondering if they will realize their obvious mistake.)

• In the end, it turns out that the pony they ignored was the technically correct pony, but that impressing a pony who they didn't even know and were not invested in, was a good thing to do.

• So it all works out in the end.

Anything is possible, but if I'm going to be convinced that that I'm wrong, I'm going to need a better argument than: "Its normal." (I've also been told that its not normal for a grown man to watch a show about colourful little ponies.)

On the side note of Super Bowl 40. Losing a competition due to irregularities by an authority figure is actually rather poignant to this episode. Do you suppose, if the Super Bowl had been decided by the team that gave the refs a better welcome, that people might have also been upset? Do you suppose that, if the refs had done their job and let the players determine the outcome, only intervening to hold them accountable for legitimate misconduct, that the game might have been enjoyable even to the fans who's team lost?

(To be clear, there is nothing wrong with having referees, just as there is nothing wrong with having a welcoming committee. The problem arises when they alone decide the outcome of the competition.)

[Rosewind]

Ginger didn't reply to my "competition can be healthy" comment. Does that mean I win by default?

(You know, of course, I'm baiting you to give me a thoughtful and thought-provoking response. Do not disappoint me!)

[elsporko]

Rainbow Dash talking about her disappointment makes sense for the character in Hurricane Fluttershy who got people pumped to do their best. By describing how she was disappointing and saying how they will not let the crystal ponies feel the same way Rainbow Dash motivated the other ponies to do their best by giving them an emotional link to those they were helping.

[Ginger Mint]

hi hi

Rosewind, I actually did. It was somewhere in the middle of a wall of text on the previous page, though I don't blame anyone for not going through the entire thing.

Reward seeking and pain avoidance are two distinctly separate things. They can occasionally produce similar results, but the motivation stems not only from a different logical reason, but from a different part of the brain as well.

You can't lose a competition that you don't participate in. If you're just standing around, minding your own business, your chances of losing a competition are 0%. By competing at all, you are increasing your chances of losing, which is why if your motivation is "don't want to lose," seeking competition is irrational. Its a nothing reason. Like being asked, "why are you walking down the street," and answering, "because running is too fast."

Rainbow Dash in Hurricane Fluttershy was the kind of pony who didn't care about the disappointment of losing. The kind of pony who said: "No. Of course not. Forget the record." The record was about seeking to better themselves. They didn't face humiliation for failing to be the best, they didn't even face humiliation for almost failing to meet par. The effort they spent was heroic, even without claiming the title, and even Fluttershy who did least of all got recognition for her effort.

[Dessa]

Good gravy, that's a lot of text!

Ginger, are you a competitive person yourself? Some of what you say reminds me of the sorts of arguments that non-sports lovers make against sports. Namely that if the consequences of sports are bearable, then sports are entirely pointless.

I think that's trying to apply logic to a matter of emotion. The purpose of sport is debatable, but even fans acknowledge that it's just a fun reason to be emotionally invested in something. It doesn't need to have a point.

Rainbow Dash, as we know, is very competitive, and the last time the games were going on, her team lost! This time, her home team isn't in the game, but she still has a favorite. It's like how people choose a favorite for the Super Bowl simply because its more fun to root for a team when a big event is going on. She's rooting for the crystal empire, and moreover, she can actually impact whether her team wins.

If you want an explanation for Dash's behavior, you need look no further than this. And if this mystifies you, that's understandable -- it's not really a settled subject. People still debate the reasoning behind it.

[Ginger Mint]

hi hi

I'm a competitive person in areas that I know I can compete. When I know that I'm out of my league, I prefer to sit back and watch.

Did you mean to say that "if the consequences of sports aren't bearable, then sports are entirely pointless?" (If the consequences of sports are bearable, then no problem.) If, in another time and space, the consequences of sports weren't bearable, then sports would be a detriment. However, in the real world, the consequences of losing are generally trivial, and the rewards are generally excellent. But it is up to the individual to decide whether participation is worth it, not everyone is the same. (There have historically been less savory types of competition, often times involving people who didn't have a choice in the matter or had nothing to lose, competitions that were definitely not just for fun, but there is a good reason why those kinds of competitions are generally frowned upon these days.)

It is just fun to be emotionally invested in something for no particular reason, absolutely. Its fun. Right there is an example of a motivation. Its not hard, its understandable. If I asked someone walking down the street, "why are you walking down the street," and they said, "because its fun," that would be totally legit.

As I said, actions are not the same thing as motivations. Rooting for a team because you enjoy doing so is perfectly reasonable. Rooting for a team because you hate to see them lose doesn't make sense, its easier to just close your eyes and not watch them play, mission accomplished 100% of the time. Its hard to imagine the latter case though, because nobody in their right mind does that. People like that just stay home and don't like sports, and thats fine too. (Nothing wrong with Fluttershy staying home if she wants.)

I don't need an explanation for Dash's behavior, I already have two.

• If Dash actually thinks that the suffering of little Crystal Ponies is a serious problem, which is a little bit odd but understandable for shortsighted people, then she is irresponsible for perpetuating a serious problem.

• If Dash is just participating in your run of the mill fan favoritism, then I don't really care one way or another. She made such a good case for Cloudsdale earlier, I'm rooting for them and not the Crystal Empire, and besides, I can't pick sides when I don't know who the other side is.

I went ahead and made a diagram to illustrate what I mean.

Without a positive motivation, you get stuck in the "no," or "who cares," areas. Fun, as simple as it is, is a perfectly fine positive motivation. The Crystal Ponies, however, were already having fun, they were already sprucing up their town, they were already attracting tourists. By my measurement, they were already on top of things, even if they didn't get to host the games.

The other issue, about Rainbow Dash impacting whether her team wins comes down to fairness. The inspection process is supposed to be unbiased, and it does not take a very large stretch of the imagination to think that going all out on lobbying the inspector is going to bias her judgement.

---

For comparison's sake, I'm going to go over the dramatic question posed in Sonic Rainboom, to help illustrate the difference in my level of interest. Your mileage may vary. (This is why I shouldn't post when I wake up in the morning, because I end up spending my entire trek to work thinking about what I didn't have time to finish typing.)

The context of Sonic Rainboom is whether or not Rainbow Dash will succeed or fail in the Best Young Flier Competition, but the Dramatic Question is: "Who am I?"

She is learning about herself through competition and dealing with the realization that maybe she isn't as good as she thought she was. She already performed the sonic rainboom once before, and now no matter how hard she tries, she can't pull it off. Instead of improving, she appears to be getting worse. She wants to join the Wonderbolts, but how can she reach their level when she's not improving?

All she needed to do was perform the sonic rainboom and prove to herself that she was a capable pony. She wanted to prove it. Winning the competition wasn't necessary, though it was a nice bonus, she didn't need to wait for the golden laurel to be placed on her head to look up at her work and exclaim, "Whoa... I did it, I did it!" and "Best day ever!" Even if she hadn't won the competition, it would have been positive.

Perhaps someone can let me know if I missed something in Games Ponies Play, because as far as I could tell, there wasn't really any solid indication that things might go wrong until they found out that the inspector would be arriving early. Applejack stated that they had practiced the routine to perfection, the Crystal Empire looked crystalier then ever, Rarity had the mane thing under control.

[Dessa]

I guess I don't understand your objection then. You get the motivations at work. You just didn't find it very good, dramatically speaking?

[Ginger Mint]

hi hi

While the topic of conversation may have drifted over time, the objection is this: I posted a picture of a little filly in another town being shocked that the Crystal Empire got the Equestria Games. I was told that it was wrong. I countered that, if you are truly concerned about kids being upset, then it is sensible to consider all of them.

If Rainbow Dash had been serious about her motivation of not wanting foals to feel upset, the standard answer would be, "Relax, its not a big deal." In the Running of the Leaves, the important part was that they made sure the leaves across Equestria came down, In professional sports, the important part is that the audience is entertained, and in the Equestria Games competition the important part is that a worthy and capable host gets selected.

If we're not truly concerned about kids being upset, since it is just a game amongst fans, then I think it is fair to say that I am a Cloudsdale fan. Go Cloudsdale, crush the Crystal Empire! Woo!

Cloudsdale fans are totally better than all those Crystal Empire losers, and I'll explain why.

• Cloudsdale is in. the. clouds. I mean, seriously, that is way awesome.

• They've built an entire city out of a single building material. What? no, crystals don't count.

• While sun glasses are cool, you don't need to wear them to appreciate the architecture in Cloudsdale.

• The stallions are more handsome, that's a fact.

• The Cloudsdale flag has more hues than the Crystal Empire's vaunted "flag of many hues."

• Have you ever heard of a pony from the Crystal Empire performing a Sonic Rainboom?

• The average pony is over 2/3rds water. And where does that water come from? Cloudsdale. Aww, yeah.

• Lightning bolts and Rainbows.

[RarityDash]

People generally don't think like this. Dash certainly wouldn't. It isn't about keeping kids from being upset. It's about keeping kids in the Crystal Empire, whom she announces she is supporting, from being upset. The idea is "I want this team to win so that their fans will be happy," not "I want everyone to be happy" or "it doesn't matter who wins because someone somewhere will be happy". A highly competitive character like Dash is not going to ever think along the lines of the latter two, nor should she really be expected to. People involved in a competition are going to want to see their side win.

[Ginger Mint]

hi hi

And when competition involves legitimate hurt, that mode of thinking is wrong.

[RarityDash]

No it's not. One side has to win. One side is going to be disappointed. It's not wrong to pick one over the other, unless you want to say the entire idea of being fans of specific sports teams is inherently wrong.

[Ginger Mint]

hi hi

Typically, sports teams do not involve legitimate hurt. The disappointment of losing a game is no big deal, unless you're talking about Roman gladiators or Mayan ballplayers or something, its nothing. You brush yourself off, you get back up, and you are better for the experience.

[RarityDash]

I would really argue that. People can take losing differently; a big loss can haunt someone for a long time. Either way you seem to be speaking about the players rather than the fans as I had specified. Fan investment is very powerful that cannot discounted. Seeing your team lose out can be legitimately painful for a fan to experience. Does that legitimate pain of seeing their side lose that some fans suffer as the fans of the other side celebrate make being a fan wrong?

[Ginger Mint]

hi hi

I have the feeling that we have already covered this ground before. Everyone is different. If the reward does not outweigh the risk for you personally, then don't play the game. Compared to random Joe, fifty grand is nothing to a big casino. Don't bet the farm on a sucker deal with a couple of con artists. If you do and you lose, then you made a bad decision.