[prof1515]

It'd be a bribe if I said, "I'll pay you to change the policy." What I'm saying is that if IRE yanks their ads in response to a change in policy, I'll pick up the difference, thus eliminating any economic considerations that such a threat would pose to making an honest decision on whether or not to implement any such changes to the advertising policies.

It's you, through threats of pulling your advertising dollars, who've turned what should be payment for ads into bribes to maintain policies directly benefiting you.

Time to change your diapers, Matt.

Take care,

Jason

P.S.--Matt, this discussion is called "IRE Sucks" so unless you're going to post about how IRE sucks, you should avoid it.

[the_logos]

Wow, your gall is neverending, and the irony continues. Here you sit, accusing Adam of accepting bribes, on the very board that you use for free. And, of course, while doing it, you help Adam make more money by generating more ad impressions for him to sell.

Attacking the site owner is just pathetic. If you don't like the way Adam runs things, why not just leave instead of accusing him of accepting bribes because he doesn't see things your way?


--matt

[prof1515]

Now who's engaging in libel?

I didn't accuse him of taking bribes, I'm accusing you of trying to use advertising payments as bribes. You keep trying to turn this away from the simple fact that you're a dishonest piece of #### who's probably wetting his pants right now at the thought that one of your points of leverage, threats, might be neutralized.

Now run and have someone change those diapers. You're really starting to smell (worse).

Take care,

Jason

[the_logos]

If he's not taking bribes, we can't be bribing him. In order to bribe someone, someone else has to take a bribe. If he's not accepting bribes, we're not bribing, and as we're not offering bribes, I know he's not taking them from us.

Either he's taking bribes, or we're not bribing him. (It's the latter for those of you just tuning in.)

--matt

[Galleus]

It's exceedingly unfortunate that you've permitted this discussion to degenerate into fecal insults, Prof. By all means, present an argument, but if you feel the need to gain leverage by making ill mannered jokes at the expense of others, you've already lost, and cost the community some degree of maturity.

[prof1515]

Re-read my post yet again, this time concentrating on the [b]bold, underlined part[b] rather than the growing puddle beneath your feet. And then consider this definition as well:

Take care,

Jason

[the_logos]

So, if Adam isn't being bribed, what's the hubbub about? Since he's not taking bribes, whether we advertise here or not doesn't affect the policy, in which case I have to wonder why you care so much and why you keep bringing up that we spend advertising dollars here.

Oh, and if you believe we're engaging in blackmail, why not come out and accuse us of it? I assume you have the evidence to back it up. That's an awfully serious accusation though, I must say. Might want to think twice, particularly given that under US law, ceasing to advertise in no way whatsoever constitutes blackmail.

--matt

[prof1515]

Degenerate as a result of insults? As opposed to every other insult the_logos has thrown out in this and nearly every discussion he participates in? Please, there's nothing wrong with a little toilet humor when addressing an ass. The two naturally go together. And there's no "leverage" through its use. It's purely humor. As for maturity, his original post threw all semblence of that to the wind.

Take care,

Jason

[Valg]

Please direct the same tone towards the_logos. I'll refer you to the post(s) he made to create and sustain this thread, all of which are rife with insults. I can also cite any number of recent threads in which he does the same thing.

As for the advertising issue, I'd be more willing to buy ads on a site that had a system that was more fair to our game. Presently, I'm unhappy with how our designation as "Free" is diluted by being lumped in with pay-for-perks games.

[prof1515]

I didn't say you weren't attempting to use your ads as bribes.

If you don't intend to pull your ads, fine.  Then don't pull your ads.  Point is that if you do, Synoozer's still going to get the same amount of advertising revenue.  That's my offer.  It's not a bribe no matter how much it scares you.

As for alienating you, how would that influence traffic to the site unless you boycotted TMS or used other methods to influence your players not to frequent the site?  That sounds like a threat since it requires actual effort on your part to hurt the site.  Pretty petty and vile to threaten the site owner for considering how he runs his own site.

Jason

[the_logos]

I fail to see how an ad can be a bribe. Adam gets no values from our ads directly. Adam gets value from money we pay him for the ads. If we're attempting to bribe him, what are we attempting to bribe him with, exactly? It can't be the money we spend on advertising, unless you want to accuse Adam of taking bribes.

So what is it we're attempting to bribe Adam with, if not money for the ads?


Yes, it would alienate people like me and would probably cost him dollars due to lost traffic in the long run as a result because a split list is of less value to large MUDs, and large MUDs are what bring the traffic to this site. 7 of the top 11 MUDs here either sell access to the game or sell virtual items. It's in Adam's best interest, and only makes logical sense, to cater to the MUDs that do the most to make TMS work.

Why would I need to pull our ads? We've already agreed that Adam isn't taking bribes, so his policy can't be dependent on our ad revenue, as that would constitute a bribe. Therefore, what would make him change his policy? A dozen forum posters, out of thousands of TMS users? I think not.

--matt

[prof1515]

It most certainly can be a bribe if your intention is to purchase advertisements not only to attract players but to contribute money to the site and hence inflate your company's value to the site.  That makes is an attempt to use the advertisements as a bribe on your part even though Synoozer is accepting the money legitimately for services rendered.  Hence he's not taking bribes, but you're attempting to use advertising dollars as bribes.

Are you really that stupid?  I don't think so.  Dishonest, yes.  Stupid no.

Take care,

Jason

[the_logos]

Is it a bribe or isn't it? A bribe requires two parties. There can be no bribe unless one parties gives a bribe and another party accepts it.

If it's not, then why do you keep insinuating that Adam maintains his current policy based on receipt of those advertising dollars?

If it is, then you're accusing Adam of taking bribes.

--matt

[prof1515]

A bribe may require two parties but it does not require two consenting parties. It only requires one party to attempt it. That's all.

It's not that hard a concept to understand. You must be desperate if you continue to feign this degree of ignorance. *chuckle* Idjit.

Take care,

Jason

[the_logos]

So are you saying we're bribing someone? Why not just come out and say it? Be a man. Make a solid accusation.

--matt

[gth]

The only way to stop IRE or any such trolls from posting, would be to remove the 'latest topics' thread from the front of the TMS web site (it's okay, I know that's not going to happen).

I gave up on these forums long ago, since they're just a tool to get one's MUD higher than position one on the rankings page and the unscrupulous have been putting their name at that position for years - and currently their name is up there twice.

[Lisaera]

Sorry to go off topic here, but since the topic is neither particularly interesting nor well argued I don't feel a great deal of regret.

I just wanted to reply to this post to say that this isn't actually to do with the Rapture engine or language, it's just how the IRE games were designed and coded. Rapture itself is actually quite flexible and combat could be implemented entirely differently using it if the coders so desired.

One thing that has been on my to-do list for a long time is writing better AI for mobs to make bashing more interesting.

[prof1515]

What do you know about being a man? You're a child and one that throws tantrums when others question you or disagree and one who has trouble telling the truth. You probably wet your pants several times a day at the thought that Synoozer might make any change to this website and you'll be required to be...*gasp*...honest! I don't think I've encountered anyone as insecure as you.

And if you improved your English skills, you wouldn't have to repeatedly ask the same questions after they've already been answered nor would you have embarassing incidents like that "duely" error you approved on one of your ads, forcing you to lie (rather poorly given your vast experience at it) about how you deliberately approved a typo.

Take care, you pathetic, insecure idjit.

Jason

[the_logos]

In other words, you don't have the balls or the evidence to make an accusation of bribery against us and were just making things up.

I knew you'd back down once challenged to actually lay out your accusations in factual terms.

--matt

[Chayesh]

I have two points simply because I'm detail-oriented (translation: anal).

1. Bribes don't require two people. It doesn't require the bribed party to accept the bribe. Try offering $50 bucks to a police officer the next time you get pulled over and see if him not accepting it helps you avoid a bribery charge. Bribery is a crime of solicitation. Just offering it is criminal, regardless of whether the other accepts it or not.

2. To the poster who pulled some random text off CF's website about donations and tried futilely to throw that in their face. I'm surprised at the lack of logic of that post or that anyone didn't call them on it. Pay-for-perks is not even close to donations. Let's briefly break it down:

Pay-for perks: Log on for free
CF model: Log on for free

Pay-for-Perks: Gladly solicits money from players for advancement opportunities within the game
CF Model: Reluctantly solicits money from players for OPERATING COSTS of the game with no in game benefit

Pay-For-Perks: Players can reach maximum potential only by the addition of perks purchased with cash
CF Model: Players can reach maximum potential completely free of charge

I think the more level heads on this forum are simply asking that some differentiation be made between Free to log, pay for perks and Free to log, Free to advance.

Thanks for your time.

Got yer back CF.