[MUD-Dev] Wild west (was Guilds & Politics)

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad <olag@ifi.uio.no>]

JC Lawrence <claw at under.Eng.Sun.COM> wrote:
>On Mon, 5 Jan 1998 19:57:08 PST8PDT Ola wrote:
>
>> (BTW I would feel pretty bad if the
>> government implanted some reporting device in my brain, or put
>> cameras on each streetcorner.)
>
>Note that the video cameras on every street corner model proposed in
>Helsinki and other places was based on the idea that those cameras
>would be freely and readily accessable by __any__ interested party.
>Its a variation on Big Brother where everybody has the opportunity to
>watch everybody else all the time, and the Govt has no control of what
>is watched, or who watches.

And?  This makes it a great idea?

>> Guilty unless logged? That's pretty horrible.  Anyway. Think about
>> this.  Your MUD is research with human testobjects, do whatever you
>> want as long as it follows guidelines for such research.
>
>There is a key difference -- players can bail at any instant without
>any expense.  

Huh?  Explain the difference.  I don't see difference. AFAIK current
paradigms implies a lot more than the right to withdraw at your own
wish without any expense.

There is of course more than one expense involved when you feel forced
to leave a mud in which you have invested time and effort, and where
you have found _real_ friends.

>> It isn't the same... yet.  Anyway, the trauma is RL, the feelings
>> are real.  Ruling over other people is ruling over other people.  If
>> the RL government were monitoring me but would guarantee to not put
>> me in jail etc, would I like it, would I approve? NO!
>
>In the final analysis, if something is seen but nothing results from
>that having been seen, does it really matter?

Yes.  Because something results.  How can you fail to see this?
Because it is convinient, again?  (Let's drop the subject, it is all
in previous messages, I don't feel like running in loops)

>I probably shouldn't note here that I consider a life itself to be a
>communication, and thus a point of responsibility and record for that
>individual.  If that individual considers, rightly or wrongly, that
>portions of that life were reprehensible or otherwise less than
>admirable, then that is their choice in engaging in those activities.

I don't feel like discussing religious beliefs that most people
(users) don't have.  I am not even going to ask you do define terms
like "choice" and "decide".

Ola.