View Single Post
Old 09-22-2010, 12:09 AM   #107
prof1515
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 791
prof1515 will become famous soon enoughprof1515 will become famous soon enough
Send a message via AIM to prof1515 Send a message via Yahoo to prof1515
Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs

It's because it digressed off the topic. I couldn't give a rat's ass about "hard" fantasy versus "soft" fantasy and even if I did, it just distracts the topic from original subject. I only pop in every now for a couple seconds to scan the forums and when I do I don't take the time to wade through threads where 75% of the posts are irrelevant to the discussion topic in search of the few that are relevant. Hence I usually just see a couple off-topic posts and move on. Only when I stick around long enough to actually comb through the thread do I respond (which is why this response is so late in coming). I know several other people who do the same thing.

Then a new thread should have been started.

But it was not directed at everyone. It was specifically asking for the views of a particular group. When someone asks a question about coding, people who don't know how to code shouldn't toss out random bull**** that doesn't answer the question. It's irrelevant and if they have no idea how to code it's also worthless.

It's not my definition; it's a definition derived by analyzing the original context of the term before it was misused by a variety of games which did not meet those characteristics.

As has been demonstrated before "Role-Play Intensive" and "intensive role-play" do not mean the same thing. Basic English dictates that the order of words influences their meaning.

As my first response pointed out, soliciting opinions from RPI veterans who've walked away isn't likely to produce many replies because RPI players have notoriously not been avid participants on these forums and players who walk away from MUDding are even less likely to start than those who are still playing.

The original post was in regard to a comment I made. Soft or hard fantasy really has nothing to do with what I was talking about.

The original post was in response to a remark I made about RPI MUDs. RPI MUDs have never had global OOC channels hence that couldn't be a factor in their decline since it was a feature during their glory days as well. It's a constant and a change would be dependent upon variables. Hence a discussion of OOC channels is irrelevant.

Without any data from which to draw a comparison of a before and after picture, their contributions would likely be little more than blind guesses.

Again, using the above example of chat channels, RPIs - by definition - have no OOC chat channels. If that could be a factor in RP degradation, and therefore a relevant part of the discussion, wouldn't opinions from both sides of the fence be useful?[/quote]

Again, the lack of global OOC channels is not something new. It was a constant through the rise of the RPIs and now in their arguable decline. Veterans played before when there were no OOC channels. Many do not and not all leave on account of life pulling them away. Through both periods, the lack of global OOC channels was a constant but the results changed. Thus other factors must have been the cause.

If they have no data or experience upon which to draw conclusions their "expertise" is non-existent.

[quote]Want to keep threads from turning into flame wars? Then show respect and consideration for the other participants. Build an environment where we discuss differences of opinion without insulting the debaters.

The conversations that happened before were irrelevant to this discussion and had no business even being brought up. They added nothing to the original post's inquiry from RPI veterans because they were not made by RPI veterans. It was like a doctor asking a patient how they feel and some stranger walking by answering. It's neither relevent nor useful.

Which wasn't done, hence my last reply about staying on target.

Jason
prof1515 is offline   Reply With Quote