[MUD-Dev] Community Relations

[Dundee]

Ola Fosheim Gr=F8stad <olag at ifi.uio.no> wrote:

> And I don't think there is much use in getting into the specifics
> without getting the other parties viewpoint either.=20

Right, sorry.  I don't mean to get into the specifics so much at all.  =
I'm
just not sure what questions to ask.  As far as I can tell, the things I =
need
to be doing are on the "Well, duh" level.

> Most admins will justify anything they do (I had no choice, it is my =
system,=20
> he asked for it, it would have happened anyway...), and that's rather =
typical of
> people that acquire positions where they can exercise.

I should explain, maybe.  We've been up for ~6 months.  I have ~6 months
experience as an admin - and all of that's been on the game design and
development front, nothing to do with player-relations apart from =
listening
to them gripe about how various things work, or don't work, or should =
work,
etc., explaining what changes I'm making and why, and so on.  The dialog =
I've
had with players up to this point has purely revolved around game =
mechanics.

=46our of us setup the mud.  No posted policies beyond "How to join" and =
"Don't
be a jerk".  No mud hierarchy.  No Arch-Wizard or Grand Poobah or =
whatever
you want to call it.  The host pulled the plug a few days ago, I found a =
new
host and put it back online.  And now I have a few days experience being =
the
Arch-Wizard or Grand Poobah or whatever you want to call it.

And the first thing I had to do, was to deal with this incident - which,
yeah, never would have happened in the first place if we'd done anything
right.  I still don't think that I *did* deal with it.  I think I tried,
couldn't do it, and finally banned the player just to shut him up.  I =
punted.

But I'm not happy with that solution, and I don't like the aura of fear I
sense now on the game message boards and such.  People are afraid to =
complain
now - even about legitimate problems with game mechanics (and they were =
never
shy about reporting these problems before).

> I am personally in favour of the empathic/autonomous/peerage with no =
visible=20
> admin, but that assumes a design without serious flaws...

I think we're stuck with the fascist model.  heh.

> Yes, but the real question is not how to deal with him, but what skills
> do you require from your admins and what systems are in place to avoid
> the admin-player conflict?

That's a good question.  Currently there aren't any systems in place to
prevent it.  We still don't even have a code of conduct posted, for =
either
players or admins.

I wish there was a check-list somewhere.  Setting up a mud: a) Post this,=
 b)
Post that, c) Decide this or that, d) etc.

--=20
http://dundee.uong.com/



_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev maillist  -  MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev