The tools of evil are Dybuk, the Evil Rings, a few spells, extortion from other players, sowing seeds of discord and - to a lesser extent � Popcorn and Contraband(!). The nature of evil is to seek rapid advancement - occasionally, sometimes or often at the expense of other players; those tools of evil that are actually game mechanics are all geared towards rapid advancement. Rapid descent is a by-product. This rapid descent is not limited to the agent of evil; it is to be shared with those who have obtained their position through time, patience and hard work.

This last statement is the moral imperative of evil. Those who attain their positions the hard way recognize the threat that evil poses to them. Their propaganda campaign is easy, direct, and rarely questioned. Moreover, this message of, "If you seek the way of evil then you will surely come to ruin," is not only universally accepted, it is also true. The nature of evil, however, is that no amount of time, patience or hard work is exempt from the ruination of evil. In the case of Dybuk, protection is available, but that has been recognized as a mistake. Unless the tools of evil are used and used well, however, turnover in the upper ranks is strictly voluntary. The "Static Power Structure" once bemoaned by Andy of the Constitution is nothing but a failure to use the tools of evil effectively. All excitement - not all the enjoyment, but all the excitement - in TBG derives from some aspect of the practice of evil.

The power of evil, then, is not the ability to establish a new state, but the power to overturn the state that does exist. The turbulence associated with the practice of evil is part of the design, part of Jeremy's vision for TBG. Those who practice evil have the ability to tear down in 100 turns what others have spent 300 turns to build. Once you have spent 300 turns building, however, you will lose the will to tear down. That's 2 years of work and emotional investment that is difficult to surrender. The act of building dulls you to the charm of revolution; every week that you invest in the current power structure can be washed away in one turn of evil � whether yours or someone else's, it matters not.

Complicated plans require strong willed, or at least competent, people to execute. Further, such plans requires that individuals with strong egos be will be willing to turn their productivity over to the plan. That is not suited to a western temperament. To those contemplating a career of evil, I am not counseling an immediate break with those who support you, but you do need to get your knife in and twist while you still have the will to do so.

Those were essentially the lessons that I learned from the downfall of FIST. Frank de Jong (Mendelssohn) was able to put a large vessel into play against good because someone else built it. The threat of the Mendelssohn was greatly reduced and the only previous agent of evil greatly hindered in a (largely Pyrrhic) victory over BSL shortly after FIST was founded. Recruiting larger vessels proved to be a mistake as they were never willing to commit to any overt evil action.

These goals are abandoned:

A general agreement on the nature of an ideal target

A truce among all agents of evil

Commitment of at least minimal resources to promote general evil

Basic co-operation among small groups of evil agents

Evil is not targeted; it is unleashed. Debate about targets is a tangent. It generates unnecessary contention among a group of people naturally inclined to it. Egos do not readily submit to external direction. Evil is essentially selfish and self-centered. There is no commitment. Those who promote evil do so in their own time and for their own reasons.

Honor among thieves exists. You can trust any agent of evil to act in self-interest. Evil alliances will, of necessity, be small and usually of an ad hoc nature. The longer an alliance persists, the more it strays from its founding principles. As with revolutionary governments, alliances of evil are transitory in nature and rife with corruption.

The new goal is to establish the following understandings:

The rise and fall of alliances and individual player positions should be the natural order.

Aggression, in game, is no fault proposition.

Doing well is relative to other players.

Only those with a vested interest in the status quo should promote it.

It is my opinion that these points should be obviously true and patently clear. It is clear from in-game conduct that many, if not most, players seem to lack a grasp of the obvious. This polemic is not addressed to them. It is addressed to those who may otherwise overlook these simple truths because of the entanglements that engulf them while they are still seeking to master the mechanics of the game.