Conflicted

[Cromicon]

A good thought provoking game anyone can buy is called CONFLICTED.
In this you are presented with various scenarios and your answer to those scenarios is graded by the other players.
Not particularly mentioned is the following scenario:

"You are a member of an online prepping forum and have been taking some advice given in this forum in order to prepare for certain eventualities.
You are impressed by a members seemingly expansive knowledge however you do not know this member personally.
Do you:
a) break operational security and work with this member to try to enhance your and/or your families survival
b) contain operational security and wait until you have met this member a number of times in neutral locations and performed a risk assessment before taking any further action (a)
c) contain operational security and simply observe the members activities
d) contain operational security and ignore the members activities.
e) contain operational security and wait until you have met this member once satisfying yourself all is in order before taking any further action (a)


Breaking operational security includes any and all actions that can betray your identity or specific location putting you and/or your family at risk.

Are these questions the product of an over-active imagination, paranoia or good sense? Comments open.

[Malthouse]

Online anonymity is not all it is cracked up to be, I know it would not take too much digging for anyone to work out who and where I am. The same goes for all but the uber-cautious.

It is just a matter of balance, if you think meeting someone in the RW is going to be worth it then just take sensible precautions. So long as you are not giving them the code to your hidden cache of preps...

So basically I vote either A or E, depending on the potential benefits of meeting.

Also undertake a bit of due diligence, using open source intelligence to research people before you open up too much to them. Are they who they claim to be, are there posts just copied and pasted from Google.

[Cromicon]

Good answer... and a well demonstrated point!

[Malthouse]

[Briggs]

We have the Conflicted pack of scenario cards at home, have you worked through a few scenarios with your friends? It's a handy method of working out their state of preparedness and what their first reaction would be should disaster come their way. I've worked out from their responses that most, if not all, are planning to come my way so I'd better prep for that, eh?

The scenarios can be a bit US based but otherwise it's all SHTF relevant and thought provoking stuff.

Oh, and I would say e) to the scenario above.

[Plymtom]

Another one here agrees with Malthouse and Briggs, I don't have the cards but have thought through many scenarios E first then perhaps A

[Cromicon]

Interestingly enough after playing this a couple of times I've realised that neither my friends nor I appear to have any moral conflicts. Self preservation trumps every time... There's been some interesting discussion though.

[newtonweir]

Hi,

This scenario based game isn't really my thing, and maybe Im just being a bit too picky, but I thought it was a shame they chose a gun to represent prepping on the window tab :



Regards,
S.

[Cromicon]

Yeah, I think the gun representation may be a cultural thing more than anything else. Don't get me wrong though, I'm not touting business for them. I'm merely commenting on the concept of the game and when we played it we noticed how much we were prepared to do to ensure survival. It's definitely good for prompting those discussions.