Treecat Social Dynamics

cthia wrote:

ThinksMarkedly wrote:
The clan members also seem to be numbered in the hundreds and we do hear a lot about exchange of members between clans, which is probably sufficient by itself.

The minimum viable population (MVP) is 50/500 according to Wikipedia. But that number increases to thousands if there is inbreeding. Treecat clans have always seemed so small to me. I always think about some of the people I've interacted with in small, even somewhat, isolated cities. Let me tell you!

Jonathan_S wrote:Hmm. I can't recall a specific clan size being mentioned - but in A Beautiful Friendship just the portion of Bright Water Clan's scouts close enough to respond to Climbs Quickly's call was "over two hundred treecats". That seems to imply that a full clan is likely over a thousand 'cats since 200ish isn't even all its scouts and scouts are a minority of even its prime age adults (then add in the kits and elders).

And we know the 'cats practice some level of exogamy, and presumably that isn't new behavior since meeting human geneticists (given how limited the ability to communicate was until very recently). The one known survivor of Black Rock clan was (now called) Sorrow Singer - a memory singer who'd been in a nearby clan's range visiting her "litter brother" who'd married into that clan. So between the clan size and some level of leaving the clan to find a mate, there probably isn't a huge inbreeding concern.

I recall that passage and assigned it to clan size, that they all responded. But that shouldn't have been the case.

Also, a species would need some sort of way to identify relatives. Two-legs have ancestry.com LOL. Other species have ways to identify relatives as well, according to my initial post on the subject.

What about treecats? Well duh. They are an empathic species with Memory Singers! The genealogy is contained in a song. It goes a little something like this ...

<Climbs Quickly is connected to the A bone. The A bone is connected to the B bone . . .>

cthia wrote:Also, a species would need some sort of way to identify relatives. Two-legs have ancestry.com LOL. Other species have ways to identify relatives as well, according to my initial post on the subject.

What about treecats? Well duh. They are an empathic species with Memory Singers! The genealogy is contained in a song. It goes a little something like this ...

<Climbs Quickly is connected to the A bone. The A bone is connected to the B bone . . .>

Humans have spent over 99.8% of its recorded history without ancestry.com. And we managed just fine before recorded history too.

Treecats can simply remember who's related to whom. The memory singers will say "Laughs Brightly, son of Builds With Care, son of Remembers Confidently, daughter of Sings Truly"¹ or something like that.

The marker characteristics you mention that animals can use to determine relationship imply the animal kingdom knows the danger of inbreeding. If the same is true of treecats, they would have realised the same long ago, before sentience and recorded history. So it's not a leap of faith to assume they knew genealogy fairly well. The fact that Laughs Brightly knew he was descended from the same litter as Climbs Quickly² implies they did record this information in their clan lore.

Note 1: the two names in the middle I've just come up with.

Note 2: Climbs Quickly didn't have a mate before adopting Stephanie and as we discussed earlier in the thread, wouldn't have found one later. So he likely had no direct descendants of his. His litter-mates probably did.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

cthia wrote:Also, a species would need some sort of way to identify relatives. Two-legs have ancestry.com LOL. Other species have ways to identify relatives as well, according to my initial post on the subject.

What about treecats? Well duh. They are an empathic species with Memory Singers! The genealogy is contained in a song. It goes a little something like this ...

<Climbs Quickly is connected to the A bone. The A bone is connected to the B bone . . .>

Humans have spent over 99.8% of its recorded history without ancestry.com. And we managed just fine before recorded history too.

Treecats can simply remember who's related to whom. The memory singers will say "Laughs Brightly, son of Builds With Care, son of Remembers Confidently, daughter of Sings Truly"¹ or something like that.

The marker characteristics you mention that animals can use to determine relationship imply the animal kingdom knows the danger of inbreeding. If the same is true of treecats, they would have realised the same long ago, before sentience and recorded history. So it's not a leap of faith to assume they knew genealogy fairly well. The fact that Laughs Brightly knew he was descended from the same litter as Climbs Quickly² implies they did record this information in their clan lore.

Note 1: the two names in the middle I've just come up with.

Note 2: Climbs Quickly didn't have a mate before adopting Stephanie and as we discussed earlier in the thread, wouldn't have found one later. So he likely had no direct descendants of his. His litter-mates probably did.

LOL

Some humans have managed well without ancestry.com. Others, in isolated cities and even not so isolated, have not. I just posted where first cousins married by mistake fairly recently in the UK. And it isn't unusual for estranged siblings to marry. You've obviously never been to certain mountains in the US and other regions. Of course to be fair, those could have been conscious decisions to inbreed. OTOH, natural selection can only work if there is something to select.

On that note, to be fair, the notion of "clan" does not need to mean anti-social, or separated by animosity, but simply separated by geography. On second thought, I would imagine clans are accepting of one another and would intermingle readily.

I agree that cats would recognize bad blood for procreation. In that respect, our songs are the same. I simply used bones in the place of names. Your song is better, but I was using a popular American nursery rhyme.

BTW, I was noting the bones who beget Climbs Quickly instead of who Climbs Quickly begets. You can't know who you are unless you know from whence you came.

cthia wrote:Some humans have managed well without ancestry.com. Others, in isolated cities and even not so isolated, have not. I just posted where first cousins married by mistake fairly recently in the UK. And it isn't unusual for estranged siblings to marry. You've obviously never been to certain mountains in the US and other regions. Of course to be fair, those could have been conscious decisions to inbreed. OTOH, natural selection can only work if there is something to select.

Sure, also happened to very well-educated people and sometimes intentionally. See the Habsburgs, for example.

And this is not new. Again, see Oedipus and Jocasta. Whence the Oedipus complex.

But by and large the human population has managed. Wikipedia estimates we had a population of 1 to 10 million at 10000 BC, which is pre-historical times for us. The treecat population now is 12 million and they do have recorded history.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

cthia wrote:Some humans have managed well without ancestry.com. Others, in isolated cities and even not so isolated, have not. I just posted where first cousins married by mistake fairly recently in the UK. And it isn't unusual for estranged siblings to marry. You've obviously never been to certain mountains in the US and other regions. Of course to be fair, those could have been conscious decisions to inbreed. OTOH, natural selection can only work if there is something to select.

Sure, also happened to very well-educated people and sometimes intentionally. See the Habsburgs, for example.

And this is not new. Again, see Oedipus and Jocasta. Whence the Oedipus complex.

But by and large the human population has managed. Wikipedia estimates we had a population of 1 to 10 million at 10000 BC, which is pre-historical times for us. The treecat population now is 12 million and they do have recorded history.

Brilliant. And, man was corraled into clans too. Even now. I'll assume you're correct on the current treecat population. I think I recall reading that somewhere as well.

If I may, during 10000 BC natural selection would have been hard at work, as I imagine it is very significantly hard at work very early on in the timeline of most life forms. In 10000 BC inbred life would have been eliminated by the dinosaurs. Stupidity was at the top of the food chain, so thought T-Rex.

Treecat Experiment

Position treecat's inline at the end of their communication range from each other at a distance of ten miles. See how fast they can send a message from the first to last cat. Is thought FTL? Two-legs always wanted to know.

When I was a kid, my parents would get a message to me by my friends. Cellphones didn't exist in the Me-so-zoic era. LOL I wonder if treecat's allow themselves to be used as mobile phones. You can literally put an APB out for someone. Why didn't Nimitz call for help when he and Honor faced the Puma?

cthia wrote:

Treecat Experiment

Position treecat's inline at the end of their communication range from each other at a distance of ten miles. See how fast they can send a message from the first to last cat. Is thought FTL? Two-legs always wanted to know.

When I was a kid, my parents would get a message to me by my friends. Cellphones didn't exist in the Me-so-zoic era. LOL I wonder if treecat's allow themselves to be used as mobile phones. You can literally put an APB out for someone. Why didn't Nimitz call for help when he and Honor faced the Puma?

Why not, each Cat has a "bubble" of coverage, and cats on the edge of a range probably have to relay through several cats to get to the central nest for emergency communications. It's probably part of your social duty to act as an intermediary for communications.

cthia wrote:

Treecat Experiment

Position treecat's inline at the end of their communication range from each other at a distance of ten miles. See how fast they can send a message from the first to last cat. Is thought FTL? Two-legs always wanted to know.

When I was a kid, my parents would get a message to me by my friends. Cellphones didn't exist in the Me-so-zoic era. LOL I wonder if treecat's allow themselves to be used as mobile phones. You can literally put an APB out for someone. Why didn't Nimitz call for help when he and Honor faced the Puma?

Theemile wrote:hy not, each Cat has a "bubble" of coverage, and cats on the edge of a range probably have to relay through several cats to get to the central nest for emergency communications. It's probably part of your social duty to act as an intermediary for communications.

I agree, as long as the 911 system isn't abused with nonemergency calls. The "phone" could become flooded and ring all of the time. Have you ever experienced that? Of course, a treecat quarrel with it's mate would never abuse the phone lines trying to find his lover who walked out on him with, <Tell her I'm sorry and that I love her> We know treecat's can become heartbroken.

****** *

It isn't beyond a treecat to become criminal. How should a treecat be punished? Should they be imprisoned like a two-leg? If they are going to be citizens they can't be allowed to break the law. We already know they can steal.

Can we apply "two-finger discount" to treecats?

LOL

cthia wrote:****** *

It isn't beyond a treecat to become criminal. How should a treecat be punished? Should they be imprisoned like a two-leg? If they are going to be citizens they can't be allowed to break the law. We already know they can steal.

Can we apply "two-finger discount" to treecats?

LOL

I believe 2 punishments have been mentioned - Banishment and Corporal. There was mention of a mentally damaged treecat who... abused?... kittens and was permanently removed from society for his crimes.

I would think, being a communal culture, that 4 fingered discounts don't fully exist, but there probably are some societal lines drawn to curb bad behaviors. Attitudes like hording would be highly discouraged.

cthia wrote:Treecat Experiment

Position treecat's inline at the end of their communication range from each other at a distance of ten miles. See how fast they can send a message from the first to last cat. Is thought FTL? Two-legs always wanted to know.

I don't think treekittens find the game of telephone very amusing. They can repeat a message received with perfection, so it won't arrive garbled at the end.

Unless one of the players is an inveterate practical joker. Like, say, Laughs Brightly.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

cthia wrote:Treecat Experiment

Position treecat's inline at the end of their communication range from each other at a distance of ten miles. See how fast they can send a message from the first to last cat. Is thought FTL? Two-legs always wanted to know.

I don't think treekittens find the game of telephone very amusing. They can repeat a message received with perfection, so it won't arrive garbled at the end.

Unless one of the players is an inveterate practical joker. Like, say, Laughs Brightly.

At only 10 miles at a time between relays it might be tricky to untangle transmission time from speed of thought.

Mindspeech is unlikely to be instantaneously processed and rebroadcast, nor is metal processing like to be perfectly consistent attempt to attempt (thinking slower when tired or distracted; for example). If, for example, there's a "processing delay of 30,0000 +/-12,000 microseconds that'd makes it exceptionally difficult to determine if the transmission delay is less than the ~54 microseconds it takes light to go 10 miles.


But I guess that's why you need scientists who are exceptionally clever experiment designers; to come up with methods to tease out the data you're interested in from a very noisy data set.