[MUD-Dev] Re: Unix is a mud (Re: Ugh, IS Diablo a mud?)

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

J C Lawrence wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 26 Sep 1998 00:06:52 -5
> Jon A Lambert<jlsysinc at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> 
> > A much better question to ask, is why is there such a strong desire
> > to refine a criterion carefully crafted to insure specific games and
> > servers like Quake, C&C, Diablo and the habitats remain on the
> > fringes of mud-dom?
> 
> And thus the circle closes: MUD-Dev is itself a MUD.

Do you really feel a strong real time "presence" in Mud-dev? 

Anyway, I would say that Unix has more MUD aspects to it than MUD-Dev, even
than some MUDs according to some of the criterions I have seen on this list.
Unix is multi-user, has a wholist, buildingcapabilities, chatting, talk, etc
etc. Different character (user) classes. Fightingcapabilities (freewheeling
forks, diskspace usage, printer queues, hacking). It is also a persistent
and changing world (filesystem). There is plenty to explore for the players.
:-P Unix also provides user descriptions (.plan) and stats.

What's the bloody point in discussing a classification system without
discussing the purpose? It is certainly more political than rational when
one are motivated by usage but lists technical requirements. If the goal is
usage, then the usage is also a suitable measure. There are usually many
classification hierarchies that could be used to order a given set of
phenomenas (in biology: genes, mating, geographical, looks, habitat, food
etc). Purpose before classification is essential, at least in the rational
world, maybe not in the political :P

My primary concern is usage, hence I don't see Unix as a typical MUD system.
Although I am willing to view it as a MUD if the usage meets my
requirements. I have seen Unix systems being used in a MUD-like fashion in
the CS-labs. (Exploring the filesystem of a big UNIX site can be very
exciting
for a newbie.)

(Btw: AFAIK Electric Communities' new habitat is not server based, but still
provides the same functionality. There you go, you technically oriented
classifying racists.)
--
Ola