New discussion forum for admins of muds with at least 50 simultaneous players on daily: .

You can see the bios of our current members at mindseye.ironrealms.com. If you're fence-sitting about whether to get involved, we hope the high quality of our membership, as evidenced in the required Biography, will convince you to join.

Forum traffic is very high signal with almost no noise. It's been useful enough that we've already made changes to our Rapture engine based on posts in the forum. Come join!

--matt

i think we've heard enough about your uber forum with its uber participants. why are you even bothering to post here anymore? Aren't you like, too good for tms?

What no public archives!?

Nope - they've already answered that point:

"...if you don't actually run a large mud you've not got much to contribute to a forum that is specifically for the concerns of larger muds. Experience in whatever we're discussing is what matters to us and if you don't have the experience of running a larger mud then there's not much reason to have you in the forum."
-- The_logos

"Of course those issues are important to people starting a mud. But the people starting one do not have any experience HANDLING those issues and therefore their presence would not be helpful to the other members. That doesn't make for a very mutually beneficial relationship."
-- Threshold

That's just so #### silly.

Err I meant publicly read-only archives.  I understand the contributing requirements are limited by mud size and level on the mud.  

How could we forget? People with that attitude keep posting something to this effect EVERY time the_logos starts a thread. We know you hate the idea of his forum. We know you don't like him personally. Yes, Kavir, we're all impressed at how you can quote old posts. Either get over it, say something constructive, or just don't say anything at all, and his threads will go away faster.

Well, this time he quoted the wrong ones. Tyche asked about the absence of public archives, and received quotes that were taken from a justification of not making the membership/posting requirements more liberal.

The answer to Tyche's question is that, as was stated in the earlier thread, the members want to be able to discuss topics that they don't want to immediately become public knowledge (coming changes to their games, plot arcs, etc.)

Stilton

Bleh, what is that supposed to mean? Are you actually passing judgement on my attitude through a text-based form of communication? I could care less what the_logos does, I personally think it's a silly idea, and if I wanted to bash the fellow I would, I'm simply stating my opinion. If you're going to defend him then go ahead, but who are you defending him from? I am completely neutral in all aspects of this time-wasting thread.

I mean only exactly what I said. Please re-read and ponder a bit more if you think i'm trying to persecute you personally, as i'm not.

Well you quoted my post in particular. And my post was just an opinion on how I feel about elitist mud admins.

Actually the first was, you're right - but the second was fairly appropriate. The discussion went like this:

Threshold: I think I would find it more beneficial to discuss issues like the above with people who have DONE those things and have had to deal with those issues on a large scale.

Me: Absolutely - those are the sort of things which are of significant importance to any starting mud. Unfortunately the only people able to ask such questions are those who no longer have much need for the answers. Indeed, those who would really benefit from such advice won't even be able to read the forums.

Threshold: I think you missed my point here. Of course those issues are important to people starting a mud. But the people starting one do not have any experience HANDLING those issues and therefore their presence would not be helpful to the other members. That doesn't make for a very mutually beneficial relationship

And you keep barking like a loyal lapdog every time they do.