Third World Naming

[jamescfm]

Not a particularly high stakes point but does anyone know if there is an explanation of the name "Third World". It is clearly preferable to ex-colonies as an in-game shorthand for non-playable nations but it does present a big question: where is the second world? If an explanation doesn't exist, we could formulate one perhaps based on a previous global conflict or some kind of old world/new world divide.

[Aquinas]

How about positing that originally, way back in time, it was considered "First World Nations" were nations which were significant colonial powers (eg. Indrala, Luthori & co.), "Second World Nations" were nations which were not significant colonial powers but were not subject to colonial rule themselves, and "Third World Nations" were nations which were subject to colonial rule for all or most of the time.

Then lets say that at some point later, someone at least vaguely famous (maybe Philippus T. Kruger, the first ever General Secretary of the World Congress when it was formed in 4113?) wrote a book called The Three Worlds, decrying the fact that a few nations in Terra seemed to hold most of the power and privilege (the "First World"), a second-tier of nations held some independence but had little influence over their own or the world's destiny (the "Second World") and a great mass of nations lived in abject poverty and were completely helpless to control their fate (the "Third World"). And lets say that since then, this has been the generally assumed definition of The Three Worlds.

[Polites]

How about positing that originally, way back in time, it was considered "First World Nations" were nations which were significant colonial powers (eg. Indrala, Luthori & co.), "Second World Nations" were nations which were not significant colonial powers but were not subject to colonial rule themselves, and "Third World Nations" were nations which were subject to colonial rule for all or most of the time.

Then lets say that at some point later, someone at least vaguely famous (maybe Philippus T. Kruger, the first ever General Secretary of the World Congress when it was formed in 4113?) wrote a book called The Three Worlds, decrying the fact that a few nations in Terra seemed to hold most of the power and privilege (the "First World"), a second-tier of nations held some independence but had little influence over their own or the world's destiny (the "Second World") and a great mass of nations lived in abject poverty and were completely helpless to control their fate (the "Third World"). And lets say that since then, this has been the generally assumed definition of The Three Worlds.

I always thought something along these lines was the case. First World = Great Powers, Third World = ex-colonies, and Second World = everyone else. Basically the same as Mao's Three Worlds Theory or the Core, Periphery, Semi-Periphery classification in the world-systems theory (for which there's a precedent in RP).

[CCP]

Some terms don't have discernible origins. Not every phrase enters popular usage by a traceable historical route. Some sayings just get widely used, and no one remembers why.

Instead of retconning a fabricated history through a meta process, an academic character could simply trace the IC history of the term's usage. When the historical (forum) record runs out, the academic could just say the term's earlier origins are uncertain.

That is the truth after all, ICly anyway.

[Aquinas]

Some terms don't have discernible origins. Not every phrase enters popular usage by a traceable historical route. Some sayings just get widely used, and no one remembers why.

Instead of retconning a fabricated history through a meta process, an academic character could simply trace the IC history of the term's usage. When the historical (forum) record runs out, the academic could just say the term's earlier origins are uncertain.

That is the truth after all, ICly anyway.

In general terms, I would be cautious about relying on the forum as a source of information for in-game history, because we've already had issues with threads being removed, and the Moderators have been talking about wanting to have even more taken out as well.

[CCP]

Some terms don't have discernible origins. Not every phrase enters popular usage by a traceable historical route. Some sayings just get widely used, and no one remembers why.

Instead of retconning a fabricated history through a meta process, an academic character could simply trace the IC history of the term's usage. When the historical (forum) record runs out, the academic could just say the term's earlier origins are uncertain.

That is the truth after all, ICly anyway.

In general terms, I would be cautious about relying on the forum as a source of information for in-game history, because we've already had issues with threads being removed, and the Moderators have been talking about wanting to have even more taken out as well.

Thank you for sharing with us what you would do. But in general terms, it's obviously besides the point.

Moderators during your tenure deleted several Party Orgs and Treaties, some containing significant amounts of game history. Game bills holding many volumes of game history are un-searchable and often can only be accessed with great tedium. Even the wiki must be taken with a grain of salt since heavily edited articles can mislead unsuspecting readers, especially those not given to analyzing an article's history page. And an incalculable amount of game history was lost when the TakeForum went offline.

None of that means we're forced to retcon every question mark. Sometimes an unknown is okay, and may even give rise to interesting fluid RP that a fully-plotted retcon couldn't match.

[Aquinas]

Some terms don't have discernible origins. Not every phrase enters popular usage by a traceable historical route. Some sayings just get widely used, and no one remembers why.

Instead of retconning a fabricated history through a meta process, an academic character could simply trace the IC history of the term's usage. When the historical (forum) record runs out, the academic could just say the term's earlier origins are uncertain.

That is the truth after all, ICly anyway.

In general terms, I would be cautious about relying on the forum as a source of information for in-game history, because we've already had issues with threads being removed, and the Moderators have been talking about wanting to have even more taken out as well.

Thank you for sharing with us what you would do. But in general terms, it's obviously besides the point.

Moderators during your tenure deleted several Party Orgs and Treaties, some containing significant amounts of game history. Game bills holding many volumes of game history are un-searchable and often can only be accessed with great tedium. Even the wiki must be taken with a grain of salt since heavily edited articles can mislead unsuspecting readers, especially those not given to analyzing an article's history page. And an incalculable amount of game history was lost when the TakeForum went offline.

None of that means we're forced to retcon every question mark. Sometimes an unknown is okay, and may even give rise to interesting fluid RP that a fully-plotted retcon couldn't match.

I'm not quite sure what the argument is you're trying to pick here.

James requested suggestions about a RP explanation for the terms "Second World" and "Third World". I proffered a suggestion. You made a comment about using the forum to dig through history. I made an observation on the limitations regarding that.

Party Orgs and Treaties have not just been deleted during my Mod tenure, but during every Mod tenure. They have never been guaranteed to permanently exist, and this has long been generally known. But anyway, this has nothing to do with the topic, so I'll be stopping here, but do feel free to pm if you want to continue.

[CCP]

You made a comment about using the forum to dig through history.

I'm not quite sure what the argument is you're trying to pick here.

I made a comment about leaving the term's origin unknown. But of course you couldn't resist an oppurtunity to project a little victimhood for yourself could you.

But anyway, this has nothing to do with the topic

Which you knew before derailing the thread with another one of your "Aquinas should be the moderator" rants.

so I'll be stopping here

Don't we wish.

but do feel free to pm if you want to continue.

You're an obnoxious attention seeker. Shut up and PM yourself.

[jamescfm]

Some terms don't have discernible origins. Not every phrase enters popular usage by a traceable historical route. Some sayings just get widely used, and no one remembers why.

Instead of retconning a fabricated history through a meta process, an academic character could simply trace the IC history of the term's usage. When the historical (forum) record runs out, the academic could just say the term's earlier origins are uncertain.

That is the truth after all, ICly anyway.

I don’t think this is entirely fair, the term is primarily meta since it was created by the Role Play Team. Having spoken to at least one of the team that first introduced it, it seems they intended for it to be primarily an OOC so it’s not unreasonable to ask how it became an in-game term.

Clearly the messages after that are pretty irrevelant.

[CCP]

it was created by the Role Play Team. Having spoken to at least one of the team that first introduced it

Who did you speak with? Zanz? Did he actually say the RP Team created the term "Third World?" Because I'm almost certain I remember the off-map countries being referred to as "Third World" before the RP Team was created (in addition to "colonies" and "former colonies").