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

[Matt Chatterley]

On Wed, 7 Jan 1998, Ola Fosheim Gr=F8stad wrote:
> Matt Chatterley <root at mpc.dyn.ml.org> wrote:
> >On Mon, 5 Jan 1998, Ola Fosheim Gr=F8stad wrote:

[Snip]

> >> designed for this).  IRC is an example of a very popular system with
> >> autonomous "zones".  Pointers to muds that are providing this type of
> >> self-controlled zones are appreciated!
> >
> >Ah, this is a matter of personal taste. IRC enforces 'nice play' in that
> >operators can remove persons from channels (operators being sanctioned
> >admins as far as their channels are concerned).
>=20
> Yeah, but it is local government, disconnected from system
> ownership. That is the major difference.

Hmm. This analogy is somewhat lost on me since where I live (Channel
Isles) we have only one government, being to small for any real sort of
'local' system that has real effect (we do actually have a 'parish'
system, but it is fairly irrelevant and only for administrative concerns
really). I find the entire 'player rights' debate quite interesting from a
distance due to the number of different opinions and approaches taken by
people - personally it sums down to 'players have no rights, except the
right to leave'. This sounds harsher than it is - since I dislike players
harrassing each other (note: harrassment does not extend to cover
bickering, the odd insult, etc, but rather covers repeatedly aggressive
OOC behaviour and so forth) and a few other things.
=20
> >Enforcing out of character regulations is something purely at the admins
> >discretion (personally I enforce a small set of standardish ones - again=
st
> >harrassment, and a few other things).
>=20
> Well, monitoring is not bad if you enforce IC strictly. (because then
> it will eventually be very visible and there will be no RL content)
> However, if you just say that you enforce it, but don't do it...
>
> (one could make monitoring visible too (red light), but...)

If I were again in an environment where I was attempting to enforce 'fully
IC play', I would probably monitor situations at random to 'check up'
(with notification before hand, or a statement somewhere that logging can
take place in any location deemed public).
=20
> >Some muds attempt to have OOC bodies enforce IC regulations (admin
>=20
> I think Lambert is on the right track by providing two separate
> systems (I guess he means instantly available).  IMO one should make
> OOC communication functionality BETTER than IC (for instance by
> offering realtime "unix talk" features). Hopefully that will make
> people prefer the OOC system for longer OOC talk sessions..

Yes, definitely a good approach.
=20
> This is a bit weird though. To stimulate strict IC, make OOC most
> attractive...

Not as strange as it sounds.

Regards,
=09-Matt Chatterley
=09ICQ: 5580107
"We can recode it; we have the technology."