[MUD-Dev] Administrative Responsibilities

[Greg Munt]

On Sun, 1 Feb 1998, Chris Gray wrote:

> [Greg Munt:]
> 
> :My question: should mud administrators neccessarily feel any
> :responsibilities, in the manner of which I have described above? Are they
> :simply maintainers of the server and its database, or does their position
> :*demand* that they take an interest in social issues too? Should players
> :expect protection from social problems - such as harassment and
> :victimisation - from administrators? If protection is not offered, are 
> :players reasonably entitled to deem the administrators unworthy? Do
> :administrators have any responsibilities to the users of their software?
> 
> Different people have different interests. Someone capable of programming
> a MUD server, and of putting together a scenario, may have the social
> skills of a wolverine. If the accepted answer to your question is 'yes',
> then that person cannot do anything with the system they have created,
> other than perhaps give it to someone else. In the free and open world
> of the non-work-time internet, I don't believe that is acceptable. You
> *want* social responsibility on the part of someone who has the technical
> skills and opportunity to host a MUD, but I don't think you can *demand*
> it. Doing so puts you in the same position as your harassers - putting
> your own desires ahead of those of others.

You suggest that to comply with my demands (yes, they *are* demands - 
explained later) an administrator must decide between not opening the 
mud, or giving it to someone else.

I do not agree that these are the only options. Even the geekiest of
coders has a social conscience, and a sense of morality. The
legitimisation of harassment and victimisation is immoral. It also has a
huge potential to damage the society. My solution: outlaw such activities.
Deal with aggressors in a predetermined manner. If the administrator is
incapable of dealing with social problems, they should delegate their
responsibilities. 

My opinion: these responsibilities are part of being an administrator. To
lose the responsibilities, you must lose the administrative position. 
Delegation does not mean discarding them, it means assigning the work 
required to meet them, to a subordinate.

You also say that I cannot demand that administrators assume these 
responsibilities. Again, I disagree. Demanding that administrators act 
responsibly is not putting my desires ahead of those of others; for, 
attempting to prevent harassment and victimisation benefits the society 
that has developed within the mud. It benefits every member of that 
society. A 'safe' society such as this increases the happiness factor of 
its members. This can only make the mud more successful, assuming that 
you consider success and popularity as synonymous. If you don't then I 
assume that you at least want any potential user of the mud to enjoy 
themselves? 

A 'safe' society aids in satisfying this goal: "We aim to encourage all
users to have as much fun as they can, providing that this fun does not
detrimentally affect that of others." 

--
Greg Munt, greg at uni-corn.demon.co.uk   "I'm not bitter - just twisted."
http://www.uni-corn.demon.co.uk/ubiquity/