I do agree with apamment's point of view that should you destroy it, rebuild it but not if it is a single layer/line of materials leading to an easily accessed location by way of swimming, or forbid the idea, walking around the body of water. It is a balance between fair and balanced. It is unfair to boaters to have unnecessary impediments in the water just so a lazy walker can run across a rude and disrespectful man made land "log" that would have taken the player no more than 4 extra blocks to build... instead of ------------------, try taking the time to use _ -============-_ (that is supposed to indicate a 2 block height...) It hurts no one and benefits both methods of travel discussed here. Walking/Sprinting and boating... It doesn't truly affect swimming...
I was thinking of really long bridges that go from island out post to main land - i believe i saw one somewhere, but i don't remember where, and possibly remembering wrong. anyway i was thinking someone smashes out a little gap several blocks wide or so to navigate through the bridge, that it wouldn't be so hard to replace those blocks to make a small hump in the bridge. but sure, if people are going to build bridges in the future, building it higher defiantly something to keep in mind.
Destroy it. The griefing rules are to preserve things that matters to people, and if people thing their bridge matters - they'll build it higher.. I dont make a diamond house RIGHT outside the spawn protection - if it matters max it! and build it somewhere that makes sense.. So IMO - TNTNTNTNTNTNTNTNTNTN!!
I am very pleased to have you here apamment to tell me the reasons I choose to do something. Not sure what I would do without you. I have been curious to why I have been frowning when I see kittens, can you enlighten me on my intentions and why I am doing that as well. If you were paying attention and not just trying to interject your attitude all over everything you would notice that the question posed was along the lines of "How do we as a community, change the building habits of the whole to recognize boaters rights to unimpeded movement through waterways and by association, get people to take other players usage and experience into mind when building or removing structures and resources in the wild." My suggestion was to force a noticeable change to the environment so that someone will take notice and inquire about the change. I never said it would be difficult to rebuild the structures or was beyond my ability, I said I think it would defeat the purpose of the goal of changing a mindset. He/she made it to more than likely benefit themselves not necessarily the community. And we are discussing the fact that he wasn't benefiting the entire community because they were obstructing others as well as not taking ALL of the community into mind when building said structure. Personally, and I am sure you will correct me for my opinion here, but I don’t care if they don't build it again if they are going to rebuild the same structure without taking others into consideration, but my opinion doesn't matter nor apply to this conversation.
The strongest argument in favor of your side is that destroying leads to someone rebuilding exactly the same leads to another destroying and a vicious cycle that will never end. If a proper bridge is built (and let's face it, the only ones who will really understand why the proper bridge was built at least 2 blocks higher than the water are the boaters) then barring griefers and idiots who just want a new walkway wherever they feel like it, then it only needs to built once and never destroyed. However, when I do feel like venting my "smashing energy," I'll be sure to charge Rupees and sell tickets for people to watch the cool explosions. [kidding]
When using the word "you" I had assumed we were using it to represent a hypothetical person who would destroy a walkway that is getting in the way of people boating. The OP boils down to "would it be griefing if I smash down this bridge that is in my way" I can't help you with kittens, sorry. No, it wasn't. Re-read the OP. Further on, Edmund Wayne responded to mrlegit's suggestion that he build it higher, do I need to give a play by play here? Infact as I re-read the entire thread, you were the first person to mention any kind of modification of building habits. My response to your suggestion is that the response to noticing something you built to benifit others being smashed down *whilst not knowing the reason* is more likely, "WTF happened to my bridge some griefer destroyed it." Not, "Hmm, it would seem that my structure was removed to prove a point about my building habits, perhaps I should ponder what could possibly be the reason, then reconstruct it when I obtain enlightenment" Of course they made it for themselves to use. That doesn't mean it didn't benefit others - the fact that it didn't benifit *everyone* is an oversight on their behalf, not malice against a certain subset of the community. We are discussing the fact that there is a bridge in the way, and what is the best response to solve this problem. I don't care either. I can swim. I can use a boat. I can build my own bridge. We're not talking about building bridges, we're talking about tearing them down, and possible consequences.
Surely we can conclude this debate by simply saying that bridges are fine when built high enough. It is possible that the bridge builders build it to benefit the community, on the other hand, maybe they don't, this probably depends on the builder, but that's a bit off topic. Basically, all that now needs to be discussed is how to spread awareness of this recommendation, as if bridges are built high enough, everyone's happy?
I think that's what people want. I couldn't care less, I take several boats with me when I go boating incase I run into something (usually ninja lily-pads). My concern was with smashing other peoples things, which I think is best approached on a case by case basis and all times try thinking about improving something rather than simply destroying it.
Well said this time apamment. I'm sorry you can't help with the kittens though, makes me sad =( Anyways, my original post was in response to: I took this as we were all in agreement that building the walkways at water level was bad and Blood was inquiring on how we as a community could get everyone to build these in this manner and how to inform and teach others to this method. I still see it as your choices for this are to: 1. make forums on the subject to inform Don’t think this will help because not everyone is concerned or likes to read the forums or frankly, cares about others 2. teach by demonstration - as in fixing the bridges for them so they see and immolate. Again, i think they will not be affective because they will not stop to think of the reasons for the change and even if you post a sign, there is a high probability they will just run past it to get to their destination. It’s not like they are going to lowly gag and smell the roses on the way, Reason they built the bridge in the first place was speed and ease of access. More than likely they are going to assume someone else that uses the bridge wanted to make it "Neater" and go on with their day. 3. Something like my above suggestion Because of the inconvenience of the bridge missing, it will spark confusion and anger, which will lead to inquires about why it was done which will force the knowledge upon them. (kind of, think of it like a miniature S.A.R.A. progression) 4. other stuff that you all suggest, it’s an open debate, yeahhhh All this aside, I have a feeling that this really isn’t going to go anywhere anyways. =( Affecting the building habits of an entire community is extremely challenging and takes time and lots of effort. I foresee people just breaking chunks in the bridges, hopefully making bump ups but if not, oh well. At least we determined that it is acceptable to at least make the holes in the bridges for passage without fear of persecution due to the fact that they are an movement obstacle.
Basically griefing is destroying something someone fells is "valuable". I don't think walkways are valuable therefore I wouldn't be sad if someone destoyed a narrow strip of land that cost me ten seconds to build and eight dirt to make. I also don't think the person who made it would care whether someone broke it. People only make these so they can cross the river easily. Hope this helps
We should probably gang up together and destroy the strip bridges in the wild and build true 2 block high bridges. Rivers are some of the easiest ways of getting around so we should make sure they are clean.
