[prof1515]

Just as an informational note, there are presently five that are definitely open, a sixth which is questionable as there's been no word from their staff in almost a year and four to six more in development.

It means everything for reasons I’ll elaborate upon below.

But instead of being upset and complaining about the RPIs using the term they coined, why not be upset and complain about those games which misuse the term? Your method seems to punish players of RPIs by stripping them of the term they've used to describe their games for 13+ years rather than correct those games which called, whether accidently or deliberately, a term whose definition they did not meet. There's a degree of familiarity, built on nearly a decade and a half of use (the wider application of the term by other games dates back only half as long) that makes the term useful for those wishing to find those 5-6 open games out of a sea of over 1500 MUDs, 350+ of which are RPE. Conversely, for those who do not like the kind of code and policy which comprise the RPIs, the term also gives them a means of identifying those games which they do NOT want to play. Just because there are more non-RPI role-playing MUDs out there means nothing. After all, there are more H&S than there are role-playing MUDs. On sheer numbers alone, they should be more entitled to use the term then! Of course that doesn’t make sense just as the “having a smattering of MUDs using this term wouldn’t mean much”.

There also really isn't a “precise term” for anything though. "ARMMUD" might lead players to expect the use of classes for determining skill selection (Harshlands and SoI derived RPIs allow the player to select their skills individually). A term like RPI-19 would probably be just as confusing if the term RPI were used by other games because they're still quite similar. Short of literally coming up with a name like "Levelless, Traditional-Class-Lacking, Description-Based, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera” featuring all 19 characteristics, you’re not going to have a “precise term”. Furthermore, if RPIs shouldn’t use the term because it’s not “precise”, why should any other MUD?

The “precise” argument also fails to take into account that the term is precise as it has an original context to which it was applied. Discerning the characteristics, 19 in total, which were shared by those games to which the term was first applied is pretty damned precise especially given the vague nature of most terms in the MU* community.

Also, even if RPIs used a new term, how would RPI players come to learn of it? As has been noted, there aren't that many of them that frequent these forums. Less than a tenth of the RPI players I know look at TMS and even fewer have accounts here. So even if a new term were created, let's just use ABCXYZ as an example, most would probably not know of it and continue using the term RPI. They wouldn't know that the games they've known of as RPI for nearly a decade and a half are now called ABCXYZ, especially if the term RPI was still being used by dozens if not hundreds of other games out there.

In addition, there are over 350 RPEs out there and if the term RPI is used simply as a substitute for RPE, what's to keep games without enforced role-play from then using the term? They can literally point to the original definition which applied to a total of only 5-6 games (and only 31-32 games in a decade and a half) and then to the broader use which could include over 25 times as many existing games and justifiably ask, "Why can't we use it too?" In fact, by the precedent that would be established, the only justification that they'd need is simply to use it then argue that they think they should be entitled to and that the 350 formerly-RPE games are being "elitist" or any other term that has been applied to the original RPIs for arguing their use of the term.

The terms Role-Play Intensive, Role-Playing Intensive and RPI were in use for years before the roots of the present controversy began. This controversy stems not from the inaccuracy of the term but from the misuse of the term, either through ignorance or deceit, by games that were not like those to which it had been describing for years. RPIs coming up with a new term or being prohibited from using the term as they had since its creation are not solutions. The real solution to this problem are educating the community and upholding standards.

Jason