[MUD-Dev] Bay Area Press re: UO, the good the bad and the Ugly.

[F. Randall Farmer]

> Caliban Tiresias Darklock said:
> Let's turn that around:
> 
> "Should you periodically call Timmy on the phone and tell him to log on
> and play the game for a while?"
> 
> Clearly, the answer to this question is a big NO. 

Unfair example! The original is not reversable in that way.

You could have just as easily made that scenario this instead:

Change the reminder to say "Timmy, we notice that you haven't been to
FantasyWorld in awhile. There's a bunch of new cool stuff ... Don't
you want to cehck it out now?" and send it via email, and you have
what every web B2C company worth it's IPO is doing today! It's
considered a benefit of membership.

In that case, the answer is a qualified YES, right? [Timmy can always
opt-out if he likes...]

> I'd say the converse applies.

Well, if the converse applies... :-P

[Apples and oranges, says I. We can contrive non-reversable metaphores
until the cows come home, and still avoid the question at hand. :-D ]

Here's the question: Are we designing systems that _encourage_, or
event _require_ massive numbers of online hours, without end, in order
for the customer to succeed? Are we building little Skinner boxes that
are commercially successful at the expense of human (social) lives?
What if anything, should we do about it (before others get really
pissed and do something about it for us?) 

This may be early, but don't forget that it didn't take much for
the US Government to get all hot to "rate" game software. I think
this is a real concern as this medium emerges.

Though I'm undecided about what extremes we should go to in making
our experiences socially "balanced." I will say that commercially
saleable behaviourlly addictive products usually come with warning
labels and liability disclaimers.

Randy




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