Tavern of the Blue Hand

Threshold · 01-24-2003, 04:03 PM

I think that is the best policy.

This way, there is no sneaky way around the rules and voting is not based on which mud can think of the most creative reward method.

KaVir, you raised some very interesting points but I think that topic deserves its own thread. As soon as I finish this post, I am going to start such a thread in the Advanced MUD Concepts forum.

Tavish · 01-24-2003, 05:49 PM

It seems to me we are saying the exact same thing, is there a something I missed?

The reason I think we see so much bitterness towards p2p games here on TMS particularly is that the listing is setup to be a competition. Bringing out the competitive nature of the various owners is bound to set off these type of reactions. In a way it was why I was (am) against adding restrictions as to how the votes are garnered by admins.

No matter how many restrictions you place on the way the votes are tallied, there is always bound to be some type of imbalance. The size of the pbase the largest variable, although most anyone who looks at the list can tell how this is factored in. But there are so many other, less-obvious ways that determine how often people vote. The location/size of the voting link and reminders from admins to vote are two things off the top of my head that if, used to the extremes, act in virtually the same manor as incentives, skewing the rankings away from the dedicated-player votes ( used loosely) towards the games that are using the list as a merely promotion.

Is it now immoral to ask your players to vote, to place any type of reference to the site other than the voting link? What exactly are people wanting the list to represent?

KaVir · 01-25-2003, 05:36 PM

Yes.

There are times when a mud developer has to choose between quality and quantity. If your primary goal is to achieve quantity then in that case you're going to sacrifice the quality of the mud; it's simple logic.

However it is a fallacy to automatically assume that a mud with quality doesn't also have quantity (or vice versa). In fact most commercial muds are fairly high in terms of quality, simply because it helps them achieve quantity.

And as an aside, I've never objected to commercial muds being listed here.

01-24-2003, 04:03 PM	#81
Threshold Legend Join Date: Apr 2002 Home MUD: Threshold RPG Posts: 1,260	I think that is the best policy. This way, there is no sneaky way around the rules and voting is not based on which mud can think of the most creative reward method. KaVir, you raised some very interesting points but I think that topic deserves its own thread. As soon as I finish this post, I am going to start such a thread in the Advanced MUD Concepts forum.

01-24-2003, 05:49 PM	#82
Tavish Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: USA Posts: 130	It seems to me we are saying the exact same thing, is there a something I missed? The reason I think we see so much bitterness towards p2p games here on TMS particularly is that the listing is setup to be a competition. Bringing out the competitive nature of the various owners is bound to set off these type of reactions. In a way it was why I was (am) against adding restrictions as to how the votes are garnered by admins. No matter how many restrictions you place on the way the votes are tallied, there is always bound to be some type of imbalance. The size of the pbase the largest variable, although most anyone who looks at the list can tell how this is factored in. But there are so many other, less-obvious ways that determine how often people vote. The location/size of the voting link and reminders from admins to vote are two things off the top of my head that if, used to the extremes, act in virtually the same manor as incentives, skewing the rankings away from the dedicated-player votes ( used loosely) towards the games that are using the list as a merely promotion. Is it now immoral to ask your players to vote, to place any type of reference to the site other than the voting link? What exactly are people wanting the list to represent?

01-25-2003, 05:36 PM	#83
KaVir Legend Join Date: Apr 2002 Name: Richard Home MUD: God Wars II Posts: 2,052	Yes. There are times when a mud developer has to choose between quality and quantity. If your primary goal is to achieve quantity then in that case you're going to sacrifice the quality of the mud; it's simple logic. However it is a fallacy to automatically assume that a mud with quality doesn't also have quantity (or vice versa). In fact most commercial muds are fairly high in terms of quality, simply because it helps them achieve quantity. And as an aside, I've never objected to commercial muds being listed here.

Tavern of the Blue Hand

Why so bitter?