|
My default understanding of placement on the mud listing would be that the game with the most votes has the most players coming to vote for it therefore has the most enthusiastic player base.
I have found it to be quite the challenge to come here twice every 24 hours to vote for the game I play. Doing it for a few days is no biggy, but doing it every day indefinitely is a lot. Still, I don't mind because I really love the game I play and I enjoy meeting new members. For me newbies have a contagious enthusiasm I find hard to resist.
Still, I don't know how long I'll continue voting at this pace. After all, my primary interest is playing the game not voting for it at every opportunity.
On the other hand, if my game offered me something like say, experience, or wealth, or a chance to win something every time I voted, or a discount on my membership, that would definitely provide more incentive to come and vote every chance I got indefinitely.
I don't really have a preference as to whether or not incentives should be permitted but they do skew the results. Now that at least one game is using incentives to vote it leaves the others in an awkward situation. Many feel that it is a grey area or have condemned the practice as being unethical.
If it is allowed, which it appears to be at this point, I would prefer that it be permitted officially rather than simply not addressed. Other games could then add an incentive that they feel is appropriate to their environment.
If it is officially sanctioned that changes the situation. Games can add incentives without feeling they are somehow doing something borderline unethical. If it is not officially sanctioned, then if a game gets found out they can be reported.
Another option would be for the games which do not offer incentives to specify in their description that they do not offer voting incentives so the ones that do stand out.
|