[Baram]

That's known as attempted bribery, a different crime from actual bribery. Attempted only one person gets charged, bribery both do.

[Baram]

Not all pay-for-perks limit max advancement to only those that spend money.

IRE doesn't(granted it's a lot harder, but possible), and in Ilyrias we are making it even easier(in some ways) to max out without spending money. At the same time we are doing some things, that will be 100% needed to be a good combatant, that money has no effect on.

In general, you were right about the differences between the two types. Though, you could have just said PfP vs 100% Free.

[lovechiefs]

IRE does allow for players to advance levels and advance their characters without spending money.It is surely very hard to do so(I am actually doing it right now,as I don't have the money to buy credits)

[lovechiefs]

IRE does allow for players to advance levels and advance their characters without spending money.It is surely very hard to do so(I am actually doing it right now,as I don't have the money to buy credits)

[prof1515]

Ha! What do you know about facts? Do you even know how to spell "facts" or do you toss in an "e" and spell it "faects" so it'll "turn heads" and make more people want to read your nonsense?

Again, if you read my posts again you'll see I've already stated my case. Oh, wait. You a) don't have the English comprehension skills necessary, b) are off pretending you're running your little "business" instead of actually sitting in front of your computer wetting your pants and whining, and c) can't see the screen what with your head so far up your ass.

You're really pathetic. How you can honestly think you're a professional is beyond reason. Now run along back to your own little VIAGRA MUD forums, play-pretend you're a "businessman", and have someone change your diaper before you wet it again. Wait! Probably too late for that.

Take care, you ignorant little child,

Jason

[Crystal]

Matt, you must be thoroughly enjoying all this free publicity. I think I finally understand why sometimes you provoke these attacks. Though I can't quite understand why other people seem to feed them.

Though I will honestly say, I'm really tired of hearing about all this, regardless.

[Chayesh]

Nope, sorry. Bribery is the offering only. You are "bribing" them. That's a crime of solicitation, same as subornation of perjury. It's a crime just to offer it.

Accepting bribes is its own separate offense.

[Valg]

I've refuted that line of attack a few times, which is why I didn't bother with it yesterday, but here goes:

1) Maybe once a year, we remind players via our website that, hey, it'd be cool if they sent us some cash, but no worries. The vast majority of players never send us anything. Those that do get a thank-you email, and we'll offer a CF webmail account or similar out-of-game convenience. They get nothing in-game (in agreement with our license), and indeed the staff has no way to connect PayPal donations to specific characters, since we don't collect any RL personal information in-game.

2) We never interrupt gameplay with these solicitations. Part of this is because we're roleplay-required and it would break the "fourth wall", and part of it is because our players would riot and throw rocks at us if we annoyed them like that.

3) In the past, when player donations did not meet operating costs, members of the CF staff just quietly footed the bill out of pocket. Our players will attest to the fact that they have never been threatened with shutdowns, reductions in service, or other coercions.

You can't get more voluntary or optional than that. This isn't unique to CF by a long shot, of course, and all we're really asking for is an accurate label that communicates the above to prospective players.

[Baram]

Got Jealousy?

[Traveler]

Got Bias?

Funny how you don't make a remark when Matt uses the same tactics.

[Ilkidarios]

What the hell is happening to this forum?

In a period of two days, this subject has gotten FIVE PAGES of posts!  Why?  I mean, whenever something that actually discusses interesting subject matter is started it gets maybe five posts and then dies.

I know I used to make posts like this, but as I've spent more time on here I've changed my subject matter.  This is just nuts.

[Valg]

I usually recommend complaining to a moderator of the thread. Generally, one blames either the person starting the flames, or the person most active in perpetuating them.

I don't know what to do when a moderator is both of those people, though.

[Ellie]

Prof1515, the last things you've posted have consisted of nothing but insults. What an excellent argument this is. Matt is rationally explaining his side, and you are spewing insults and trying to aggrivate him. I, for one, don't see anything wrong with what Matt does. The IRE games are FREE to play. To play. That means, you can log in, and get a character, and level up and do everything someone who bought credits can, other than the things that you purchase with credits. It shouldn't have to be any deeper than this. Have fun childishly insulting people and treating it like a valid argument.

[Traveler]

If you think Matt was rational then your opinion is obviously invalidated by bias. He was every bit as defamatory as Prof and he initiated it. Prof responded in kind to Matt's own antics.

[Anitra]

Ilkidarios: Mar. 17 2006,15:49    
Just a reminder, in case you or anyone else forgot, since the thread got so long:

the_logos: Mar. 15 2006,23:45  
Fringe minority? Flamefests? Vitriol?

Who started this thread in the first place?
Who is the one commonly known for broadly insulting a large number of Mudowners, or singling out a special target to spew his vitriol on?
Who is the one repeatedly posting flamebait, (like supporting the code-thieving Medievia or encouraging other mudowners to break the Diku licence?)
Who is the one usually provoking the flames, and/or starting the personal insults or attacks on a particular Mud or person?
Who is the one that constantly reacts to even moderate criticism by lashing out violently?
Who is the one that drove several interesting posters off the Forums here, because they couldn't stand his antics?
Who is the one that wrote a majority of the more inflammatory posts on the thread himself?

Take the time to read through this thread, and a number of similar threads, and perhaps the picture will become a bit clearer to you.

So why did the_logos start this thread?
I am inclined to agree with Crystal that he is doing it for the free publicity. Apparently he belongs to the people who believe that all publicity is good publicity. I remember Vryce doing the same in the past. Now that he's mercifully withdrawn from the boards, Soleil has taken his role. (With friends like that, who needs enemies?)

I am growing increasingly tired of these flame threads myself.
They are of course a bad thing, because they tend to drown all attempts at serious discussions on the boards, which in turn is negative for the quality of the site.

But they will continue.
Because a significant number of people are disturbed by unethical behaviour.

As long as Soleil persists in flaunting stolen goods on the boards, every one of those threads will probably be 'polluted' by one or more posters pointing out that the goods is indeed stolen.
And as long as the_logos persists in actively preventing a desirable addition to the search engine, using all methods available, (including bullying, veiled threats, speaking on behalf of the list owner, word-twisting and insults), this topic will also pop up repeatedly.
Because most people with the capacity of independent and unbiased thinking realise, that a distinction between truly free Muds and pay-to-play or pay-for-perks games is information that would be valid to a majority of the players around, and as such would improve the quality of the site.

It has been said before, but it deserves to be said again:
It’s not the IRE games that people have a problem with, it’s the behavior of  the_logos on the boards.
I don't recall any of the active posters here actually attacking the IRE _muds_.
I do however recall the_logos attacking other people’s muds on several occasions.
So who sets the standards here?

[cron0s]

I wouldn't worry too much, he's been at it for years. This forum just happens to be his current stomping ground. I didn't notice he was a moderator, nice sense of irony from the board owner.

Given that their games seem to be inferior copies of Avalon and their owner frequently makes himself out to be an asshat, I can't help but admire the commercial success that IRE has had.

Maybe some members of this community need to reflect on why the two biggest factors in the success of IRE; namely their charging model and the 'tenacity' *cough* of the_logos, are the two things that they seem to hate the most?

[Crystal]

I have to agree with you Anitra. On one hand, most of the people here already know the issues with the repetative problem MUDs or rather... people who run/own them. On the other, people feel the need to educate any new people to MUDs on how the repetative problem MUDs/owners are doing wrong.

Though I can honestly say, I've never tried a MUD on someones recommendation, and I've certainly never not tried a MUD on someones recommendation.

Again, I believe this to just be an attempt at more publicity, and people taking the bait. Why else would there be 3 separate threads on the main page just concerning IRE?

I've heard all I've ever wanted to know about IRE games and then some. I personally just don't see the appeal. Then again, I've played plenty of free MUDs that suited me just fine.

It'd be nice if the flamewars like these were just cut immediately. But I don't think anyone has the patience to really moderate that.

[prof1515]

Why would I be jealous? I am offended by Matt though because I find dishonesty offensive. I also find it pathetic, a feeling I share for those who are ignorant in the face of overwhelming information. However, I don't pity dishonest people. I do pity those who are ignorant and who don't have the intelligence and reasoning skills to realize as much. So consider yourself pitied by me.

Take care,

Jason

[latus]

Is there some psychological reason why people who play MUDs are among the worst debaters and forum users I have ever seen?

[edit: seems I can't even spell "mud", myself...]

[Zyrian]

I am not even close to being informed about what Iron Realms or any other mud mentioned in the post does or doesn’t do. I have not played any of the muds mentioned and therefore won’t comment on the quality of the games. I’ve noticed that a number of people are indeed simply “flaming” because they do not care the demeaning and condescending and demeanor portrayed by Matt. It appears to me people are offering comment on the dispute between Matt and Jason without understanding what is being discussed. Jason does not have any issue with the way Iron Realms is run. The issue he raises is that he feels it is dishonest to advertise as being free to play. As evident in the quote below:

I am not familiar with what Iron Realms does or does not do or how free or costly it is to play. There is no mudding regulation authority that sets guidelines that say you can call yourself  “free to play”, “pay to play”, or any other titles that may exist, if and only if you this or that. I find it slightly amusing (for the lack of a better word to describe my feelings on the issue) that people actually get this upset over this. I can’t imagine that advertising that your mud is free to play could possibly help you scientifically (given the majority of muds are).  If I were to play a mud that was advertised as “free to play” and found out some people pay to get an in game advantage I would leave. I don't like that type of mud so I would make the decision to quit. I haven’t seen any Iron Realms players here complaining about the mud or its advertising (albeit I haven’t been looking either). My thinking on this would be that there are not many if any. I don’t know about everyone else but if I didn’t like a mud…I wouldn’t play it. Why would you play a mud you didn't like? Who does it hurt if they advertise they are “free to play”? The players will make the decision on if they want to continue to play or not. There may be a valid ethical issue here but I don’t see that being resolved any time soon so arguing the issue on public forms doesn’t seem like the best use of time.  Neither does making personal attacks or attacking each other’s muds. I know from an Administrators aspect I couldn’t give a damn if most of you liked or didn’t like my mud. Why…because seems most of the people commenting on the mud itself appear to be staff on muds and are not perspective players and therefore mean nothing to me. I would much rather see the forums get back to where they were when I first entered the mudding community…thought provoking conversation along with fun and fellowship.

Simply my two cents.

          -- Zyrian