[MUD-Dev] Guilds & Politics [was Affecting the World]

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

JC Lawrence <claw at under.Eng.Sun.COM> wrote:
>
>On Wed, 7 Jan 1998 17:19:57 PST8PDT 
>stad <Ola> wrote:

>
>>>>> The admin is tha ultimate authority, should know that...
>
>>>> [Not?] neccessarily. Look at IRC.
>
>>> Nahh, that's where the aspect of consent mentioned above comes in.
>
>> world vs segment (channel on irc) system owner vs player
>> Quite a big difference.
>
>Nope.  The channel ops are the owners of their channels, such (until
>they get kicked off by any of the standard robot attacks), but they
>are also there by the sufferance and consent of the server owner.

Server owner?  It is distributed, do you mean the university?
Actually, they only pulled it down for a week or two to make it look
good because the newspapers wrote about pedophile exchange during
christmas.

The big difference is local government by peers.


>> Owner = designer = programmer = janitor = JCL.  Implies total
>> control.  
>
>Agreed.
>
>> Implies blurred roles.  
>
>False.  The ability for blurring is just as present as when the roles
>are embodied in seperate individuals.  A person amy "collude" or
>"conspire" with others almost as easily as he may with others.

Of course. But you can't avoid that _communication_ when one individual
holds all roles.  You may avoid that in other "configurations".

>Consider the standard bitch sessions which go on in most companies
>break rooms over coffee.  In its more innocuous form:

You assume a "configuration".

>> If the owner is an user owned (and run) organization...
>
>I won't bother argueing againt the idiocies of democracy.  However

That was not the main point.  The main point is that those that make
the laws and those that execute them should be separated.  And there
should be formal rules for the janitor.  This is rather basic.

Ola.