[DonathinFrye]

You're being defensive, and understandably so, because I have attacked your indirect attitude. However, you are also both hypocritical and wrong in your choices of nouns used to describe me. I have stated in this thread, several times, that some large MUDs are capable of not compromising certain valuable things to remain popular. See below; I have been on staff of some such MUDs. I do not, and could not reasonably claim otherwise. Therefor, your statement is, simply put, wrong. Re-read some of my posts if you want.

In addition to that, I could not even gather information on Threshhold's playerbase size because I was told that there is no "in-game command" to see howmany players are logged on at one time by your staff, during the application section of the game. Therefor, I am not directly targetting your MUD, I have next-to-no experience with it. The only thing I criticized, perhaps, was your indirect cold-shoulder to smaller MUDs.

Speaking from personal experience, however, I've been high-level staff on two MUDs which reached peaks of over 200 players. Both were very unique and very enjoyable games - on neither did I ever question whether their concerns were more with mass popularity than quality. I did advertising for both of these MUDs, and I have a very good grasp on what it takes to make it work.

I simply do not think that having a large playerbase necessarily makes one MUD better than another - and I bet that the vast majority of MUDers would not base its "success" merely off of its size/popularity. Trying to say that I'm an immature communist, just because I don't value gaming success by immediate commercial means, is just sort of silly. We're talking about a genre of free, indepth text-based online rpgs here - we can leave behind the western mentality that we deal with every day in real life long enough to try to take the genre as far as it can possibly go ... and if that exploration's not for you, at least give a nod of respect to the ones that it is for.

The amount of traffic some smaller MUDs can give you and/or this website is insignificant when compared to the amount of good, creative ideas/inspiration some of the more commercial MUDs could gain from these more secret successes. If you were open to that sort of thing, of course.

[Lanthum]

[DonathinFrye]

Seperating commercial from non-commercial MUDs as different list choices makes sense. Commercial MUDs have the money, or commercialize themselves to make the money, to be able to advertise and draw in online game wanderers who are easy to suck into mass-popular stylized games. Non-Commercial MUDs sometimes(besides half-assed ones) are focused more on creating something unique and wonderful. In film, independent films are judged in their own category, aka a "Film Festival"(like the Sundance or Cannes), and Hollywood movies are seperated into another category, with different award ceremonies. It is the same concept. Indy Films often-times are far more creative and focused on the art of creation, rather than the pay-off.

Why should the owner of this site care about creating one extra list that would show the community how the non-commercial MUDs are stacking up in votes? I'm assuming perhaps too much when I venture to guess that the creator of this site did it for his passion of online text-gaming, and not for a "get rich quick" scheme. If this is the case, then it would benefit the MUDing community to be able to more easily take a look at the more "independent" text rpgs out there.

All of this talk of business ventures is taking away from the game. Again, if you are really in this for the 'business', you should go join up with a graphical MMORPG. Maybe I'm pushing my case too much here, but I'm just really suprised the attitudes on this thread in particular.

As far as being off-topic - yes, we are, very much so. It's probably about that time to move on. : p

[prof1515]

The real problem is with the way in which TMS fails to explain itself, or even worse how it portrays itself.

Incorrect. It's not a one-stop resource, or even a resource for that matter. It's a "traffic exchange", as Matt said. That should be reflected SOMEWHERE on the site. It is not however. The closest TMS comes to explaining itself is that phrase in their Homepage title banner. And that phrase is simply not true.

If TMS was really a one-stop MUD resource, you'd be able to find what you are looking for rather than what the MUDs who contribute the greatest traffic want you to find. If it was a resource instead of a "traffic exchange", it would be more helpful in helping those visiting the site find what they're looking for rather than whoring for those MUDs who send in traffic.

So perhaps the sub-quality commercial MUD owners have it right. But only so far as in practice. As far as perception, TMS is misleading visitors to the site and not clearly presenting their "service" as it really is. A nice public disclaimer somewhere is in order, explaining that TMS is not a resource, at least not an intentional one, contrary to their own self-description.

Take care,

Jason

[Jazuela]

To mud administrators, this is definitely a traffic exchange. But to players of muds, who have no stake in which games succeed and which fail, no vested interest in which games bring traffic here and which don't, this is a resource. It's where we come to look for available games that suit our interests. And isn't it interesting, there are VASTLY more players than there are mud administrators. Thing is, it's the admins who are the most vocal and prolific on this forum, which is only one part of the website. The biggest part, the most obvious part, the part that people see most prominently when they come for the first time, is the list itself.

This is why I offered the suggestion of splitting the list into two sections. Side by side, with the commercial games on the left and the non-commercial games on the right. That way, no one gets "front and center" except those who pay for the banner ads at the top, which is as it should be anyway.

It has nothing to do with communism. It has to do with the function of this website from the perspective of the *majority* of visitors - the players themselves.

I, and most of the people I know personally who mud, came to Topmudsites for the first time because we were looking for a mud to play. Not because we had any desire to bring traffic to the site. Our game wasn't even listed, so it was impossible to use the voting system to come here. We were trying to find out what was available as an alternative to what we were already playing. This is just a dozen or two of people I personally know. The 11th person that I know, of this group, might know another dozen or two people. The 14th person of this group might know another dozen or two people. Do some guestimate work and add it all up, and you've got a couple hundred people all coming to Topmudsites who are NOT using it as a traffic exchange. And that's just in -my- circle of "people I know". Grab a couple percentage points of the entire mudlist's playerbase, and you can easily be well into the thousands of people who come here because they're looking for new games to play, and NOT because they want to promote a traffic exchange.

Topmudsites IS a listing service, a resource for mudders. It's one of the two most prominent ones on the internet for English-speaking people (and for many who speak English as a second language).

If you ditched all "resource" capabilities and left in 'only' the traffic exchange capabilities, this website would very quickly become either totally vacant of substance, or become the "Iron Realms Secondary Website," since their players comprise the majority of people who click on their own site's little button to come here.

[Anitra]

Lanthum @ Dec. 31 2005,06:37

You are the one that has got things wrong here. What people  are expecting is for the site to be what it was originally designed for, and what it advertises itself to be: A resource site for all mudders.

Claiming that it is nothing but a traffic exchange is actually quite insulting, considering the work that has been put into the site originally by the  owner, and the contributions made by various members in the various sections. (Which I assume that you never bother to read).

Actually some things in life _are_ free. One of those things is the free muds, run by dedicated people, who donate their own time and even pay the expenses for the server out of their own pockets, so that players can enjoy their creations for free.
The fact that some commercial muds that advertise themselves as 'free' actually have hidden costs, doesn't change this very basic fact about free muds.

It might not be your cup of tea, but you should at least respect it and recognise it for what it is.

Excuse me, who are you talking to here? I don't own a mud. I just play on a couple. I might want to try out some more, but since I am mainly interested in free muds, of course I would like separate lists, (especially in view of the misrepresentation of some commercial muds). I would also like the listing to be as cheat-free as possible. And it still surprises me how anyone could be against that.

And there is no need to scream at us, by the way. we are all perfectly capable of reading your post without all the caps.

To conclude this, I am not _expecting_ Synozeer to change anything.
I am however _hoping_ that he is following the thread, and maybe realising that the main part of the _real_ visitors here, (not the ones that just click the vote button and log out again), would like the site to be something more than just a 'traffic exchange'.

What it all comes down to is the purpose of the site. Is it a 'Mud resource', as is said on the top and like it was designed  to be? Or is it just a 'traffic exchange', as you and some owners of big commercial muds claim?  

Sure, I am hoping that Synozeer would listen to the arguments and decide to do some changes, which I think would make the site better for most mud players.

If he decides not to, that is his privilege as List owner. But I would like to hear it from _him_. Not from the_logos.

[imported_Synozeer]

There are no new site owners. It is still just me.

And I am listening to the thread.

-Adam

[Sacac]

I understand Threshold. You want to cater to the biggest Muds. They have the most to lose. However, by getting those smaller muds onto the list and making their users happier, they will vote more and see your mud more. Of course, that also goes the other way, those smaller muds have a better chance of luring your players away and I know, that is bad for business.

The question though. Do you want to improve the community as a whole, or be popular with the “most populous” muds?

I know threshold, you want the latter. I want the former.

If this is truly a resource, we should provide for the quality.
If this is a traffic exchange, we should provide for the quantity.

Those are my thoughts.

[Fern]

Long ago, Johor (our retired coder imp) told us 'anything can be coded.'   This small thought drummed up a lot of enthusiasm and boosted us into a stable orbit, along with the caveat, 'just because it can be coded does not mean it should be coded.'

Kudos to Synozeer, on several fronts - the most important of which is strength in the face of the tsunami of browbeatings on this topic and others in the past.  I'm grateful for the service that TMS provides, which, along with the services of several other mud-related sites, gives our game the exposure we desperately need.

[Anitra]

[Threshold]

I have never said anything related to "gaming success by immediately commercial means" or whether a "large player base makes one MUD better than another"? You are arguing against a straw man there.

If you want to turn this into a flame war, then you'll have to carry that on with yourself. If you want to discuss things reasonably, I'll try to participate.

[Threshold]

Nobody said eliminating bots, itself, is bad for traffic. But the methods suggested here so far, WOULD be bad for traffic. They would reduce REAL traffic. It would be cutting off your nose to spite your face.


Would you look at a hammer and want it to be _more_ than just a hammer? Do you understand than wanting a hammer to be more than just a hammer is somewhat silly?

The voting element of TMS was specifically designed from the very beginning to be a traffic exchange. The only reason any web site on the internet has any sort of voting or polls is to generate traffic. Period. The votes/polls are always incredibly unscientific, so obviously there is no goal of "truth" for these polls. The goal is always traffic. Period.

It doesn't make any sense to even hope for a voting/poll area of a site to have any other goal or purpose. Traffic is specifically the goal of polls.

As for the whole of TMS, there already is more. There is a large discussion area, and an incredibly worthless review section that should, in my opinion, be completely removed (but that is another issue).

If your desire is for TMS to be a more robust site, suggest features to add, or suggest ways to improve the discussion forums. Discussing changes to the vote portion, especially ways that only reduce traffic, is not productive.

Furthermore, I simply do not believe that any of the people suggesting things like separate lists have ANY goal other than trying to get artificially enhanced prominent placement of their favorite game. They want popular muds to send traffic here, and then their mud to benefit from it unfairly and undeservedly. That's their honest motive, which they occasionally veil thinly with other, transparent goals.

[Sacac]

Well my friend, believe it. I want to have tons and tons of lists to make every need of mine viewable.

Call it a fetish of lists.

The only reason I see that you are against it is because the mud beneath you might steal your players. And every mud beneath you is unworthy of the same treatment you get. I'd rather that the player has list for everything. So they can see a list like the front one with all the muds that fit their query. Censorship by massive amount of uninforming information is a major turn off.

I mean this when I search for death.
Really unproductive.

[DonathinFrye]

Hah, I don't want a flamewar Threshhold. Easiest way to avoid feeling like you are a part of one is to not incorrectly generalize other people's comments, and avoid calling them immature and communistic. Again, it's just silly.

My opinion remains the same; this site is supposedly a resource site, and therefor should be focused on the community as a whole, rather than just a few MUDs. Others have echoed me in this.

On that basis, I still believe improving the accuracy of a fair voting process, as well as creating seperate lists for commercial and non-commercial games is more resourceful/beneficial to the community as a whole.

One last note, Thresh - I never knew the size of your playerbase, nor am I familiar with you/your game really. My notes have nothing to do with you, beyond re-clarification of my purpose to solidify my opinions. So let's just leave things to that. : )

[Threshold]

Wrong. But nice try at putting words in my mouth.

I love how you equate fairness with "catering to the biggest MUDs." That just cracks me up.


Why do they need to be made happier? They should already be ecstatic that something like TMS exists that they can use to easily get some attention and players. They pay nothing and they get to be on a list that is visited by thousands of mudders (the majority of them sent here by a handful of the more popular muds). I sure wish TMS had existed back when I was starting Threshold. It would have helped a TON.


They don't have a better chance, they are just putting a lot less at risk and getting a lot more benefit.

Imagine 2 lists side by side, like Jazuela and others have suggested.

A top 10 mud on one list, sends thousands of people to the site. This is a lot of traffic, and that is also a lot of players they are risking by saying "Hey, go to this site that lists other games."

A top 10 mud on the other list, perhaps sends tens of people to the site. This is not very much traffic. They did not risk much and they did not send a lot of traffic to the site. Traffic is what benefits the site, and traffic is what benefits all muds in the community.

Both muds got the exact same "reward": #1-10 placement and the top spot on a list. They are both listed equally prominently. Is this fair? Not even close.

Of course, you don't care. All you care about is figuring out ANY WAY to get your favorite mud a better listing, so it can benefit unfairly and undeservedly from the traffic sent by other games.

Just be honest, ok?

Stop kidding yourself by trying to paint me and others as people who want preferential treatment for popular games. We aren't asking for anything preferential. We are asking for things to stay the same as they are, which is a fair way to do things. You send traffic, you get listed higher. It is that simple.

What amazes me most of all, is to listen to people **** and moan and attack the very MUDs that are sending them traffic and giving them a CHANCE to get new players from the traffic they send.

It isn't enough that popular muds send the majority of the traffic here. They need to also give up the reward of prominent listing and share that with other muds as well.

It isn't enough that Synozzer creates a site that helps MUDs get publicity and new players, which they did not have before. He has to find ways to artificially boost up less popular (for whatever the reason) muds so they can gain more players from popular muds.

Truly, no good deed goes unpunished.

[DonathinFrye]

This is not being 'fair'; it is being self-serving. If this site is oriented towards helping the community out as much as possible, it would be useful to add *any* features to the site that could improve the community as a whole. And the vast majority of MUDs in the community probably would feel greatly aided in a seperation of commercial/non-commercial lists. If most MUDs do not agree with you that the status quo is the best viable option, then it could be assumed that the community as a whole wants to improve itself with the afforementioned change.

I'm currently working on a massive commercial MUD project(granted, trying to avoid things I generally dislike about some of such projects), and I still feel like I would prefer two lists. Again, it would benefit the community as a whole.

[Threshold]

How exactly does it aid the community to alienate and run off the MUD that send the overwhelming majority of the traffic?

That's calling killing the goose that laid the golden egg.

Right now, smaller muds have the enormous BOON that is TMS. The popular muds on the list did not have anything like TMS to help them out. Smaller muds have an opportunity to be listed on a site where traffic is sent from tons of MUDs (which means the visitors are self selected to be interested in MUDs).

Since almost EVERY SINGLE player of every MUD tries out other games eventually, this means every small mud has a shot at these players from all of these muds.

But you WILL run off popular games if you continually push for these unfair, communistic ideas like two side by side lists that give equal prominence to games that are not sending traffic.

Why should one mud send thousands of its players here, to earn a placement that another mud can earn by sending a handful of players. That makes no sense.

If you were to get your way, traffic would drop and that benefits nobody. That doesn't help the community at all.

What helps the community is driving as much traffic to a site that provides information on MUDs. That grows the community.

By the way, you seem to only consider "the community" to be small muds. You realize that the majority of the mudding community probably plays about 10-20 muds total, right? So things that benefit the big muds still benefits "the community" of which they are a part.

[Threshold]

A vast majority of MUDs might want that, but the vast majority of MUDs are also garbage.

How about the vast majority of MUDers? You know, the actual PEOPLE playing the muds and visiting this site?

Take a look at the votes (as they existed when I wrote this post):

[code]
6249 votes, top 10
1573 votes, 11-20
778 votes, 21-30
390 votes, 31-40
280 votes, 41-50
208 votes, 51-60
133 votes, 61-70
102 votes, 71-80
74 votes, 81-90
59 votes, 91-100

Total Votes; 9846

Top 10; 6249 (63.46% of all votes)
Top 20; 7822 (79.44% of all votes)

Bottom 90; 3597 (36.53% of all votes)
Bottom 80; 2024 (20.56% of all votes)
[/quote]

So if you want to talk about majorities, the majority of the traffic comes from the top 10 muds on the list, and the OVERWHELMING majority comes from the top 20 (front page).

Think about that, before you start wondering how the majority of the people who visit the site feel. Think about where the majority of the traffic for this site comes from.

Don't kill the goose that laid the golden egg.

[DonathinFrye]

[nass]