Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post - In defense of all MUDs. Our genre's noteworthiness is being questioned.

chaosprime · 09-15-2010, 05:00 PM

Realized some of the problem there: Wikipedians are actually by and large unaware that MUDs are not Web content, so they tend to believe that one of the (A7, article about a person, animal, organization, or Web content that does not assert notability) applies to MUDs. Understanding the confusion there will probably help in the future.

Maybe I'll even get lucky and run into some jackhole who will assert that MUDs really are Web content because he says so, and I will get to invite him to compare the duration of the existence of the Web with the duration of the existence of MUDs. Good times.

09-15-2010, 05:00 PM	#296
chaosprime Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Home MUD: Lost Souls Posts: 199	Re: In defense of all MUDs. Our genre's noteworthiness is being questioned. Realized some of the problem there: Wikipedians are actually by and large unaware that MUDs are not Web content, so they tend to believe that one of the (A7, article about a person, animal, organization, or Web content that does not assert notability) applies to MUDs. Understanding the confusion there will probably help in the future. Maybe I'll even get lucky and run into some jackhole who will assert that MUDs really are Web content because he says so, and I will get to invite him to compare the duration of the existence of the Web with the duration of the existence of MUDs. Good times. Last edited by chaosprime : 09-15-2010 at 05:02 PM. Reason: +specificity