[prof1515]

Originally Posted by Newworlds You have a real strange belief that many Admins in the MUD community are out to lie and deceive players, even to the point of claiming someone could be a homophobe, rapist, and even murderer (completely uncalled for and beyond insulting).

I did not claim that anyone in the MUD community was a homophobe (though I do know of at least two), a rapist or even a murderer. I said those are amongst the types of people with which I do not get along.

While some may not accurately define their games in "your" terms, I just don't see this intentional deceit.

H&S or PK MUDs which do not even require role-play or support it in any way that attempt to identify themselves as RPI are either grossly ignorant or intentionally deceitful.

As is calling something Role-Play Intensive. The opinion of the player, not 19 code and policy characteristics.

While you may not like it, the term was invented to describe particular types of games. The 19 code and policy characteristics are a fact. They are common characteristics shared by the two original MUDs called RPIs. Just because somehow this term became popular doesn't change that.

Despite your claim to education and intelligence...

I have not made any claims about my education or my intelligence.

...(or rather your insult to everyone elses intelligence or education)...

I don't insult "everyone elses (sic) intelligence or education" although I do question your intelligence and level of education. My guess is that your intelligence is slightly below average and your education level doesn't extend much beyond high school. Am I close?

...the terms you bring up as examples to RPI do not have the same litmus test that you give to RPI. RPE, NFL, REAL-TIME are all terms that can be defined by a singular yes or no question. RPE-Are you enforcing RP or not? NFL-Are you in the national football league or not? REAL-TIME: does your game utilize real time or not. Even RPI can be answered with one question, RPI: Is your game Role-Play Intensive or not? The trouble is, the last one is opinion, the others are not.

The difference lies in the term "Role-Play Intensive" (or "RPI") versus is it "role-play intensive"? The former is a proper title, a term created to describe a specific type of game. The latter is an opinion.

Is a text-based role-playing game like Armageddon a multi-user domain/dungeon/dimension?
Answer: Yes.
Why? Because it is multi-user though the terms "domain", "dungeon" or "dimension are all questionable. It's also a Multi-User Domain/Dungeon/Dimension or MUD, a specific term meant to apply to a particular type of multi-user game.

Is Yahoo! Spades a multi-user domain/dungeon/dimension?
Answer: Yes.
Why? Because it is multi-user and the terms "domain", "dungeon" or "dimension" are as equally questionable as with a text-based role-playing game. But Yahoo! Spades is not a Multi-User Domain/Dungeon/Dimension (MUD).

Or, to use the NFL example....

Were the old American Football League teams (pre-merger) national football league teams?
Answer: Yes.
Why? Because these teams were found throughout the nation and played American football.

Question: Were the old American Football League teams (pre-merger) National Football League (NFL) teams?
Answer: No.
Why? Because they did not meet the qualifications to be NFL teams until after the NFL and AFL merged.

Like it or not, the term Role-Play (or Role-Playing) Intensive was applied to refer to specific games featuring a specific set of characteristics and is therefore a proper term.

Example:

Question: Is Armageddon a RPI MUD?
Answer: Yes.
Why? Because it possesses all of the characteristics of a RPI MUD.

Question: Is Newworlds' MUD a RPI MUD?
Answer: No.
Why? Because it lacks some of the characteristics shared by RPI MUDs.

As role-play intensive is a subjective term and easily confused with Role-Play Intensive (RPI), calling a game such is questionable and possibly deceptive. Calling a game a Role-Play MUD, Role-Playing MUD or RPI is either erroneous or outright deceptive if it does not meet the characteristics of a RPI MUD. The first (lower case) example is a generic term with little value, especially given the ability to be easily confused with the formal term for a specific type of game (the capitalized, formal term). Furthermore, calling a game role-play intensive because it has "intense role-play" is not only subjective but also incorrect English since "role-play intensive" does not mean "intense role-play". Finally, calling a game role-play intensive (lower case) just to evade the technicality is deceitful if the intent is to intimate that the game is a RPI MUD. Given the presence of RPI MUDs for well over a decade, the community awareness of them and the immense amount of discussion on this subject, there are very few people who could reasonably claim their game is role-play intensive without knowing that they are intimating the formal term.

And by the way, chess utilizes real-time. You play chess at the same rate in a computer-simulated version as you would in a real version of the game. It does not utilze what is called Real-Time Strategy (RTS) though.

[Newworlds]

Originally Posted by prof1515 I did not claim that anyone in the MUD community was a homophobe (though I do know of at least two), a rapist or even a murderer. I said those are amongst the types of people with which I do not get along.

You don't even remember your own posts, which is evident all through this lame response you give. I shall quote you for your educational benefit:

Originally Posted by prof1515 I do tend to get along with a wide variety of people with notable exceptions being extreme religious fundamentalists, racists, sexists, homophobes, liars, thieves, rapists, sex offenders, murderers and (unjustifiably) egotistical, ignorant morons. Take your pick which of these applies to you.

Remember now? Rapist? Sex Offender? Murderer? Take my pick which of these apply to me? Are you kidding me? If I was the Admin of this Forum I would ban you for such a comment. At the very least, you should apologise. Even the worst debators I've found on any forum do not use these terms to identify their adversaries.

Likely you will try to talk your way out of the semantics written above which is your style in any argument, hence your arguments are always surface level.

Originally Posted by prof1515 While you may not like it, the term was invented to describe particular types of games. The 19 code and policy characteristics are a fact. They are common characteristics shared by the two original MUDs called RPIs. Just because somehow this term became popular doesn't change that.

Whether I like it, you like it, or Johnboy likes it is irrellevant. Anyone may use the term.

Originally Posted by prof1515 I don't insult "everyone elses (sic) intelligence or education" although I do question your intelligence and level of education. My guess is that your intelligence is slightly below average and your education level doesn't extend much beyond high school. Am I close?

You do. It only takes a short perusal through your posts to see this. From the beginning this has been your tact, uneducated, amateurish, and childish, as it may be.

The rest of your post was a feeble attempt at bringing RPI into the same category as the other, clearly definable, terms.

[Delerak]

I don't think Prof was calling you any of those words. He was stating people he doesn't get along with and told you to pick from the list, which was obviously a quip at you, it was a good one since you think he was insulting you but he really wasn't.

[Newworlds]

You have a dangerously warped sense of humor if you think this is a quip for fun. It is disgusting and should not be representative of TMS.

[Delerak]

Originally Posted by Newworlds You have a danerously warped sense of humor if you think this is a quip for fun. It is disgusting and should not be representative of TMS.

He's not representing the forums, just himself. An open forum is where you're allowed to speak your mind. If you get offended you don't have to talk to him, put him on ignore and be done with it. So far he's winning the argument though. You're both taking petty jabs at each other, which is fine, but the facts are on his side as much as you don't want to admit it.

[Newworlds]

Originally Posted by Delerak He's not representing the forums, just himself. An open forum is where you're allowed to speak your mind. If you get offended you don't have to talk to him, put him on ignore and be done with it. So far he's winning the argument though. You're both taking petty jabs at each other, which is fine, but the facts are on his side as much as you don't want to admit it.

He is representing the style of the Forums. This is not a completely open forum Delerak and rules and maturity are important even if you do not like them. Simple jabs are one thing, insinuating someone is a murderer is quite a bit different. In your imagination of course he is winning, this is YOUR argument he is defending. You two are like siamese twins stuck at the hip.

I have pointed a lot of non mudders to TMS for the purpose of educating them on MUDs and it is this type of attitude that embarrasses me about our genre.

[Anjanas]

Originally Posted by Newworlds He is representing the style of the Forums. This is not a completely open forum Delerak and rules and maturity are important even if you do not like them. Simple jabs are one thing, insinuating someone is a murderer is quite a bit different. In your imagination of course he is winning, this is YOUR argument he is defending. You two are like siamese twins stuck at the hip. I have pointed a lot of non mudders to TMS for the purpose of educating them on MUDs and it is this type of attitude that embarrasses me about our genre.

I have to agree with New Worlds. I've been following this thread to better educate myself on the different styles of MUD's out there and then I see something like this. Grouping someone in with murderers and rapists is just wrong and insulting. And to have someone actually defend those words is even worse. I think you need to quit posting Delerak befoe I advocate that you be banned for trolling immaturity and Prof you need to apologize. Thank you.

[Delerak]

Originally Posted by Anjanas I have to agree with New Worlds. I've been following this thread to better educate myself on the different styles of MUD's out there and then I see something like this. Grouping someone in with murderers and rapists is just wrong and insulting. And to have someone actually defend those words is even worse. I think you need to quit posting Delerak befoe I advocate that you be banned for trolling immaturity and Prof you need to apologize. Thank you.

I've been posting on these forums for a long time. I'm blunt and if people don't like that too bad. The great thing about TMS is it's flexibility of it's forums. Many voices can be heard instead of being quashed because a few sensitive people think they are being called murderers and rapists, when in fact they don't even recognize a common literary device being used in somebody's post. I would agree if Prof's post read: "You're a murderer and rapist." But it didn't, and considering New Worlds and Prof have been insulting one another throughout the entire thread, it's fair game for him to use libel even if you think it's crossing the line because they've both been crossing the line of civility for the past 3 pages.

[Delerak]

Originally Posted by Newworlds You two are like siamese twins stuck at the hip. .

I disagree with Prof on plenty of things, but you're making the assumptions that I support all of his opinions? Whatever, no point in trying to argue against that, apparently you know every conversation I've ever had with him.

I think it's obvious you're getting frustrated and offended. That's going to happen in arguments where both sides think they're right, and begin to resort to ad hominem, but so far you're not providing any facts against the stance of the 'RPI' argument. Just like in the other thread we argued in. So now you're going to lobby for us to be banned and apologize? Typical behavior of those who can't win the debate with facts.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by Newworlds Roleplay does indeed mean something different to people, which is why it is hard to determine who is a good roleplayer or not except by your own standards.

But judging everything by ones own standards doesn't result in a very effective method of categorisation, because there are many muds, and everyone has different standards.

For example one could argue that almost every mud has enforced/mandatory roleplaying, on the basis that you're required to play the role of a fictional character. But would you really want every mud listing itself as RP enforced/mandatory?

[prof1515]

Originally Posted by Newworlds Rapist? Sex Offender? Murderer? Take my pick which of these apply to me? Are you kidding me? If I was the Admin of this Forum I would ban you for such a comment. At the very least, you should apologise. Even the worst debators I've found on any forum do not use these terms to identify their adversaries.

Yes, take your pick which of these terms apply to you. I don't know you so you may well be all of them or just one: the ignorant moron. The very fact that you can't seem to comprehend that only adds to this conclusion.

Now, if I called you a mentally-retarded bastard child of a serial rapist and a really ugly horse then that would be an insult. However, I'm not calling you that since I know nothing of your parents or the circumstances of your birth.

So, no apology is needed and sure as hell none is coming.

Likely you will try to talk your way out of the semantics written above which is your style in any argument, hence your arguments are always surface level.

Your inability to counter my arguments by deliberately (or accidently if you're really that dumb) misinterpreting and misrepresenting what I say as well as your frequent appeals to emotion (ie, claiming I'm comparing you to a murderer or claiming I'm insulting "everyone") only serves to demonstrate your desperate position. As it's been pages since you've even attempted to provide any argument for your position, I'd have to agree with Delerak's observations that you're frustrated and that you're losing this discussion/debate/argument. But that would simply be my opinion.

Anyone may use the term.

Just because someone uses the term doesn't mean they are correct in doing so. They'd either be demonstrating their ignorance by using a subjective phrase as a label or deliberately lying if they try to associate with the RPI MUDs.

Again, my 3-year old niece understands this so why can't you?

You do. It only takes a short perusal through your posts to see this. From the beginning this has been your tact, uneducated, amateurish, and childish, as it may be.

Show me where I insulted the intelligence of Delerak or Kavir or Mabus or anyone else who posted in this thread besides you? As for you, it's hardly an insult to call you a ignorant since you meet the characteristics of the first word. When I call you ignorant I'm referring to your lack of knowledge and the likelihood that you have a limited education. as for the word moron, when I call you that I'm referring to your lack of intelligence as demonstrated by your inability to comprehend even when it's explained at a level that my 3-year old niece could understand. It's either that or you're being deliberately obtuse, possibly out of desperation. Either way, you come across as a moron.

The rest of your post was a feeble attempt at bringing RPI into the same category as the other, clearly definable, terms.

Which I did because the term is a formal term which has been in use for a decade. Just because you weren't aware of that doesn't mean it wasn't so.

Again, your lack of knowledge in regard to this is why I call you ignorant. Your inability to comprehend this is why I call you a moron. They're not insults so much as they're observations. RPI is a formal term which has been used by a small group of MUDs with a particular set of policy and code characteristics. Like it or not, they are and I'm correct.

Originally Posted by Anjanas Grouping someone in with murderers and rapists is just wrong and insulting.

"Wrong" is a matter of opinion. In the context of my statement, what I said was perfectly acceptable. I find murderers disgusting and do not get along with them. I find rapists disgusting and do not get along with them. We live in a time where human knowledge has accumulated to unprecedented level and is accessible via techology and resources, be it libraries or universities or even online. With such opportunity to obtain knowledge, I find ignorance unacceptable. When coupled with the egotistical arrogance to assume one is correct in spite of ignorance, I find that disgusting and do not get along people who display these characteristics. Hence I find ignorant morons disgusting as well.

And to have someone actually defend those words is even worse. I think you need to quit posting Delerak befoe I advocate that you be banned for trolling immaturity

I find people who want to censor speech because they're either too ignorant, too stupid or too biased to discern the difference between subjective "right and wrong" and lawful free speech disgusting too. That doesn't mean I'm calling you all three nor does it mean I'm calling you a rapist or a murderer just because I find your statement as disgusting as I view murder.

Nor am I calling for or suggesting you be banned for it.

...Prof you need to apologize. Thank you.

I do not need to apologize nor am I going to. You're welcome.

Jason

[prof1515]

Originally Posted by KaVir But judging everything by ones own standards doesn't result in a very effective method of categorisation, because there are many muds, and everyone has different standards. For example one could argue that almost every mud has enforced/mandatory roleplaying, on the basis that you're required to play the role of a fictional character. But would you really want every mud listing itself as RP enforced/mandatory?

Ah, thankfully Kavir has the gift of brevity which I do not possess. Then again, historians are paid to be long-winded! :-D

[Newworlds]

Your arguments are now starting to belittle even your own niece. This is the highschool debate tactic: "my 3 year old niece knows more than you do!", "My 3 year old niece can type better than you can", "My 3 year old niece can understand RPI better than you." What are you, in junior high? Have you failed to notice that your 3 year old can't even read this forum. At least make real arguments and comparisons. And of course I was right, you tried to explain your fax pas by delving into semantics and free speech.

As for countering your arguments. Yes, I have done so, countless times. Your issue is that you believe, however wrong, that only your presentation is accurate, though you couldn't substatiate any of it with fact. Examples:

1. The term RPI you claim was established years ago. There is no fact to substatiate that claim.

2. RPI is as valid an acronym as the terms RPE, NFL, and Real-Time. No, is is not. Why? I told you why and either: a. You couldn't understand it (like your 3 year old niece whom you tend to tantrom like). 2. You pretended I didn't. 3. You are ignorant of the concept of litmus.

So I'll explain it again. NFL, RPE, and Real-Time can all be proven by a singular yes or no question. RPI cannot.

3. I said your posts, not your posts on this thread, ALL of your posts. Go back and read from when you first became a member Prof. You constantly use the tired argument of this person or that person is ignorant, uneducated, etc etc. Like this makes you seem more educated? I think not.

4. You make outlandish insults then claim freedom of speech.

Prof, you remind me of a history professor that writes his own history book and claims everyone else is wrong and uneducated and a moron if they don't accept your book as fact, despite the hundreds of invalid, unsubstatiated, and subjective claims contained within the book.

As for misinterpretation. Look in the mirror.

[prof1515]

Originally Posted by Newworlds Your arguments are now starting to belittle even your own niece.

I didn't insult her. If I'd said she's only as smart as you, that'd be an insult. I didn't say that. She's already smarter than you are. As elements of English like adjectives are taught either in the later stages of grade school or at least early junior high and she just entered pre-school, it's likely that in another 5-7 years she'll likely be more educated than you as well.

As for countering your arguments. Yes, I have done so, countless times. Your issue is that you believe, however wrong, that only your presentation is accurate, though you couldn't substatiate any of it with fact.

Oh?

1. The term RPI you claim was established years ago. There is no fact to substatiate that claim.

Here's use of the term by a NEWBIE to Armageddon in August of 2001. The term is used by a newbie to the game and thus it's clear that it's already in common use on Armageddon. There's also the possibility that since it's being used by a newbie to Armageddon that the term's application to a specific type of game is also known in the greater community. Additionally, the reference to permanent character death in that post demonstrates one of the features to which this term includes. The follow-up post also reveals another of the 19 characteristics: separation of IC and OOC knowledge.

Unfortunately, Arm does not list all of their old discussions, only those they chose to archive. Hence, finding an earlier example of its use that has been saved may be more difficult. Nevertheless, this proves that the term Role-Play Intensive was already in common use by 2001 as was the acronym RPI.

Here, we have Armageddon's rules from 2000. They haven't changed much since then and thus were in place in 2001 when the term RPI was in use to describe Armageddon. Note that numerous policies found in the 19 characteristics of RPIs are found in Arm's rules in 1997 (and today) such as separation of IC and OOC information, a concentration on in-character behavior and a policy against simultaneous multiple characters.

As the term was in obvious use by that point to describe Armageddon and you have yet to provide any proof that it was being used to describe any other games, at the very least it suggests that the 19 characteristics shared by Armageddon and Harshlands comprise elements of the definition of RPI. It could be argued, since I have yet to find any old threads relating the term to Harshlands, that the definition of RPI could therefore be even more exact in its detail although I first enountered the term RPI in regard to both Arm and Harshlands back in early 2000(again, documentation from that period is fragmentary).

So where's your proof that it was being used to describe any other games at this time?

2. RPI is as valid an acronym as the terms RPE, NFL, and Real-Time. No, is is not.

And you are wrong again. The aforementioned link shows use of the acronym RPI as well as the term Role-Play Intensive. As it also uses Hack & Slash as an adjective and relates that term to Role-Play Intensive ("Hack 'n' Slash vs. Role Play Intensive") which the user denotes has characteristics which are different to other games he's played ("going to have to readjust to RPI, unlearning my Hack'n'Slash ways").

The following comments by you don't really constitute countering my points because they have nothing to do with the question of the term RPI. They're the result of your lame attempt to use personal attacks and claims of insult in lieu of defending your position but I thought I'd address them anyway.

3. I said your posts, not your posts on this thread, ALL of your posts. Go back and read from when you first became a member Prof. You constantly use the tired argument of this person or that person is ignorant, uneducated, etc etc. Like this makes you seem more educated? I think not.

If a person lacks knowledge, that's ignorance. If a person can not understand a sentence in their own primary language, that's either a reflection of their poor education or their lack of intelligence. Neither of these are insults and considering it's been estimated that as much as 40% of the American public is illiterate to some degree, it's not far off to suggest that figure could easily apply here as well. Your repeated inability to comprehend that Role-Play Intensive does not mean the same thing as "intense role-play" is proof of that. Don't blame me for your ignorance and take offense at the fact nor should anyone else.

Again, you also bring up the topic of my education. I don't haul out my degrees in the forums to make points but you seem obsessed with referencing them. You really are insecure about that aren't you? So how far did you get before you dropped out? Tenth grade? Eleventh?

4. You make outlandish insults then claim freedom of speech.

I'm still waiting for you to explain this outlandish insult. So far you haven't been able to and it's my suspicion, as I've already said, that you're simply trying to play the role of a victim, paint your opponent (in this case, me) as a villain and thus hope that it sways people to support your disproven position out of sympathy regardless of your inability to defend it.

Lame, dude. Lame.

Prof, you remind me of a history professor that writes his own history book and claims everyone else is wrong and uneducated and a moron if they don't accept your book as fact, despite the hundreds of invalid, unsubstatiated, and subjective claims contained within the book.

Who's this history professor to which you refer? Or is it merely another figment of your insecurity and hostility toward people with an education?

As for misinterpretation. Look in the mirror.

That might very well be the dumbest thing you've said. What have I misinterpreted? Please elaborate.

[prof1515]

Newworlds, you've also ignored Kavir's question. Why not give him an answer? Hmm?

[Newworlds]

Since the student of roleplay can't help himself from throwing insults and railroad other threads, I dragged his latest attempt to bring the topic of RPI to the forefront and will respond to his sewage here.

Originally Posted by prof1515 The only real troll I've spotted on the forums is Newworlds who posts unprovoked personal attacks

Oh please student, all you do is attack anyone that doesn't agree with your weak definition of RPI.

Originally Posted by prof1515 repeatedly and deliberately misuses terms which have defined meaning

Again you claim your definition of RPI is the only one. After some research I found a couple of things. 1. In an old post by Arm they defined themselves as intensive roleplay mud not Roleplay intense you ignorant fool. 2. RPI is copyrighted by a company out of Texas. Better check in with them to use the term or perhaps you will define it for them?

Originally Posted by prof1515 runs away from threads when he's proven wrong and continues the attacks in another thread (for example, this one).

You are more clueless than a blond highschool girl from the Valley. I stopped replying to you when you became a broken record of idiotic redundancy. This is quite normal. Look it up under: arguing with idiots or students that think they are professors. Since you need an explanation I will give it to you: when you debate someone that only has tunnel vision and can only insult with a fools tongue it is time to stop the discussion. You are so ignorant you did not even realise I stopped discussion with you for that very reason. You have to have it spelled out for you in capital letters. Go back to school, youngster, you need at least four more years to reach my 4th grade education. You really should stop thinking someone is proven wrong when they stop discussion with the mentally incapacitated.

Originally Posted by prof1515 Every person I've discussed him with thinks he's a moron.

Yes, I know you have hourly discussions with your 3 year old niece. I'm beginning to realize that your education is about on par with hers.

Originally Posted by prof1515 my personal estimate of him is that he's petty, he's a liar, he's extremely under-educated and is also quite possibly suffering from slight mental retardation...He's entitled to his ignorant, unintelligent, undereducated opinions. When he decides to share them rather than keep them to himself, rather than ignore him, I just counter his remarks.

The only thing you enjoy is insulting people with baseless comments about retardation, murder, rape, education, intelligence, and on. You are weak and small minded. You are a wannabe of ownership to something like SOI or Armaggedon, yet you will never achieve anything of the like. You want to be a spokesman for Roleplaying MUD's but you haven't the skill, knowledge, or ability (called KSA's in the business world, something I'm sure you've never heard about). You claim to be building your own game that will be so much more upfront and honest than any game out there. You are the type of person that will likely call himself a GOD on your game and pretend everyone is an ignoramus. I hope you will be honest about that like you claim you are and post a disclaimer about your pretentious overrated evaluation of yourself. You claim to organize a grand group for RPI yet in your own words no one wanted to work with you. You claim to be the end all be all of definitions, yet you will never open your eyes to realize that your definitions are worse than a second grade english dictionary written by a slum dog in broken spanglish.

I guess this is what you wanted isn't it? Another post of insults so you could reply in kind. You thrive on this type of tripe don't you? Well, sometimes it is the more intelligent one that knows when to stop arguing with idiots. Such a sad thing it is but I'm imagining you will happily post another 2 pages of garbage for us to dig through and it will go back and forth until I stop wasting my time with you or until you decide to make another lame RPI post or claim you have proven yourself like some cackling insane man on the corner yelling about global warming and saying he is right because no one stops to listen.

[Anjanas]

Even though your flame was hilarious I wish you had left this thread alone New Worlds. I do not understand why both of you can't just agree to disagree and stop the insults. This thread should be locked.

[Delerak]

Originally Posted by Anjanas Even though your flame was hilarious I wish you had left this thread alone New Worlds. I do not understand why both of you can't just agree to disagree and stop the insults. This thread should be locked.

The opinions are becoming pretty debased. Like I said earlier in the thread.

I want to see a deathmatch between prof and Newworlds

I still want to see it. I've got my money on NW.

As far as the topic at hand. I really don't think there's anything else that can be posted. This topic obviously has two to three sides. The RPI fanatics. The anti-RPI fanatics. And those who don't really care either way.

[prof1515]

Originally Posted by Newworlds Since the student of roleplay can't help himself from throwing insults and railroad other threads, I dragged his latest attempt to bring the topic of RPI to the forefront and will respond to his sewage here.

Wrong, it was you who again initiated the personal attack in another thread, one which I had not even posted in up to that point.

Oh please student, all you do is attack anyone that doesn't agree with your weak definition of RPI.

Wrong, it's already been pointed out that it's not "my definition".

Again you claim your definition of RPI is the only one. After some research I found a couple of things. 1. In an old post by Arm they defined themselves as intensive roleplay mud not Roleplay intense....

And what is the date of this post? Hmmmm? Can you provide a link?

[QUOTE}2. RPI is copyrighted by a company out of Texas. Better check in with them to use the term or perhaps you will define it for them?[/quote]

Wrong, trademark is the term you're looking for, not copyright. However, a trademark only extends to the areas that it is applied for. But in this case you're wrong yet again because they have trademarked their particular logo and seal. They have trademarked the phrase "Why not change the world?", not "RPI".

This is yet another example of your lack of intelligence.

You are more clueless than a blond highschool girl from the Valley. I stopped replying to you when you became a broken record of idiotic redundancy.

You stopped arguing when you demanded evidence that the terms Role-Play Intensive and RPI were used to identify a particular type of MUD. I presented the earliest evidence I can find though personal recollections from many people in the RPI community remember its usage even earlier.

The only thing you enjoy is insulting people with baseless comments about retardation, murder, rape, education, intelligence, and on.

I didn't accuse anyone here of murder or rape. I questioned your intelligence as evidenced by your repeated inability to comprehend facts and I estimated that you have a very limited education by your ignorance and your insecurity toward others you perceive as educated.

You are a wannabe of ownership to something like SOI or Armaggedon, yet you will never achieve anything of the like.

I distinctly do not want a game like Armageddon or SoI. I was on SoI's staff back in 2004 and quit because various things about the game did not sit well with me. My goal with TSOY is to create a historical-setting RPI. Both Arm and SoI are fantasy. I don't expect a large playerbase and all of my staff are in agreement that we'd be happier with a small playerbase of solid RPers interested in the setting than having a larger playerbase at the expense of the setting.

So your statement is wrong, yet again.

You want to be a spokesman for Roleplaying MUD's but you haven't the skill, knowledge, or ability....

First off, I'm not particularly interested in being a "spokesman" for anything.

You claim to be building your own game that will be so much more upfront and honest than any game out there.

Yes, we intend to be honest about things like playerbase figures, player expectations and staff expectations. Not sure why you have a hard time understanding that unless it's because you're not honest about your own game. Oh wait, you're not.

You are the type of person that will likely call himself a GOD on your game and pretend everyone is an ignoramus.

Wrong again! I actually think it's silly when people call themselves a "God" on their own game. I prefer the term staff or administrator.

I hope you will be honest about that like you claim you are and post a disclaimer about your pretentious overrated evaluation of yourself.

What "overrated evaluation of yourself" do you refer to? Please show me where I'm making claims about myself?

You claim to organize a grand group for RPI yet in your own words no one wanted to work with you.

No, once again either you're dishonestly misquoting of what I said or your limited comprehension of the English language is confusing you. The people that resigned had their own reasons for quitting the Operating Committee. Of the three that resigned, I can only say that one had personal issues to deal with and another had work issues (and I will not reveal more without their express authorization). Of the third, I can not say as they did not give any reason why they did not continue. Perhaps they did not like me. Perhaps they had too little time to invest. Perhaps they were sick. They never said.

You claim to be the end all be all of definitions....

When do I claim to be the "end all be all of definitions"? Just once, support something you say with some proof.

I guess this is what you wanted isn't it? Another post of insults so you could reply in kind.

I'd actually prefer you back something up just once with actual evidence instead of personal insults. You have yet to do that. Instead you've made a lot of erroneous statements which still do not bolster your position.

Jason

[Newworlds]

There are two threads full of discussion, definitions, links, and discourse on this topic. Regurgitating it all for your limited memory is something you may enjoy, most do not.

[prof1515]

Originally Posted by Newworlds There are two threads full of discussion, definitions, links, and discourse on this topic. Regurgitating it all for your limited memory is something you may enjoy, most do not.

And I'm asking you to please stop relying on personal attacks and misquotes and post something to defend your position or else concede and stop deliberately making dishonest statements.

[Newworlds]

Originally Posted by prof1515 And I'm asking you to please stop relying on personal attacks and misquotes and post something to defend your position or else concede and stop deliberately making dishonest statements.

You mean stop doing what you do through this entire thread?

The thread is about RPI, RPE, and Roleplay. The thread was started because of your railroading another thread. Do not take the position that you were not. The OP asked the discussion to stop on the other thread and you would not stop so I brought it here. If you need a reference to that thread that proves this here it is: Looking for RP-focused MUD with as little combat as possible

You claim constantly about misquotes and misunderstandings, but even as I read back through this entire thread I noticed you making assumptions and ignoring questions put before you. (example: post 23 if you need one). You also make misrepresentations utilizing an interpretation of the english lanquage or semantics. (Example: post 21) Here you claim the RPI Network is not your site you just pay the bills. Legally it IS your site. Legally you can ban every member of the commitee whether they want you to or not. Unless you have written bylaws and legal documents to control the site, the site is yours and yours alone to be owned and operated by you alone. To be shutdown, discontinued, or modified with you as the ultimate control to do so.

Personal Attacks: After reading through the thread it is clear I did throw some unnecessary insults. Deliberately making dishonest statements? I deny that accusation.

The argument, in my understanding, boils down to who may use the term RPI and who may not. My contention is that any game that is Roleplay Intense or Intensive may use the term RPI at leisure. Your contension (correct me if I am wrong) is that only those that follow the 19 points outlined by your group may use this term. Looking through threads, MUDs that claim to be RPI and RPE I saw a lot of confusion and disagreement about the term and no evidence (despite a few RPI references) that would proclude anyone from using the term as I outlined above.

A similar argument could be made for using the term MUD which is also ambiguous, in that only MUD's begun in 1980(some say the 70's) under the original codebase when the term MUD was first used may call themselves a MUD. It is my understanding that the 19 points you bring up about RPI were not all utilized when the term RPI (according to you) was first established. In fact, many if not all of the games you refer to have changed drastically since.

I ask this question then. Do you think no MUD should use the term RPI except as accepted by your group under the guidelines you established?

[Fifi]

Originally Posted by Newworlds I find it odd that a roleplay game like Armeggedon still uses the antiquated think command. Think is an emote that is only useful to the character typing it as no one but a psion or mindreader would be able to roleplay off of it.

I think this question best illustrated the difference between an IRP and an RPI. Not why an RPI is better (though subjectively, I'd maintain they are better) but why they are different.

When writing a novel or story an author will often write an elaborate back story. They have no interest in including said story in the published text, but the richness of the backstory will be be felt in the subtext and the way the story hangs together. Almost a ghost facet of the text.

The think command does the same thing. Only the player thinking sees their thoughts, but it makes their rp deeper and richer and more fleshed out. Other players won't see the thoughts but they will see the depth that stems from those thoughts.

In an RPI that's more than important it's crucial. In an IRP, I have to assume, from your question, it has less or no value.

So, this is why RPIs are different, and why they continue to use a command that you perceive as outdated.

[prof1515]

Originally Posted by Newworlds You mean stop doing what you do through this entire thread? The thread is about RPI, RPE, and Roleplay. The thread was started because of your railroading another thread. Do not take the position that you were not. The OP asked the discussion to stop on the other thread and you would not stop so I brought it here. If you need a reference to that thread that proves this here it is: Looking for RP-focused MUD with as little combat as possible

My response in that thread was begun in response to your post (4:13 pm my time) before the OP's request (4:41 pm my time) was ever made. As my dinner was ready as I was typing I stopped and did not come back to the post for some time. I completed and posted my response at 7:12 pm (my time), after the OP made their request. That is not the same thing as "you would not stop".

You claim constantly about misquotes and misunderstandings, but even as I read back through this entire thread I noticed you making assumptions and ignoring questions put before you. (example: post 23 if you need one).

Delerak answered that in the next post so I saw no reason to. As for misquotes and misunderstandings (or misrepresentations), examples would include your claim that I was calling anyone in the discussion a murderer, that the 19 characteristics of RPIs represent my own personal views, that people quit the Operating Committee because of me, or that I'm paying for the hosting for the RPMUD Network for some hidden motive beyond my stated one.

(Example: post 21) Here you claim the RPI Network is not your site you just pay the bills. Legally it IS your site. Legally you can ban every member of the commitee whether they want you to or not. Unless you have written bylaws and legal documents to control the site, the site is yours and yours alone to be owned and operated by you alone. To be shutdown, discontinued, or modified with you as the ultimate control to do so.

We do have a formal set of bylaws establishing how the site is operated. In 2008 we formally approved our Charter which governs how the site is operated and established our Operating Committee to make all decisions regarding such operation. I've mentioned this on numerous occassions.

I've also mentioned that I'd be happy to cease paying the bills if someone else would do so. While I suppose I could shut down or discontinue the site by refusing to pay for its hosting, I have no intention of doing so. I'd also welcome an arrangement to guarantee I couldn't by the creation of an independent funding source to ensure that hosting was automatically paid.

As for modifying the site, I could not any more than any other member of the Operating Committee. In fact, there's plenty I could not do as I do not have the passwords for full access. Only the site's webmaster, one of the other Operating Committee members, has those. I do not.

Personal Attacks: After reading through the thread it is clear I did throw some unnecessary insults. Deliberately making dishonest statements? I deny that accusation.

For an example, you need go no further than your initial post in this thread.

The topic revolves around the origin of RPI and RPE and why a small subset of MUD's should annex the title RPI...Every month or so someone brings up another thread about RPI's and relating them to this small group. Some gamers and creators believe that this is a misuse of the term Roleplay Intensive and take offense to this small group claiming that name for their subset of MUD's.

The annexation, to use your term, is not by "a small subset" since this term's original application referred to them. The controversy has resulted from its wider use by and to describe games beyond that context. It is dishonest to alter the historical context of this disagreement to switch the nature of the origins of the controversy. If this is merely an error on your part, then it's not dishonesty. If it's a deliberate attempt to bias interpretation of the controversy, that's dishonest.

(continued below)

[prof1515]

The argument, in my understanding, boils down to who may use the term RPI and who may not. My contention is that any game that is Roleplay Intense or Intensive may use the term RPI at leisure. Your contension (correct me if I am wrong) is that only those that follow the 19 points outlined by your group may use this term.

The "points" were not outlined by my group, if by "group" you are referring to the RPMUD Operating Committee (although many of the people present in the round table discussion to discern the characteristics to which the original application of the term applied do sit on the Committee).

Looking through threads, MUDs that claim to be RPI and RPE I saw a lot of confusion and disagreement about the term and no evidence (despite a few RPI references) that would proclude anyone from using the term as I outlined above.

As I said, there's a distinct lack of archiving for the formative years of the term. My own exposure to the term use was in 2000. Others can attest to it as far back as 1997. While some never gave much thought as to what it means, they could at least attest to what were RPIs and what weren't. I didn't take a serious interest in the origin, use and misuse of the term until preparing a presentation on MU*s for a role-playing and gaming group I formed back in college. Based on those games which had consensus as RPI, I and some others were able to discern shared characteristics possessed by all of those games for which there was consensus in calling RPI.

A similar argument could be made for using the term MUD which is also ambiguous, in that only MUD's begun in 1980(some say the 70's) under the original codebase when the term MUD was first used may call themselves a MUD.

Agreed, there are varying disputes over the term. That's why in most cases I prefer the term MU* although not everyone uses that term (and in some instances it's therefore better to say MUD and avoid confusion).

It is my understanding that the 19 points you bring up about RPI were not all utilized when the term RPI (according to you) was first established. In fact, many if not all of the games you refer to have changed drastically since.

The 19 characteristics were all in place at the time that the term RPI was used to describe the group of games to which there is consensus that they are RPI. The games have changed, but those 19 characteristics have remained. All 19 characteristics were present when the term was in use as far back as 1996 (for which earlier evidence of its use is at present non-existent). There are many other characteristics that were brought up in the analysis which did not apply to all of the first RPIs. One such example was player accounts. While player accounts are almost universal in RPIs today (aside from Southlands they all use them), this is due to the spread in use of the RPI Engine. Harshlands originally did not employ accounts nor did FEM or FE2. As a result, despite its common use today, use of player accounts was not included in the 19 characterstics (and hence why Southlands is considered RPI despite being the odd-man out without them).

Another example of a characteristics which some felt was necessary for RPI was the existence of ranged weapon code. Again, Armageddon had this but Harshlands, FEM and many other RPIs did not. It was only with the spread of the SoI RPI Engine that this feature again spread in use.

There are variations on how the RPIs enforce the policy characteristics. For example, citing their setting, Armageddon has far less emphasis on RP in the deserts outside of the cities. This, however, is also subject to interpretation as I have seen examples of the staff taking deliberate action to enforce RP in those areas when players do disregard the setting. Such variations are therefore more the case of staff diligence and time than they are examples of non-RP policies. Also, as has been pointed out, there are disagreements over what constitutes "role-play" and thus such variations are also subject to the differences in the interpretation of role-play rather than a lack of a RP-enforcement policy.

On Harshlands, there are areas which are not described but that's because those areas of the game were never completed and were locked off for some time. At some point they unlocked the gates allowing access in but as it's on the extreme edge of the game world, very few players ever go there. Likewise, in 2002 they allowed alternate characters for a single event to allow players without characters in that particular region the ability to participate in the major battle that was to occur. However, these characters were only on the game for that event and never again. They also opened a separate and isolated area of the game for "alternate characters" but these characters do not have contact with the rest of the game making this area function as a separate miniature game unto itself. The same could apply to the OOC arena in SoI's Guest Lounge.

For code variations beyond the 19 characteristics, I do think it's possible to further distinguish particular sub-types of RPI MUDs though in many cases it's rather unnecessary. Still, a breakdown of RPI MUDs tends to reveal several sub-types.

1. Armageddon-type RPI: Armageddon is the sole representative.*
2. Harshlands-type RPI: Dark Horizon seems to be the sole remaining representative.
3. SoI-type RPI: A variation on the Harshlands-type, most of the RPIs presently in existence conform with this game.
4. Southlands-type RPI: It appears Southlands is the only remaining operating game of this type.

*Black Sands uses the SoI RPI Engine but is changing their code mechanics to more closely resemble the way in which Armageddon displays some information. As such, it could be argued that it's either Arm-type or SoI-type. However, as they're still in open beta the final result remains to be seen.

There are also several other projects in development which are creating new RPI-useable codebases and thus may also be handling the code mechanics in ways which would warrant labeling as a new type of RPI. My own project would fall under this category as we'll still possess the 19 characteristics but in other ways will be doing things differently than any of the other RPIs.

I ask this question then. Do you think no MUD should use the term RPI except as accepted by your group under the guidelines you established?

I think that the because that term has a historical context relating back to its earliest use in the MU* community to describe a small number of games sharing a particular set of characteristics, its use should be confined to referring to that particular group of games. For people who played those games then, it served a distinct purpose by identifying games which were similar and still does today. The "guidelines" are not such; they are characteristics shared by those games to which the term's use originally applied.

For games which do not possess these 19 characteristics, I tend to use the terms Role-Play Oriented (RPO) and Role-Play Enforced (RPE). Another person on the forums here used Role-Play Focused. Role-Play Enforced is fairly easy to define as the only characteristic of such games is the existence of a required RP policy. I coined the term Role-Play Oriented (RPO) as a catch all to describe games which weren't simply RPE but didn't necessarily have all 19 characteristics of RPI. Coming up with a clearer definition than that is difficult because of the number of variations possible. With some of those 19 characteristics, you could get nine games with 17 characteristics but each could be missing two completely different ones! Sure, names and acronyms could be devised for each different variation but without a significant number of games conforming to this variation, it becomes a bit unnecessary. Hence the catch-all term of RPO, a term with the RPMUD Operating Committee also uses.

Please understand that while some people may associate RPI with "higher quality RP", such a conclusion is subjective and such association is therefore not accurate. If anything, it's been my observation that the RPIs have suffered an overall decline in the quality of the RP typically found on them in the decade since I first started playing them. On one hand, one could simply suggest that this is due to the greater number of RPIs open and the increased playerbase size on the older ones but it appears to be more than just that. In any regard, the term RPI is not a reference to the quality of role-play.

Finally, I appreciate your more civil tone of your last post. Thank you very much.

Take care,

Jason

[Jazuela]

I don't think it boils down to "who may use" the term and "who may not." I think it boils down to "to whom does the term, AND its common attributes apply, and to whom it does not."

As I've said in another thread (in similar terms)...if most people who have seen the color green, define it in a certain way, and a blind guy comes by and says "no no, that's not green, THIS is green" and defines it a different way, well the blind guy may very well be correct, and the rest of the people may very well be incorrect. But..

It doesn't matter. If the people who defined green say, "We're having a party, come on by, you have to wear green to get in" and you show up wearing purple, you ain't getting in. EVEN if you say "this IS green."

NewWorlds doesn't agree that RPI means what most of the people *who actually use the term* think it means. New World's game isn't an RPI, and it never was an RPI. He didn't know that, because he didn't understand the "generally regarded as standard" usage of the term. He knew its definition: "Roleplay Intensive." He was absolutely correct. And his game really IS roleplay intensive. However, the three letters, used as a term - RPI "Are Pee Eye"..don't -only- mean "roleplay intensive." It means that, along with certain criteria that has become generally regarded by the community as standard, for that specific term. Not the specific term "roleplay intensive," but the specific term "RPI." The term -could- mean "Real Pigs are Interesting" for all it matters, and it wouldn't change a thing. Only games that include the majority of certain criteria will fit that category.

NewWorlds is welcome to call his game Roleplay Intensive - his game really does have some great intensive roleplay afterall, so the term is appropriate. However, it is not an RPI. If he uses the term RPI, no board police will come down and arrest him, no one will sue him, no one will siteban him. His entry on the TMS listings might be edited if he says officially on his listing that it's an RPI, but other than that, he's not doing anything *wrong.* What he's doing, is wearing a purple jumpsuit and walking over to a bunch of green jumpsuit-wearing people, and telling them that he's wearing green and that all of the green-wearing people are wrong.

That's not wrong, it's just dumb. Or perhaps color blind. As far as I know, neither is a crime.

[Newworlds]

Originally Posted by Jazuela I don't think it boils down to "who may use" the term and "who may not." I think it boils down to "to whom does the term, AND its common attributes apply, and to whom it does not."

While I respect your opinion, I disagree. Who uses or doesn't use the term is, in my opinion, irrelevant. There is is an entire thread of 239 posts arguing over what the term means, who should use it and who should not as shown here: Guidelines for an RPI mud.

Originally Posted by Jazuela It doesn't matter. If the people who defined green say, "We're having a party, come on by, you have to wear green to get in" and you show up wearing purple, you ain't getting in. EVEN if you say "this IS green."

I do not recall ever wanting to be part of the RPIMud.org, RPMUD network, or associated with this group. As shown in the above link, I am not the only one. The contention is simply the use of the term RPI and the definition of it.

Originally Posted by Jazuela NewWorlds doesn't agree that RPI means what most of the people *who actually use the term* think it means. New World's game isn't an RPI, and it never was an RPI. He didn't know that, because he didn't understand the "generally regarded as standard" usage of the term.

Again, look at the above link and read through it. Your supposition here is incorrect, in my opinion. NWA is not "RPI" in your (meaning the 19 point) definition, true, but the above link shows that many do not agree with this.

The rest of your presentation ended on how I'm dumb or blind, so I won't comment on it as I see it as argumentative opinion.

[Newworlds]

My summation is this:

Should Roleplay Intense or Intensive MUDs be allowed to use the term RPI without hostility, arguments, or insults over such usage?

Yes.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by Newworlds My summation is this: Should Roleplay Intense or Intensive MUDs be allowed to use the term RPI without hostility, arguments, or insults over such usage? Yes.

Then I pose you these related questions:

Should pure H&S or powergaming MUDs be allowed to use the term "RP Enforced" to refer to themselves in their listings and adverts without other MUD owners responding with hostility, arguments or insults?

When players post on these forums asking for RP-oriented MUDs, should I be permitted to recommend my MUD without other MUD owners disagreeing with my recommendation?

[Jazuela]

Furthermore, if my game is about wars between gods, can I call my game a Godwars game and advertise it as such, and even name it "The Godwars Mud" without hostility, insults, and arguments?"

If my game has as its theme, three new worlds, can I call my game NewworldsIII and advertise it as such, without hostility, insults, and arguments?

If my game is about Redundant Partial Integrity, can I call it an RPI and advertise it as such, without hostility, insults, and arguments?

If my game has a Dog that Is Killing in the Underworld, can I call it a DIKU and advertise it as such, without hostility, insults, and arguments?