Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

Mason · 09-25-2002, 01:54 PM

Disclaimer: I am not trying to tell anyone what to do.

Yes, Adam makes money of this site and it is his site to do with as he pleases. At the same time, he makes money by providing a valuable service to, in essence, the consumers of the product he provides. As such, it seems quite appropriate that the consumers be able to offer feedback in a public forum about what they would like to see in the product to which they subscribe. Moreover, I would think that, as the administrator of this forum, he would not only be interested in, but appreciate, the willingness of people to express how they feel the site can be changed for the better - whether he agrees with them or not.

In my own opinion, I think there is no need for two separate lists. I have no problem competing against the p2p muds. I just think it appropriate they be designated as such.

Finally, it seems that most of the opposition to incorporating a $ sign on the rankings list comes from the p2p muds. If the product is as good as you say it is because you have better resources and offer a better product - supposedly proven by the fact that people pay to play when there are free muds available - then why are you so opposed to the sign? Are you so afraid you'll lose business? If people can find out on the info that you are p2p, why not let them find out immediately. Why must they scan through 20 muds to find out which ones are p2p and which ones are free? Why not let them find out immediately?

Muds are so anxious to provide information in their abstract on the rankings list about being the #1 mud in the world, or being the oldest, or the biggest, or the number of players online. You don't make people go to the info page to find that information out! Why should they, then, have to do so to find out about the fact some charge over $30/month to get the full benefits?

09-25-2002, 01:54 PM	#23
Mason Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 158	Disclaimer: I am not trying to tell anyone what to do. Yes, Adam makes money of this site and it is his site to do with as he pleases. At the same time, he makes money by providing a valuable service to, in essence, the consumers of the product he provides. As such, it seems quite appropriate that the consumers be able to offer feedback in a public forum about what they would like to see in the product to which they subscribe. Moreover, I would think that, as the administrator of this forum, he would not only be interested in, but appreciate, the willingness of people to express how they feel the site can be changed for the better - whether he agrees with them or not. In my own opinion, I think there is no need for two separate lists. I have no problem competing against the p2p muds. I just think it appropriate they be designated as such. Finally, it seems that most of the opposition to incorporating a $ sign on the rankings list comes from the p2p muds. If the product is as good as you say it is because you have better resources and offer a better product - supposedly proven by the fact that people pay to play when there are free muds available - then why are you so opposed to the sign? Are you so afraid you'll lose business? If people can find out on the info that you are p2p, why not let them find out immediately. Why must they scan through 20 muds to find out which ones are p2p and which ones are free? Why not let them find out immediately? Muds are so anxious to provide information in their abstract on the rankings list about being the #1 mud in the world, or being the oldest, or the biggest, or the number of players online. You don't make people go to the info page to find that information out! Why should they, then, have to do so to find out about the fact some charge over $30/month to get the full benefits?