[MUD-Dev] Re: Affordances and social method (Was: Re: Wi

[Dan Shiovitz]

On Fri, 7 Aug 1998, J C Lawrence wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jul 1998 03:46:36 -5 
> Jon A Lambert<jlsysinc at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
[..]
> > Nod.  The availability of @gag did not prevent the Mr. Bungle
> > incident.  Nor would @gag or "squelch" affect third party
> > observation of such activity.
> 
> A thought:
[..]
>   As the number of gags increased on a player, the distance
> propagation of his speech, or of his proxies speech would be decreased
> proportionally.  Ultimately perhaps he would have to shout to be heard
> by someone standing immediately beside him.

If you're going to do something like this, why not just let people
vote to prevent players from speaking at all? Say, if 10% of the
people on the mud (minimum 10) vote to @gag someone, that person gets
gagged for the next thirty minutes or until a wizard ungags them. You
can of course expand this sort of system to handle all the wizard
functions: @boot probably requires slightly fewer votes than @gag,
@toadplayer requires a lot of votes, @siteban requires virtual
unanimity. There's some stuff to work out here about preventing
multiple votes from the same person and how long the voting period
should be and so on, but no biggie.  

(If you want, it might be better to do a chit system instead of a
voting period. You have X chits you can give out. If a person
accumulates N chits, they get whatever penalty is appropriate. This is
basically a slightly-more-decentralized version of the voting system.)

> J C Lawrence                               Internet: claw at null.net
--
Dan Shiovitz || dbs at cs.wisc.edu || http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~dbs 
"...Incensed by some crack he had made about modern enlightened
thought, modern enlightened thought being practically a personal buddy
of hers, Florence gave him the swift heave-ho and--much against my
will, but she seemed to wish it--became betrothed to me." - PGW, J.a.t.F.S.