[SirTank]

I know we have a few sites with databases of MUDs, but how about the player's themselves? Specifically I am referring to the existence of a master banned player database? For example:

Player Joe Mudder gets banned from Mud A for reason B. I think it might be a little helpful to have a way for us mud admins to insert Joe Mudder's IP address into a database with the reason for the ban. This would do nothing more than serve as a tool for admins to use at their own disgresion. Sort if like how the sexual predator database works. It would in no way suggest or force a mud to take any sort of action against the player, but again, serve as a tool from which they can judge what action or non action to take.

I realize IPs are fleeting and people usually get them dynamic, but at leat it's a step, something small that might help. Except for AOsmeLl and other crappy mega ISPs most mudders are locked into a specific class C. Think of it as a player review, but obviously only bad ones. Bad player's can't hide forever unless they make a concerted effort to switch providers, and make a conscious effort not to do the same actions that got them banned and bad reviewed in the first place, which at that point the list has served its purpose and the said player should never appear on there again.

I don't mean this to be a rant or confessional for admins to express their own muds opinions about who should and who should not play Muds, but rather a call to see if this would in any way be echoed as a value to anyone else? And if anyone disagrees, why.

Tank

[ScourgeX]

I don't think it is a good idea. I could be wrong, but I don't think people are added to a sex-offender list until proven guilty in a court of law. I don't see how to validate claims that someone is a bad player.

There are bad admins just like there are bad players and if I was a normal player (I only play my own mud now), I'd stay away from any game that used such a database as I don't want my IP posted on a public forum just cause of someone on a powertrip.

[Valg]

1) If you don't require extensive documentation, this would be not much more than a rumor mill. I don't think such a product would be useful, let alone fair.

2) If you do require extensive documentation, it probably won't see much use. If I know someone's a toolbox, it takes me a minute or so to take care of them on my own game, and I always keep documentation in case an appeal is requested, but I'm probably not going to want to spend all the time organizing this for everyone else.

2B) I'm not really interested in disseminating how we catch cheating in a semi-public fashion. It tends to act as an instruction book for not getting caught the same way a second time.

I'd like to see more MUDs communicating if there are specific concerns, however. For example, the owner of another game recently contacted me about a couple of our players being retards on their game (advertising us, being a nuisance, etc.). He provided names, logs, and some identifying information, and I was able to track down who was responsible and pull a couple aside.

I could also see a small group of admins agreeing to cooperate if they know each other.

But that's very different from opening up our records to a large group of people. I suspect a lot of admins will see it that way, and such a database won't get off the ground.

[GuruPlayer]

Bad idea!  Some bannings are because of IMM's having tantrums, & a revenge posting of a hated player wouldn't be out of the question for some unethical IMM's.  Just like banned players posting troll reviews against the mud that banned them.  Besides, a banned player on one mud, may be a model player on another.  Punishment should be given for actual crimes, not the potential for one.

[KaVir]

This is a really poor idea, but people keep bringing it up every couple of years.

It's not a database of jerks, but rather a database of IP addresses used by people who've ****ed someone off.

Example: Bubba logs onto Boffo's mud. Boffo's girlfriend flirts with Bubba to make Boffo jealous. Bubba flirts back. Bubba gets banned.

Now every mud can have the option of preemptively banning every player who connects from the same university network as the guy who flirted with Boffo's girlfriend!

But wait, Bubba runs a mud too. Bubba finds out Boffo's IP address and submits that for a ban, based on a set of fictional (but very creative) logs. Now every mud can preemptively ban every player who connects from Bubba's university, too.

Meanwhile, Bilbo the dedicated troublemaker flits from mud to mud, untouchable behind his huge range of proxy addresses.

[Hephos]

I knew bilbo was a slut!

[SirTank]

Well, I really don't see anything posted in reply beyond what can be applied as faults to ANY list. So then how can one say this this kind of list would be any better or worse in terms of usefulnes than say, a mud review database. It seems quite ethnocentric for anyone to hold the opinion that it's ok for us as admins to maintain lists that critique the game, and for that matter the immortal staff, but exclude the player base. That kind of a top down view has proven time and time again to be flawed. How can examining the base, the support of the game, be all together such a bad idea as some have emphathetically claimed?

"I don't think people are added to a sex-offender list until proven guilty in a court of law. I don't see how to validate claims that someone is a bad player."

...You would be surprised at the things the government can make up on people and get them indited, oh sorry are you one of those people that believe everything thing authority says is correct, then that contradicts your next statement about how Imm claims can't be trusted. I never said the claims against Player A had to be truthful and verified, it can't and shouldn't expect tobe, but just as we allow false MUD reviews to pass as posts, as stated other topic after topic those are easily weeded out by players or help in the end if they are truely false claims in terms of publicity.

"1) If you don't require extensive documentation, this would be not much more than a rumor mill. I don't think such a product would be useful, let alone fair."

..I point you to the fact that you are living a double standard then. You agree with mud reviews which in the exact same spirit, you despise above. (I do take the liberty to ASSUME here that you agree with mud review database since I have never seen you post about removing them due to the exact reason you state ..my bad if you despise mud reviews)

And the whole rant about a small number of Mud coming together, well that doesn't help the whole, and can be inherently just as faulty as an entire group. It is false to assume small numbers means a result of increased truth, it actually works against it. How many Dictatorships and Ogliarchies do you know that are truthful?

" Punishment should be given for actual crimes, not the potential for one."

woah woah pal, you didnt read my post either. I was not suggesting that the players listed in the database face any sort of external punishment, but rather that it might lead to Imms being more aware of their players, and do or NOT do whatever they so choose.

There do exist habitual cheaters, hackers, jerks that may or will (I hae to use will never) never change. And there are players that will mature and leave their immature ways behind. I only pose this as an attempt to find out why us Imms will agree and live with a system of databases that carry te exact same inherent flaws and weakneses and potential for good use for one thing, but refuse to do it for another (bad player database).

And I mean all this discussion in good faith, I hope not to offend anyone, this is mearly a discussionary piece, I'm not trying to force anything down anyones throat. And I apologize if it has been brought up years ago, I'll have to search the archives or something better next time before posting. Although I have been involved with muds longer than probably 95% of you I'm just now bothering to get active in the communityso I'm not quite up on what has been discussed in the past 16 years..

Tank

[the_logos]

What you seem to be missing is that a reviewer can identify a MUD. You cannot identify a player. You can only identify an IP or range of IP addresses, and that is not the same thing, at all.

There's no such thing as a 'false' MUD review. There are many badly written MUD reviews, but the review itself can't be false. It can contain false information, of course. Again though, the difference is that MUDs can be positively identified. Players cannot at this time be positive identified.

Wow, calm down man. This isn't complicated. Why would Iron Realms, for instance, not participate in any sort of list like this that included all MUDs? Simple: I'd never trust most mud admins to use standards for reporting that are satisfactory to us. I'd imagine that's the same for most mud admins, or at least those who are thinking about it clearly. What a small number of MUDs cooperating could potentially achieve is that trust. I'd happily partner with World of Warcraft, for instance, as I trust them to report people in a professional, documented, and fair manner. I do not trust random DIKU mud #1107 to do the same and I'm quite justified in feeling that way.

In the absence of credit cards or some other semi-unique method of identification however, (which only commercial MUDs have access to), you have 0 reliable information by which to identify a player. Even with credit cards, you only have some information, and are still left without any surety as to the identify of the player. All you achieve is, barring stealing large numbers of cards, preventing someone from continually re-creating their online identity, since they are limited to the # of credit cards they have. And, of course, many people simply don't have credit cards (such as many Europeans and most Asians) as we know them.


Because you cannot reliably identify players. It's that simple. The analog for mud reviews would be people posting mud reviews but without the ability to identify what mud they are actually reviewing, which would make them utterly useless.

--matt

[GuruPlayer]

[Valg]

MUD administrators are not licensed or regulated. All it takes to be one is the limited technical skill required to download a codebase and get it running. That minimal hurdle does not inspire sufficient trust for me to start sharing our data or banning potential players. Thus, the database is useless to me, and I would choose to invest zero time in it. Similarly, I would advise other MUD admins to not waste time contributing to an unchecked pool of slander.

Your dictatorship example is beyond ludicrous. My decision to choose to share (or not share) data with specific MUD administrators is precisely because I have no reason to trust a total stranger. Why is it strange that I would place additional trust in someone who I have dealt with previously, with satisfactory results?

Would you invest your money based on advice from someone off the street? What about from a long-time friend who makes a living as a stock broker? This isn't complicated.

[ScourgeX]

[the_logos]

Abusing your position by posting someone's IP is unethical to begin with, and a violation of most decent privacy policies.

--matt

[zombiedepot]

Yeah, I don't like the idea of making a black list, because some immortals and administrators get on a power trip when you try to question their judgement or accuse them of being wrong. Not all, but some. Could prove as a problem.

[sparky]

i have an extensive list of banned players from my mud for various reasons, as do all mud owners/admins. but personally i think each player deserves a fair chance at a mud they play (innocent until proven a trouble maker)

now i would not share the ban list info with anyone.

if there were the situation of a "sexual predator" as mentioned in previous posts i would supply the logs and supporting information of the predator to the isp they log from and would take an active part if they decided to prosecute the offender. the reason i would follow up like that is that i am a parent of 3 kids ages from 9-16 , and i would not tolerate anyone harrassing my kids like that.

a big database of troublemakers would in my opinion violate alot of personal infomation that players trust to their mud to be kept private. although if a reputable mud contacted me asking if i have had problems from isp 111.111.111.111 i would reply yes i have or no i havent and go no further than that with the details

[SirTank]