[MUD-Dev] Re: Affordances and social method (Was: Re: Wi
Jon A. Lambert
jlsysinc at ix.netcom.com
Tue Jul 14 03:46:36 CEST 1998
On 13 Jul 98, Koster, Raph wrote:
> > From: Todd Lair [SMTP:tlair at mailzone.com]
> > A squelch command? A player could squelch another, so that any text
> > produced by the
> > irritant would not be received by the squelcher. Also, the squelchie
> > could not perform any
> > acts on the squelcher. One of the drawbacks probably would be that it
> > certainly would
> > make dieing from PK's obsolete. Although, with friendly PK, or duels,
> > this might be viewed
> > as chickening out. Thus the standing player wins by forfeit.
> >
> What about indirect means, though? Here's something to consider... say
> Bubba who is now squelched wanders around telling everyone in the mud
> that Buffy is a <insert derogatory term of choice>. Word gets back to
> Buffy. Is this something Buffy should be upset about? Is it something
> Buffy should have recourse for?Is it something an admin needs to step in
> for, or is the proper answer to have everyone in the game squelch Bubba
> too?
Nod. The availability of @gag did not prevent the Mr. Bungle
incident. Nor would @gag or "squelch" affect third party observation
of such activity.
--
--/*\ Jon A. Lambert - TychoMUD Internet:jlsysinc at ix.netcom.com /*\--
--/*\ Mud Server Developer's Page <http://www.netcom.com/~jlsysinc> /*\--
--/*\ "Everything that deceives may be said to enchant" - Plato /*\--
More information about the mud-dev-archive
mailing list