[Threshold]

<Snip: Removed reference to deleted post - Xerihae>

I think the Professional vs. Hobbyist distinction holds more value to players than multiple versions of the definition of free.

Evidence of this is the fact that more people play Professionally made games than Hobbyist games. So clearly it is a distinction that matters a lot to people.

[scandum]

I haven't read all of the discussions above, but "pay for perks" as it is is too vague.

Many of the pay for perk muds use a system where you pay like 20 to 30 dollars and get some minor perks for a year. Other muds allow you to pay up to 10.000 dollars to boost your character.

So what would be best would be to calculate the maximum cost for one character over a period of 10 years, which could be abbreviated to MLC (maximum longterm cost). For WoW this would be about 2000$. For Nodeka this would be about 200$. For IRE games this is more difficult to calculate, but I've heard of figures around 15.000$.

This way players can get a good idea of the potential financial consequences of playing a particular mud.

[Newworlds]

Originally Posted by KaVir [ ] Commercial game, subscription required. [ ] Commercial game, no subscription fee. [ ] Non-commercial game, rewards donations in-game. [ ] Non-commercial game.

This seems like the easiest most sensible of all the suggestions in this thread. The rest of the suggestions are much to arbitrary and convoluted.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by KaVir You could break it up based on whether the mud collects revenue, I guess - something like: [ ] Commercial game, subscription required. [ ] Commercial game, no subscription fee. [ ] Non-commercial game, rewards donations in-game. [ ] Non-commercial game. No need to use the word 'free' then.

That does seem to make some sense though I'm a little unsure about the third option insofar. If you're not a registered charity I'm unsure whether it's proper to consider something a donation when the person giving the money is getting something fixed in return.

It's certainly possible for charities to reward people for donating but someone running a MUD is almost certainly not running a charity. Most of the time when MUD operators take donations it's either income going into the pocket of the MUD owner (who may then spend it on server costs or whatever, but is not obligated to) or income going into the pocket of an LLC or corporation that owns the MUD (who may then spend it on server costs or whatever, but is not obligated to).

Another question is how to deal with MUD operators that only sporadically accept donations. For instance, if a MUD operator took 'donations' 2 years ago but not since, does he check #3 or #4? How about if he/they took them 1 year ago? 1 month? 1 week? Yesterday?

--matt

[the_logos]

If you consider being a hobbyist an insult I could see that (though would find it odd), but 'hobbyist' is certainly not intended as an insult by me. I'm a hobbyist at all sorts of things I enjoy doing. Cooking, skiing, jiu-jitsu, etc. I am not a professional cook just because I'm good at cooking, and it's not an insult to point out that I'm an amateur cook rather than a pro.

I also know that when I'm looking for a meal I'm more likely to be excited about one than the other. Some nights I am specifically looking for amateur cooking (eating at a friend's house or cooking myself) and some nights I am specifically looking for professional cooking (eating at a restaurant or at the house of someone who is a professional cook). Is it so hard to believe that people may feel similarly about MUDs and that providing that information is potentially useful?

Just because you don't see it as useful doesn't mean it's troll bait.

--matt

[Zhiroc]

Originally Posted by the_logos If you consider being a hobbyist an insult I could see that (though would find it odd), but 'hobbyist' is certainly not intended as an insult by me.

The problem I foresee is that it doesn't add information. Who gets to call themselves a professional? Does it mean run by a for-profit company? Would most open software projects be therefore called hobbyist organizations?

If we can't agree on the term "free", there's no chance we'll agree on "professional".

But since it's a content-free term one way or another, and people can choose which they want to call themselves. I don't really care. Might as well add it if it makes adding the payment information more palatable.

[cratylus]

So, since matt/sarapis/the_logos/whatever is dropping his
objection anyway, I think it might be more useful to come
to some general agreement on what will work, since it
appears Lasher is receptive to a reasonable proposal.

As I mentioned, I like the Modified Osiris Scale
( see MUDs and Money - WikiMU* - a Wikia wiki ) but
KaVir's works too:

[ ] Commercial game, subscription required. [ ] Commercial game, no subscription fee. [ ] Non-commercial game, rewards donations in-game. [ ] Non-commercial game.

I liked his larger checkbox solution better, frankly,
but this one seems to be gaining consensus.

What do folks think? Can we get some examples? Would
Nodeka fall into "Commercial game, no subscription fee."
or into "Non-commercial game, rewards donations in-game."?
Let's hammer out the specifics.

Also, I propose splitting off the "professional v hobbyist" subthread
into a separate thread, since it seems to be only serving the
purpose of obscuring the primary topic this thread was created for.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net/professional_v_hobbyist.gif

PS It's not too late to voice support for the MOS:

* Payment Impossible -- Type A: Payment and donations rejected. * Payment Optional -- Type B: Donations accepted but unrewarded with advantage. -- Type C: Donations rewarded with in-game advantage that can also be earned in-game. * Payment Required -- Type D: Payment required for in-game advantage that can't be earned in-game. -- Type F: Payment required to access most of the game's entertainment.

[Threshold]

I think this is much better, more accurate, and more useful to players.

[ ] Professionally Run Game. Subscription Required. [ ] Professionally Run Game. No Subscription Fee. [ ] Hobbyist Game. Accepts monetary contributions or purchases (includes sale of merchandise). [ ] Hobbyist Game.

[Lasher]

Avoiding using the word "free" anywhere so that we can switch to debating all day long what "advantage" or "commercial" or "professional" or "available in game" (realistically) mean doesn't achieve a whole lot.

I still haven't seen options less open to debate on their meaning than:

[ ] Payment required to play?
[ ] Payment / Donations accepted, not rewarded in-game.
[ ] Payment / Donations accepted, rewarded in-game.
[ ] No Payment / Donations accepted, period.

To clear up another point of confusion, Matt's username on the forum is "the_logos". Continually throwing out that line is not constructive, adds nothing of value to the thread and most definitely is not "good faith".

Lasher/Derek/TMSOne/Webmaster/whatever.

[cratylus]

Lasher wrote:

[ ] Payment required to play? [ ] Payment / Donations accepted, not rewarded in-game. [ ] Payment / Donations accepted, rewarded in-game. [ ] No Payment / Donations accepted, period.

Sounds great. It's got my vote.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net/happycrat.jpg

[Molly]

Originally Posted by the_logos If you consider being a hobbyist an insult I could see that (though would find it odd), but 'hobbyist' is certainly not intended as an insult by me. --matt

How nice of you.

However, I don't share your opinion about those terms.
To me - and I suspect to several others - the constellation 'Professional - Hobbyist' has clear implications about lower quality in the latter.

We have already agreed to disagree about the definition of 'Free', and we are even less likely to reach a consensus about the definition of 'Professional', so let's drop that discussion too and get down to business.

'Commercial' - 'non Commercial' would have been acceptable to me, but I think Lasher's suggestion is better, it covers most bases and is probably less inflammable:

Originally Posted by Lasher [ ] Payment required to play? [ ] Payment / Donations accepted, not rewarded in-game. [ ] Payment / Donations accepted, rewarded in-game. [ ] No Payment / Donations accepted, period.

Sounds good to me. I cast my vote for that one.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by Lasher I still haven't seen options less open to debate on their meaning than: [ ] Payment required to play? [ ] Payment / Donations accepted, not rewarded in-game. [ ] Payment / Donations accepted, rewarded in-game. [ ] No Payment / Donations accepted, period.

This works for me too (it wouldn't be my first choice, but it's certainly an improvement).

[Newworlds]

Originally Posted by Lasher Avoiding using the word "free" anywhere so that we can switch to debating all day long what "advantage" or "commercial" or "professional" or "available in game" (realistically) mean doesn't achieve a whole lot. I still haven't seen options less open to debate on their meaning than: [ ] Payment required to play? [ ] Payment / Donations accepted, not rewarded in-game. [ ] Payment / Donations accepted, rewarded in-game. [ ] No Payment / Donations accepted, period. To clear up another point of confusion, Matt's username on the forum is "the_logos". Continually throwing out that line is not constructive, adds nothing of value to the thread and most definitely is not "good faith". Lasher/Derek/TMSOne/Webmaster/whatever.

I'll give my vote for the above.

On a side note, there was some argument about professional/hobbyist. The only difference between a professional and non professional is whether you get paid or not. It has nothing to do with quality of performance in the strictest sense of the word. World class Gymnasts who win Gold Medals are still amateurs if they do not get paid.

[Xerihae]

I have deleted certain posts that were just arguments between members and not relevant to the discussion. If you have any issues regarding this moderation please start another thread or feel free to PM me.

Play nice people!

[Threshold]

Originally Posted by Lasher [ ] Payment required to play? [ ] Payment / Donations accepted, not rewarded in-game. [ ] Payment / Donations accepted, rewarded in-game. [ ] No Payment / Donations accepted, period.

Many, many problems. As soon as you go beyond Payment Required/Payment not Required, you enter the world of semantics. How do you define rewarded? I honestly do not believe that any mud which accepts payments/donations does not reward the "donators" in some way. It may be extremely obvious (items, xp, etc.) or it may be less obvious (a list of donators that gives donors notoriety in game, or the simple fact that donors will inherently have, or at least expect, greater access to the admins of the game). Even something as simple as a donators list is pressure on those who do not donate, and a reward to those who do.

But the biggest problem is these categories lack the far more useful and important differentiation between Professional and Hobbyist muds.

If we are going to start making changes, lets make the changes that truly matter to players. It is obvious that this distinction is even more important than payment model, since far more people play Professionally Run muds than Hobbyist Muds. In other words, the clear importance of this distinction is proven by the choice the overwhelming majority of players make.

This is even reflected in the traffic on the TMS site. I don't recall the exact numbers from memory, but the last time it was calculated, I believe somewhere in the neighborhood of 70-80% of TMS traffic came from professionally run muds.

This makes the following still the best, simplest, and most accurate set of categories:

[ ] Professionally Run Game. Subscription Required.
[ ] Professionally Run Game. No Subscription Required.
[ ] Hobbyist Game. Accepts monetary contributions or purchases
(includes sale of merchandise).
[ ] Hobbyist Game. No monetary contributions or purchases accepted.

[Xerihae]

Originally Posted by Threshold If we are going to start making changes, lets make the changes that truly matter to players. It is obvious that this distinction is even more important than payment model, since far more people play Professionally Run muds than Hobbyist Muds. In other words, the clear importance of this distinction is proven by the choice the overwhelming majority of players make.

I'd be interested to know what sort of information you used to come to this conclusion. I'd be willing to accept that more traffic may come to TMS from commercial MUD websites/voting links, but the claim that more people play commercial MUDs than non-commercial ones I find a little difficult to swallow. I would think the ratio of existing MUDs stacks highly in favour of the non-commercial games, and even if they only have 10 players each I would think that there are many more people playing them than the commercial games even if said games have a bigger player base on average.

If you can support your conclusion then by all means do so, I'm curious as it's not something I've ever thought of before but in my mind the number of players playing non-commercial MUDs is far higher!