[MUD-Dev] "An essay on d00dism and the MMORPG"

[Richard Tew]

> From: Chris Gray [mailto:cg at ami-cg.GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA]
> > From: "Richard Tew" <rmtew at wiredgroup.com>
>=20
> > Just because you create something which someone can abuse=20
> doesn't mean
> > that you should facilitate them.  While not related to=20
> muds, examples
> > that spring to mind for me are:
> >
> >  - The barcode reading gizmo which people reverse engineered and
> >    proceeded to use for their own purposes.
> >
> >  - The cheap computer that was sold (I-Opener?), people converted it
> >    to a Linux box or something.
>=20
> <Chris blinks and shakes his head in amazement!>
>=20
> You're serious? If I don't sign a contract limiting me in=20
.... snipped ...
> I don't think these cases match the issue of d00ds at all. The point
> about the d00ds is that they are harming other customers of=20
> the product,
> who have paid good money for it. The fact that they are harming the
> business is of primary concern to the business, but only of secondary
> concern to the customers. When I buy a PC shipped with Windows, remove
> Windows and run Linux, I'm not harming those who buy a=20
> similar computer
> and proceed to run Windows.

They weren't meant to.  The point of Marians I was addressing was
that the designers had made the exact game the d00ds were playing.
All the cases were meant to illustrate was that just because someone
makes something one way doesn't mean that its an intended or desired =
use.
And so, just because the game allows that behaviour doesn't mean it
should be tolerated.  That was the main point I read into Marians post,
that they should be tolerated and if possible, educated.  May be I
should have been a little bit clearer in separating the examples from
the actual argument.

One last addition

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