Okay, this is my first time posting a poll, so I'm hoping it comes out alright.

We've seen the debate, let's see some numbers.

If you would, how would YOU like to see pay2play MU*s differentiated from free MU*s?

[Dulan]

This is inapplicable, and is solely designed to make the vocal minority's complaint about this appear as if they are the majority.

I do not vote in polls. I know many that are for the $'s being added do not vote in polls. And, furthermore, these options are irrelevant. Only three, possibly four, are even truly relevant - and it ignores several options that have been brought up, and are superior to the ones on this poll.

-D

[Gwynderlaine]

I can see the validity in having a MUD have to choose the payment category into which they fall. I appreciate the inclusion of a couple delineations of options: "required" "voluntary" and something that references being able to play to a certain level or in certain areas, but beyond that pay. I play a p2p myself, but do understand it's a very real concern for many folks out there. By making the MUD choose something in a specific category, it helps prevent MUDers from getting involved in a MUD they enjoy, only to find out they will have to budget for it later down the line.

Gwynderlaine

Sorry, I had just flipped thru the current debate thread and thought I covered several of the ideas suggested. If you point out some that I have perhaps missed that can not be applied to one of the above listings I'd be open to hear them and point out where I thought that might be categorized. Or, if I am so off base I would be willing to ask a moderator to have this thread removed.

There was no "design[ed] to make the vocal minority's complaint about this appear as if they are the majority" intended. Frankly, I just posted it to see some numbers. I see various opinions being tossed about both FOR and AGAINST certain ways of doing it.

In fact, if my interpreation of the 'vocal' complaint is correct, I'd say the vocal folks are FOR putting $$ on the Ranking Page, which is diametrically opposed to the view I had debated in the debate thread of the same-themed poll.

How many people don't voice their opinion's in debates? If indeed, there is the "vocal minority", then the silent majority who don't feel like debating could just give a simple click.

And if there are people who don't vote in polls, thats fine. I'm from America - its in most of our nature to take for granted our right to vote. Heck knows I don't. Besides, there is no necessary "need" to vote. Syn might look through it, he might not. He might be another to vote "he doesn't care". The information might be interesting to him, it might not. He might value the people's opinions who don't poll more than he values polls as a whole. Heck, if moderators of his Forums were people who didn't Poll, then I'd probably feel the same way. A person's right to be heard, or not be heard, to vote or not to vote is there own. With any right, you take the good with the bad.

And for the record, I started the vote with an "I really don't care". The TG in my name stands for the MU* in which I Admin. Its the only one I play. Its one I don't advertise in a signature. Its not p2p and its not in the top 20. I have no "hidden agenda" other than seeing this topic somewhat resolved so people can move on with their lives. Besides, its always interesting how people interpret 'design', whether it is within a game structure or outside of one.

But bluthering aside, I'd be interesting in seeing some other choices I could have added. I do [almost] apologize for the Cockroaches choice. Its a reference to an old Cyberpunk RPG choice that, for some reason, I feel compelled to offer as a choice when asking anyone's opinion. Even when asking their mat color selection on a piece of art work - though it is usually under my breath.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Dulan @ Oct. 09 2002,12:34 pm) This is inapplicable, and is solely designed to make the vocal minority's complaint about this appear as if they are the majority. I do not vote in polls. I know many that are for the $'s being added do not vote in polls. And, furthermore, these options are irrelevant. Only three, possibly four, are even truly relevant - and it ignores several options that have been brought up, and are superior to the ones on this poll. -D

And how could you possibly know what is the minority and what is the majority, besides just childishly assuming everybody agrees with you? I think I've seen less than 15 people post saying they want to classify MUDs this way. Last time I asked Adam, this site had over 50,000 unique visitors a month.

Get over yourself, you don't represent anyone but yourself.

--matt

[Quicksilver]

This is actually the only poll I've found worthwhile.

I'm also assuming the 2nd choice (list of icons at bottom of frontpage listing) would be inclusive of the $$$ icon choice.)  Other people did make a valid point that codebase, RP and pk can seriously affect one's choice of muds.  And a single line of pertinent icons would not be intrusive, and would simply shorten browse time.  I personally always check out the reviews and info page anyway, but eliminating muds with definite "not interested" traits would be nice.
I mean, if i'm looking for enforced RP (actor mask icon) and see a bloody dagger icon (PK?) I would pass.  Granted, a Mask with a Dagger (Enforced RP with PK) would be intriguing enough to take a 2nd look at.
These icons will result in the same decisions being made for the most part, but they may also intrigue some people enough to look at combos they wouldn't normally consider.

QS

[truthfulthomas]

An entry on the info page that gave a bit more information than simply whether or not a game was pay-to-play would be fine as long as it was open-ended enough to provide for all the possible payment configurations that would be found on commercial muds. I think putting an icon on the banner list is pointless and is nothing more than catering to the laziest common denominator. I mean, really, you have to click to the info page to at least get the mud's address anyways (unless you go straight to the web page in which case it will probably take you even longer to find all the information you're looking for).

[Dulan]

Am I the only one that is vastly amused by the great amount of irony within Mihaly's post? Especially considering he insists that there is no "MUD Community"?

-snicker-

-D

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Dulan @ Oct. 09 2002,5:47 pm) Am I the only one that is vastly amused by the great amount of irony within Mihaly's post? Especially considering he insists that there is no "MUD Community"? -snicker- -D

That's typical of your posts Dulan. Insults and no attempt at reasoning. If you can point me to these masses of MUDers that you represent, I'd be gratified.

--matt

[Dulan]

"Masses"?

Again, Mihaly, you bring the thread off-topic, and litter it with disinformation, as well as take posts out of context.

Point me to where I claim to represent masses. I never once did.

In the context of my posts, if you bother to read what my posts say, and not what you want them to say, I imply that the majority of the people who care about this subject are for PTP MUDs, such as Achaea, identifying themselves properly.

Now, does anyone here have an objection to PTP MUDs identifying themselves _someplace_ on TMS? That's what this argument is largely coming down to - PTP MUDs should identify themselves. But, WHERE should they identify themselves, and HOW should they be identified?

Other than Vrycie, at least.

-D

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Dulan @ Oct. 09 2002,10:20 pm) "Masses"? Again, Mihaly, you bring the thread off-topic, and litter it with disinformation, as well as take posts out of context. Point me to where I claim to represent masses. I never once did. In the context of my posts, if you bother to read what my posts say, and not what you want them to say, I imply that the majority of the people who care about this subject are for PTP MUDs, such as Achaea, identifying themselves properly. Now, does anyone here have an objection to PTP MUDs identifying themselves _someplace_ on TMS? That's what this argument is largely coming down to - PTP MUDs should identify themselves. But, WHERE should they identify themselves, and HOW should they be identified? Other than Vrycie, at least. -D

It's not that you openly claim to represent the masses. It's that you automatically seem to assume, based on a handful of posts by a handful of people, that the thousands of users of this site have X position. Keep in mind that the posters to these forums represent a tiny fraction of the users of the site, and have no claim to representing the views of anyone but themselves. Not only can we posters here not validly claim to represent the views of others, but one can't even truthfully claim that the posters here are a statistically valid sample of the rest of the posters, as a valid sample requires a minimum of self-selection, and the posters here are entirely self-selected. It's why polls like the ones here are absolutely and utterly meaningless (something we may actually seem to agree upon, believe it or not). To run a poll that can provide useful information, you need to either survey the entire population (or quite close), or survey a randomly selected sub-segment of that population. The polls here do neither, which isn't a slam on them, but is an indictment of their usefulness for anything other than entertainment.

I have no problem at all with a labeling of "commercial" (though I think any MUD that takes donations should also be labeled that way unless they can prove that every dollar they've taken in has been spent solely on hosting), but the fact is, we're not pay-to-play. You -never- have to pay to play Achaea. Ever. There's just no way to quibble with that fact. It's like saying that a grocery store is pay-to-browse. It's not. You go in, you stay pretty much as long as you want (they might kick you out for loitering, but we're much nicer than that, even though it costs us money for every minute you spend there), and, IF you choose, you purchase things.

Now, you want a commercial (or pay-to-play, though again, we're not pay-to-play) indicator because you think that's the piece of info people care most about. I'm just saying, "Show me these people." There are a lot of site visitors, and there doesn't seem to be any big cry for this extra info. Just a few people posting they'd like it. Similarly, I'd like to see a PK indicator, and a codebase indicator. I generally don't play non-custom MUDs, and never MUDs without PK. The cost doesn't matter to me. A few other people have posted that they too find other information more useful than pay-to-play. Now, let's say for the sake of argument that 20 people post they want the commercial indicator and 10 post saying they want a PK indicator. What's that mean? Nothing really. It's an almost meaningless segment of the userbase of the site, because, as I explained earlier, there's no way the attitudes of the users of this site generally with the miniscule minority that frequents these forums.

I really have no objection to it. It just seems like it's a really arbitrary piece of info to put up there.
--matt

[Orion Elder]

If a large enough group of people want it, it would be a good addition. And if you don't care one way or the other, why are you fighting so hard against it? Sure, you do it in a way that it makes it look like it just doesn't seem that important, but you're still fighting against it.

Simplest reason? A lot of people will see that dollar symbol, and bypass your listing like a bolt of lightning, and you know it. It WILL cost you players... players who, if they got addicted enough to your game for whatever reason, might end up paying, or who might bring in other paying members.

So, the reason, in essence, is greed. If it really doesn't matter to you, you wouldn't be so vocal about it, but this has the potential to save some poor saps (my personal opinion) from dishing out more dollars to you and/or your MUD.

Personally, I highly doubt I'll EVER play a p2p MUD for the simple fact that I have better things I could do with that money... like pay someone to kick me in the head, and I know SEVERAL (translation, "a lot of") other people who will not play a MUD that has a potential cost. Does this mean required? No, so please save me the lame "it's not required" speech.

So, my vote is to label a MUD where the accept donations, they're ad-supported, they charge for usage... in other words 'not free MUDs,' in every place possible. On the voting listings, on their MUD information section, etc.

But, that's my opinion... and that's all that matters to me, in this case.

G'day.

[Jaewyn]

Originally Posted by (Dulan @ Oct. 09 2002,12:34 pm) This is inapplicable, and is solely designed to make the vocal minority's complaint about this appear as if they are the majority. I do not vote in polls. I know many that are for the $'s being added do not vote in polls. And, furthermore, these options are irrelevant. Only three, possibly four, are even truly relevant - and it ignores several options that have been brought up, and are superior to the ones on this poll.

If this poll is inapplicable and the options are irrelevant, why are you getting so bitter and twisted about it?

I think the main theme of the poll is, "Do you think P2P muds should be identified as such in some way?" Just one person asking the question, it's Adam's choice as to whether he takes any notice of it. From what I can gather, Adam likes feedback and this is just one way of doing it.

Dulan loves everyone else, but has it out for me, is all.

[editted to add a wink, to show attempt at humor]

*wink*

[Sylvado]

Originally Posted by (Orion Elder @ Oct. 10 2002,01:56 am) Simplest reason? A lot of people will see that dollar symbol, and bypass your listing like a bolt of lightning, and you know it. It WILL cost you players... players who, if they got addicted enough to your game for whatever reason, might end up paying, or who might bring in other paying members.

Although I agree that sites should be identified as pay to play, I voted for the added sort options, I don't agree with your reasoning. I don't see the point in attracting customers that prefer free MUDs. They will not become addicted before they understand the payment plans. It is better to attract customers that are willing to pay if the value is there.

[Seraphina]

In retrospect I want to change my vote to icons indicating major points about muds. That is, roleplaying required, PkP, etc. as well as payment status.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Jaewyn @ Oct. 10 2002,09:58 am) If this poll is inapplicable and the options are irrelevant, why are you getting so bitter and twisted about it? I think the main theme of the poll is, "Do you think P2P muds should be identified as such in some way?" Just one person asking the question, it's Adam's choice as to whether he takes any notice of it. From what I can gather, Adam likes feedback and this is just one way of doing it.

Bitter and twisted? I'm not bitter or twisted about it. I'm just pointing out it's total lack of validity as a representative sample of the users of this site. I spent lots of time studying polling techniques during my poly sci degree (possibly the single most boring thing I've ever studied), and was just happy to have an opportunity to apply some of it. =)

--matt

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Sylvado @ Oct. 10 2002,11:41 am) I don't see the point in attracting customers that prefer free MUDs. They will not become addicted before they understand the payment plans. It is better to attract customers that are willing to pay if the value is there.

Well, first of all, calling the habit of playing MUDs a lot an 'addiction' trivializes real addictions like alcoholism or heroin addiction. They are not comparable. You will not go into convulsions because you stop playing a MUD.

But anyway, I agree. People who are not willing to pay for products aren't people we would actively look to attract, as all they do is cost us bandwidth, and the rather large amounts we pay monthly in bandwidth is plenty.

Similarly though, we're not looking to attract people who want to play a DIKU codebase, who want a MUD without any PK, or who want a MUD where bashing monsters is the primary activity.

--matt

[the_logos]

Sorry about that Jaewyn. I just realized you were talking to Dulan, not me. This illustrates the dangers of posting before morning coffee.

--matt

[Nevynral]

I definately think the rankings list should include a symbol to indicate a pay to play mud.  It should be located right next to the symbol that indicates whether or not the mud offers voting incentives.  

Originally Posted by (Orion Elder @ Oct. 09 2002,11:56 pm) So, the reason, in essence, is greed. If it really doesn't matter to you, you wouldn't be so vocal about it, but this has the potential to save some poor saps (my personal opinion) from dishing out more dollars to you and/or your MUD.

Orion,

First, to make sure there are no misunderstandings - I am not staff on any game. I am not a staff member of a PtP. I have been staff on free games and enjoyed the game and players in the past. I now play both free games and one PtP with investments into the characters and player bases of both types of games. With that information known (and with it, any biases I might have laid out)....

I do not want to see $$$ in front of game listings on the actual ranking page. I would never have gone to the game I have ended up spending most of my time at for nearly a year if it had a $$$ in front of the name. Not because I refuse to pay, but because I would have skipped right by its website and looked for a free game. After all, why pay if you can find what you want for free, right? And chances are, I would have found a free game I enjoyed well enough. But instead, I clicked on the website of a PtP.

The game I play has a very impressive website with amazing background and a detailed manual. I clicked the website button, I found a great site that completely drew me in, despite the fact I knew it was PtP within a few moments of hanging out at the site. I made the decision to pay for that game. But had I seen the dollar sign from the get go, I probably would have kept cruising the list looking for something free and missed ever seeing the excellent site.

Having or not having a dollar sign isn’t just about folks who CAN’T pay or REFUSE to pay. It also will draw away folks who aren’t really partial one way or the other, but out of habit will head to the free stuff first. If $$$ is added, it should be only one of many things that are told on the rankings page, among them: level of rp enforcement, years the game has been around, level of pk, class or classless style game, general theme, codebase, etc. There are a lot of details that draw folks to and from games.

(For those of you who want to notice, all of those things listed, including whether it is PtP, are variable. It would be quite difficult to create one simple set of icons to tell us if a game is any of the above. How many coders who have a heavily modified ROM game would want the generic ROM icon? How about a PK mud that puts everyone into the system, but has all sorts of checks and balances? Would they want the hardcore pk icon or would they want the “limited” pk icon that doesn’t represent what they have?)

Sapphar

Originally Posted by (Sapphar @ Oct. 10 2002,5:19 pm) (For those of you who want to notice, all of those things listed, including whether it is PtP, are variable. It would be quite difficult to create one simple set of icons to tell us if a game is any of the above. How many coders who have a heavily modified ROM game would want the generic ROM icon? How about a PK mud that puts everyone into the system, but has all sorts of checks and balances? Would they want the hardcore pk icon or would they want the “limited” pk icon that doesn’t represent what they have?)

Difficult like making a set of smiley face icons that you can choose from?  Hmmm, am I or , should I begin my post with my one-eyed green monster or the two-eyed blue guy?

I'm sure if Syn was interested it wouldn't be too difficult to design an icon layout that worked for most everyone.  
I mean, most the admins that run MU*s probably have a little experience with design in one aspect or another.  

Thats my only thing against the $$$ right next to the MU*s name in the ranking list.  It's conceptually silly, imho, to have that variable listed on ranks and as opposed to all others.

But thats my opinion.  Were I to find 2 MU*s that had all the positive things I looked for in a MU* and the only defining "drawbacks" were one was p2p and the other was heavy PK - I'd definitely put my quarter in the p2p one.  I pay for cable(**).  I pay for someone to cook for me when I go out to eat.  I pay for someone to BRING me my food when I go out to eat.  I pay for the cigarette companies to kill me(**).  A MU* is just another form of entertainment, one that you _could_ do without if you choose to.  And that choice is yours.

And finding an artist to make them probably wouldn't be so difficult, either, if the icon thing was chosen.  Heck, I'm sure there would be people that would loooooove to offer Syn with help like that.  If not, I'd offer my meager skills if asked - its the least any of us could offer for the service Syn provides.

** Actually, no I don't, but the example has merit.

Originally Posted by (TG_Nek @ Oct. 10 2002,3:43 pm) I'm sure if Syn was interested it wouldn't be too difficult to design an icon layout that worked for most everyone.   I mean, most the admins that run MU*s probably have a little experience with design in one aspect or another

What I think would be difficult isn't creating cute icons, but rather making a reasonable number of them that would fit into a user-friendly little key at the bottom of the rankings page. If you have 5 options for pk, 5 for rp, 10 for codebase, 5 for types of commercial... well, keep going and you've got one hell of a big key to scan through while you try to figure all the cute little icons out.

*shrug*

So don't flip through icons.  Pulling up the "modify records" option on MU*listing allows you to choose how you detail your MU* in its profile _mostly_ (but admittedly not all, a high [75%+] percent) by drop-down windows or check boxes.  Theoretically I can't see it being difficult to keep the same system (with a few modifications) when modifying your MU*'s profile and allowing the system to interpret the icons.

Ie, I pull down and choose my current PK type, the site has a pre-set icon for it.  I don't see the icon til later.  As for defining p2p options, a number of different theories were discussed in other threads on how to define them.  I can't see it being terribly difficult to do.

I still am all for not needing to post any of the info ($$$+) on the ranks page, but if deemed necessary I stand behind the icon theory.  

Proper design can overcome.

Doh, I misinterpretted your post. Sorry.

Uhm. Yeah, well I guess a key at the bottom would have to be VERY self-explanatory, indeed.

Still think it's possible

[Orion Elder]

Sapphar is a prime example of why I think the '$' icon, or some other p2p icon would be good. Sapphar plainly admitted to falling into the example I provided.

Originally Posted by After all, why pay if you can find what you want for free, right? And chances are, I would have found a free game I enjoyed well enough. But instead, I clicked on the website of a PtP.

So, had you noticed the '$' symbols, you would more than likely still have the money you used on this p2p MUD AND you'd be playing a MUD out there that, first, probably needs more players, and second, you enjoyed just as much if not more. THIS is why the '$' symbol is needed.

Originally Posted by Having or not having a dollar sign isn’t just about folks who CAN’T pay or REFUSE to pay. It also will draw away folks who aren’t really partial one way or the other, but out of habit will head to the free stuff first. If $$$ is added, it should be only one of many things that are told on the rankings page, among them: level of rp enforcement, years the game has been around, level of pk, class or classless style game, general theme, codebase, etc. There are a lot of details that draw folks to and from games.

Ok, I get it now. It's better to lure them to your site to try to get them interested BEFORE they find out it's a pay site. Good idea... that way they can be disappointed that they were tricked into thinking it was probably free. OOOoOOOoo... that's so... crafty! Good thinking! Sorry, but if these MUDs are as good as they, and others, claim them to be, the fact that they're UPFRONT and HONEST about their MUD having a potential cost wouldn't hurt them. God, I feel like I'm dealing with a car salesman.

Anyway, to something more important... like being bashed in the face with a shovel. There are people who become addicted to MUDding. I don't know where the hell you've been living, the_logos, but look around you some time.

Definition 2a of 'addiction' from www.dictionary.com:

Originally Posted by The condition of being habitually or compulsively occupied with or or involved in something.

So, yes, it can be a psychological or physical, or even both, compulsive 'need' for something. People have, or have come close, to RUINING THEIR LIVES over MUDs. To say you can't be addicted to these games trivializes the problems those people face(d). I've seen people who've done this. They were my friends. I've seen them give up more than any person ever should. So do not EVER say you can't become addicted to online games. It can and DOES happen.

Originally Posted by Orion: So, yes, it can be a psychological or physical, or even both, compulsive 'need' for something. People have, or have come close, to RUINING THEIR LIVES over MUDs. To say you can't be addicted to these games trivializes the problems those people face(d). I've seen people who've done this. They were my friends. I've seen them give up more than any person ever should. So do not EVER say you can't become addicted to online games. It can and DOES happen.

Speaking as someone who's first attempt at a bachelor's degree back in 1990 was foiled by mudding....  Had nothing to do with my lack of willpower tho.  I take no responsibility for my actions... It wasn't my fault I couldn't stand up to my weakness.  Right.

Back to the topic at hand....

Originally Posted by Sapphar: After all, why pay if you can find what you want for free, right? And chances are, I would have found a free game I enjoyed well enough. But instead, I clicked on the website of a PtP.

Originally Posted by Orion: So, had you noticed the '$' symbols, you would more than likely still have the money you used on this p2p MUD AND you'd be playing a MUD out there that, first, probably needs more players, and second, you enjoyed just as much if not more. THIS is why the '$' symbol is needed.

Originally Posted by Sapphar: ...I would never have gone to the game I have ended up spending most of my time at for nearly a year...

The rest of Sapphar's quote, to me, made this sound more like a point about a fortunate mistake than a complaint.

Originally Posted by Orion: ...first, probably needs more players, and second, you enjoyed just as much if not more.

If Sapphar enjoyed the game, what does it matter if they could've gone to a game that needs more players?  Sapphar enjoyed it enough to stay, and isn't that the point of a MU*, p2p -or- free, to a player?  As for your second point, you can say that with any MU* search you do.  I can swing by TPE and be completely satisfied with it, never realizing that Inferno is ACTUALLY much more to my liking.

Originally Posted by Orion: Sorry, but if these MUDs are as good as they, and others, claim them to be, the fact that they're UPFRONT and HONEST about their MUD having a potential cost wouldn't hurt them.

Actually, since most this hub-bubs come up, bub, most the admins I've seen of these p2p's have tried to be more open with the fact that its p2p as opposed to free.  Mostly I site the forums posts and the MU*'s profiles (which is the only place that has p2p as an option where one is prompted to define).

To say they are not being upfront and honest about their postings because it does _not_ say it in the ranking list that they are _not_ a free MU* is like accusing Dragon's Den of not being honest for not putting they are _not_ a WoT MU* in the ranking list.  You come to this site hopefully for the forums, to show love for your favorite MU*, and to see what else is out there - no matter how diverse it is.  As far as I've seen, there is no "standard MU*" which defines how everyone should differentiate their's.  This is not just a FREE MU* site or a theme-oriented MU* site - it's just a MU* site.  And until Syn offers it up as otherwise, there should be as much differentation and segregation between a free vs p2p MU*s as there should be as against Custom v GodWars MU*s.

Another thing, I would think if I were running a p2p MU* for over a decade and I decided to advertise on a site called topmudsites.com I probably wouldn't think about the need to "offer up" the fact that I was p2p as opposed to if the site was called topfreemudsites.com.  If I were posting my MU* on wotmudlisting.com I probably would be a little suprised when the current community browsing the forums got all irate because I didn't post that I didn't allow elves.

I'm sorry Orion, your posts (to me) seem more directed at just shooting down p2p muds specifically than actually trying help figure out a better way to inform the public about certain restrictions muds have.

From what I've been able to gather..top 10 p2p Mu*s...
Dragon Realms (listed p2p Info)
Gemstone III (listed p2p Info)
Threshold RPG (listed p2p Info)
Eternal City (not listed as p2p)
Herc & Xena (listed p2p Info)
Dragon's Gate (Info not connecting)

The 'newcomers' admins have put forth an effort to adopt to the ranking/profile/advertising written and unwritten rules put forth by this site.  In fact, its seems to be everyone BUT them clamboring for additional scrutiny because of it.  From what I've seen and read, they've tried to be somewhat accomodating given the unwelcome greeting they've been shown.  In fact, I'd say they've acted rather

professional

about it.


*looks at the crowd bearing pitchforks, torches, and axes gathering around him*  
Yeah... I think I've said more than my piece.  
*ducks for cover*

[Dulan]

You forgot Achaea on that listing, TG_Nek.

-D

[Orion Elder]

Being addicted to something has nothing to do with will power. Being able to break that addiction has to do with will power. Note the difference.

As for me slamming P2P MUDs, I have nothing against them. I personally wouldn't play them, because, as I mentioned, I have better things to do with my money... like giving it to someone who likes to set it on fire... but what other people do with their money is of course their choice, and that's great.

As for my point about MUDs that need more players, it's this simple. MUDs that charge more than likely have plenty of players. They don't NEED more. Free MUDs... good ones... die on a regular basis because they receive a lack of support.

You're trying to compare codebase to cost. Sorry, it just doesn't work that way. The codebase they have isn't going to cost me any money... a cost factor on the other hand, would. Getting people interested is one thing. Getting them interested on an assumption that a MUD is more than likely free is another entirely. If you don't see that, I see no point in continuing to argue the point with you, because you're obviously thickheaded.

But, fighting AGAINST having an upfront listing, as the_logos has done so hard, is the same as trying to deceive someone. Putting it in an information listing is all good and well... but putting it on the ranking list is a good step to follow, in my opinion.

But, either way, good day to you. I'm going to go do something more productive now... like play with a bar of soap, or something.

[Seraphina]

Originally Posted by As for my point about MUDs that need more players, it's this simple. MUDs that charge more than likely have plenty of players. They don't NEED more. Free MUDs... good ones... die on a regular basis because they receive a lack of support.

If good free muds are failing I think they need to look for reasons other than the existence of commercial muds. Free is a very strong draw. It might be helpful for admins of free muds to check out the p2p's from the perspective of novices and see how they differ.

As non-mudding friends to spend an evening trying both, a good free, and a p2p, and ask them for their opinions on why they might choose one over the other.