[MUD-Dev] Community Relations

Thu Jan 27 23:17:08 CET 2000

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------_=_NextPart_001_01BF6946.8B142610
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

Re: Lovecraft's last posting:

Hi, read your links, have some questions...

First, however, IMHO, well done.  Remarkable insight for someone who claims
that their "understanding of political science continually needs upgrading."
:)

A few of your statements concerning how to/how not to politic were obviously
born of some trying experiences.  One that particularly drew my attention
was "It is very uncouth to yell out 'Has everyone given support?'"  This
leads me to believe that you've had some problems with players who didn't
really care about representing the interests of their fellow Aislings, but
were simply concerned with obtaining extra powers - i.e., another form of
levelling.  And, based upon the assumption that people wouldn't repeatedly
send out such inquiries unless they were, to a certain degree, successful -
that some players throw away their "votes" without the due care and
attention you're system tries to foster.  I realize there is always going to
be the bad with the good, et al. that... but I was wondering if reducing the
frequency of voting, thereby increasing the value of each decision, would
lead people to treat the process with greater respect?

Lovecraft wrote: 
> What is an example system that is less corrupt than the tyranny of the
> majority?

An incorruptable and authoritarian AI hooked up to an everlasting power
supply that is programmed to listen to and evaluate every possible point of
view on every possible issue, and make decisions that maximize the
well-being of every person alive by ensuring that equal distibution of both
goods and security is balanced with unheralded levels of social and
scientific progress, all the while maintaining the prime directive that all
forms of life are to be protected and cherished at both the individual and
collective levels. :) 

> I agree with Matthew's statement about the advantage of competing
> hierarchies.  Dark Ages has two hierarchies.  There are two villages.
> Village officials only have jurisdiction over the village.  
> The greatest
> threat is exile, which means the criminal cannot enter the village's
> territory.  As the community grows, the other villages will 
> be given to
> player control.

Do you provide each village with an initial slant, i.e., "you guys are the
evil ones", or is every village free to start from scratch?  If the latter,
do the villages eventually pursue vastly distinctive political philosophies,
or do they all start to resemble one another?

> Corruption, like a weed, lives.  Since I am a developer and 
> the only level
> editor/writer/operator/scripter, I don't directly administer.  When I
> receive a report of a crime, I refer it to a player Guard or Demagogue
> (legislator).  When I receive a report of Guard or Demagogue 
> corruption or
> neglect, I investigate.  When necessary I remove the corrupt official.

Do, and if so, how do people rebel against these "dictatorial" acts?  Also,
have you ever gone back on a decision when faced with a huge outcry?  Do you
ever put your opinion as to what "should" happen above that of the players?

Forgive me if these issues were addressed prior to my joning the list...

Cheers,

G. 

------_=_NextPart_001_01BF6946.8B142610
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2650.12">
<TITLE>RE: [MUD-Dev] Community Relations</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Re: Lovecraft's last posting:</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Hi, read your links, have some questions...</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>First, however, IMHO, well done.  Remarkable =
insight for someone who claims that their "understanding of =
political science continually needs upgrading."  =
:)</FONT></P>

A few of your statements concerning how to/how not to =
politic were obviously born of some trying experiences.  One that =
particularly drew my attention was "It is very uncouth to yell out =
'Has everyone given support?'"  This leads me to believe that =
you've had some problems with players who didn't really care about =
representing the interests of their fellow Aislings, but were simply =
concerned with obtaining extra powers - i.e., another form of =
levelling.  And, based upon the assumption that people wouldn't =
repeatedly send out such inquiries unless they were, to a certain =
degree, successful - that some players throw away their =
"votes" without the due care and attention you're system =
tries to foster.  I realize there is always going to be the bad =
with the good, et al. that... but I was wondering if reducing the =
frequency of voting, thereby increasing the value of each decision, =
would lead people to treat the process with greater respect?

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Lovecraft wrote: </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> What is an example system that is less corrupt =
than the tyranny of the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> majority?</FONT>
</P>

An incorruptable and authoritarian AI hooked up to an =
everlasting power supply that is programmed to listen to and evaluate =
every possible point of view on every possible issue, and make =
decisions that maximize the well-being of every person alive by =
ensuring that equal distibution of both goods and security is balanced =
with unheralded levels of social and scientific progress, all the while =
maintaining the prime directive that all forms of life are to be =
protected and cherished at both the individual and collective levels. =
:)

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> I agree with Matthew's statement about the =
advantage of competing</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> hierarchies.  Dark Ages has two =
hierarchies.  There are two villages.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Village officials only have jurisdiction over =
the village.  </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> The greatest</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> threat is exile, which means the criminal =
cannot enter the village's</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> territory.  As the community grows, the =
other villages will </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> be given to</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> player control.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Do you provide each village with an initial slant, =
i.e., "you guys are the evil ones", or is every village free =
to start from scratch?  If the latter, do the villages eventually =
pursue vastly distinctive political philosophies, or do they all start =
to resemble one another?</FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2> </FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Corruption, like a weed, lives.  Since I am =
a developer and </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> the only level</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> editor/writer/operator/scripter, I don't =
directly administer.  When I</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> receive a report of a crime, I refer it to a =
player Guard or Demagogue</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> (legislator).  When I receive a report of =
Guard or Demagogue </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> corruption or</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> neglect, I investigate.  When necessary I =
remove the corrupt official.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Do, and if so, how do people rebel against these =
"dictatorial" acts?  Also, have you ever gone back on a =
decision when faced with a huge outcry?  Do you ever put your =
opinion as to what "should" happen above that of the =
players?</FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Forgive me if these issues were addressed prior to my =
joning the list...</FONT>
</P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Cheers,</FONT>
</P>

G.

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01BF6946.8B142610--

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