[Jazuela]

This subject has also been discussed before, see here: What is necessary to have an RPI?
I like this post it does explain things clearly. The only issue of confusion and the problem stated by Kavir is the choice of RPI. Stating that I created the RPI tagline and telling everyone that only this subset of MUD can be considered RPI would be akin to creating a standard called RRP Mud or Real Roleplay Mud and claiming the standards for a Real Roleplaying Mud are (among others):

1. The Mud must have at least 6 specific Gods.
2. The Mud must have guilds, clans, three distinct nations, and heirarchy of political structure.
3. The Mud must only allow players over 18.
4. Etc.

The trouble is that I am now defining what Real Roleplay is based on my limited subset of rules and conditions that do not validate what is real roleplaying.

---------------Another straw man arguement.

Oh and Newworlds, calling your arguement a strawman arguement isn't namecalling. Do you even know what a strawman is?

What you garbled above - let's apply see how ridiculous it looks with another term:

It would be akin to stating that Hummel's created the term hotdog and telling everyone that only this subset of meat can be considered a hotdog, and that this subset must have the following standards:

1) The meat itself must come from a cow.
2) The spices must not include MSG
3) The paprika must be from anywhere other than New Zealand.

And your trouble is that you are now defining hot, by your limited subset of rules and conditions.

See what I just did? See what you are doing? You are taking a term, that has been defined, and used by a "general consensus" with a general, overall meaning, and taken that term apart and nitpicked on a single word, or declared it false because a single word of that term can be defined in other ways.

Yes, the I in RPI can mean this. The R in RPI can be interpreted that way. The P can be used for this purpose. However - the term, the phrase, the collective grouping known as RPI - has a defined and generally regarded as functional purpose.

Just like "hot" can mean a few things, and "dog" can mean a few things. "Hotdog", in the hypothetical example above, would have been a very specific term, created by a specific company, to be used to describe a specific food. Just because you think "hot" refers to your sister's beautiful legs, and "dawg" is how you feel about your best buddy, does -not- mean that "hotdog" means your sister and your best buddy are getting jiggy with each other.