That's rather insulting, Brody.
The 'little guys,' as you termed them, are always ten times better than the 'big cheaters,' nee top twenty five.
I'm sure that if they want to advertise, they'll do it themselves.

This is a rather broad and unsubstantiated generalization. For the record, Dartmud has never offered any incentives for voting, and has been in the top 20 for some time.

As I am very, very close friends with the woman who owns Cat's Haven, it is indeed my business.
As I said before, I'm sure that if they want to be advertised, they shall advertise themselves. And Cat's Haven is hardly a 'little guy.'

I'm starting to believe that you cannot see how tasteless you are.

These games are "underdogs" in the sense that they aren't in the Top 20 and don't show much sign of getting there against the likes of Achaea.

If I take *my* time to pick out some from the lower ranks and give them some front page exposure - free advertising - on a daily basis, I *hardly* think that can be considered tasteless.

It's not meant to be insulting. If you take it that way, I'm sorry, but you've got some issues that need working out.

I wish you the best.

I don't know a single MU* that, to ANY capacity, wants to be like Achaea. If they want advertising, than they will advertise for themselves. And I doubt many people are going to trust the word of someone who hasn't even played on these MU*'s.
Clearly, Brody, I do have problems: my sense of morals and my respect for other's privacy amongst them.

No offense Alajha, but you don't see the folks who run these MUDs posting in heartbroken-tear-jerking sentences because Brody picked someone not in the Top Twenty and said something nice about them.

He didn't even review them and offer some down sides to their MUD. He gave them free positive exposure. You just come off as someone with an axe to grind not somone protecting the dignity of these other muds. If you are going to have a cause to promote at least promote it when it makes sense.

...privacy? Good heavens, I'm not posting anyone's RL information. If a game doesn't *want* to be known, and doesn't *want* to be on the list, there's an easy way to keep it quiet: Don't get listed.

As OnyxFlame said, I'm just helping out as I can. If *you* don't appreciate it, I'm sorry. You're welcome to your opinion. But it's as much my right to post about these intriguing games as it is your right to gripe about my doing so.

Again, sorry if you're having such a negative kneejerk reaction to it, and I wish you the best, but I'll continue doing it.

Why do you lump the alleged practices of Achaea in with MU*s being able to advertise for themselves?
I know for a fact that many muds (including the one I build for) can only afford their hosting fees.  ANY advertising, mention, objective review, or even a pat on the back the way Brody is doing in pointing out the people who deserve a second look is much appreciated by those of us who may never again see the Top 20.  I also applaud Brody.  He makes no judgment on the MU*s he lists, he simply points out a couple interesting features.  Any who are interested can go and form their own opinions.  
And any mud which places a link here and expects privacy is seriously in need of common sense.  If someone gives them a fair, and objective, critical review, would that be offencive as well?

--QS

*pat pat* Awwh, are the grapes just a little too far out of reach for you?

--matt

Sorry Folks,

I just hated the way this came out the first time.

->edit here->
I just went and looked again at TMS 100 and didn't realize how little votes you need to get into the voting. There seems to be good competition in the 80-100 range!


Your doing good service for Mudding by speaking of lower ranking MUDS IMHO. Keep it Up!

Thanks again,

Klered
implementor

Actually the word "underdog" has two meanings:

1) A loser or predicted loser in a struggle or contest.

2) A victim of injustice or persecution.

It has nothing to do with being the "best".

So basically, Brody is posting his "Loser of the Day award". Indeed rather insulting, but he's perfectly entitled to his opinion. Of course if he doesn't want to cause offense, he might try changing the name to "Overlooked mud of the day", or "Random mud of the day".

KaVir, I like or at least respect just about everything you've *ever* said. Not that. Your inference (and anyone else's) that this is meant to be a slam on the MUDs I spotlight is your own. Here's the definition I get from my trusty pal, dictionary.com:<ul>1) One that is expected to lose a contest or struggle, as in sports or politics.
2) One that is at a disadvantage.[/list]Myself, I follow Definition No. 2. The games I spotlight are disadvantaged from the standpoint of visibility on the list. In an effort to give them some advantage, I post about one each day.

I think some folks can get a little too carried away with politically correct wording. My hometown team, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, were underdogs going into the Super Bowl. Yet they came out on top. Underdogs are those you may not expect to succeed, but really can, if given the opportunity to shine.

Sorry if anyone has wildly differing/demeaning definitions, but those are *your* issues. Not mine.

I for one think it's a great idea. The more exposure the better.