Not an attack, I am genuinely curious -- why would anyone play without being a "valued customer" under those circumstances? What keeps someone on a mud after this has been so clearly spelled out.

(I am taking the post at face value and assuming this is a genuine quote from Matt, although I am skeptical).

I don't know if you were expecting Matt to answer that, but the bottom line I think is that we are talking here about borderline behavior from people who don't pay making the game harder for paying customers to enjoy. It is not at all unlike the resteraunt with the sign out front that says, "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."

I personally would like to see a mud go pay per month, or even pay per quarter, and then improve their service to the point where they could charge more per month and still keep a player base. The pay for perks model is just flawed at its core to me.

If some muds actually manage to "make money" simply off donations, how can it be that hard to implement one that people would pay $5 a month to use? Start low and build higher....

Meh, easy to say I know.....

aardwolf May 07 2006,09,02
It's a genuine quote alright. I didn't copy the URL, but feel free to check it out for yourself. There are several other interesting statements from the_logos in those archives too.

It seems that he talks a lot more bluntly there, probably because those forums are generally frequented by commercial Mud administrators, and not very many players. Don't expect him to comment on it here though, he generally ignores posts that are uncomfortable to him.

I'm sorry but if you purchase a t-shirt and think you deserve special in game treatement for it, you might want to seek professional help. Its like me saying "Gee, I bought this t-shirt from my cable company, and now they owe me better service." Ha, ludicrious! A thank you note with the purchase however would be a nice thing but not expected.

If the mud I am currently helping to develop reaches the point where we market merchandise I can assure you that I will not cater to such selfish demands either. You purchased a t-shirt, not the sub-servience of my staff, or myself. So wipe your eyes, blow your nose and move on with your life. You bought a t-shirt. Wow. Good for you. I bought one from Wal*Mart last night. Deal with it. Get a grip. Move on.

I honestly don't give a #### what you are tired of hearing Soleil. Until I see a post from Synozeer replying to any of our threads on this topic, I will take logos implied threat of removing his advertising here as the deciding factor on a couple of different topics. And I'm sure many others feel the exact same way.

I don't think TMS would shut down if Matt pulled his advertising. However, IRE is certainly Syno's best customer both traffic-wise and advertising-wise.

As far as Matt goes - I can only assume that there was at least some amount of promise behind his words. But if you are really curious as to why he would do it - you should ask him. He's the one who made the comments. We have just reacted to them.

We rock.

--matt

Hmm...I was surprised to see this thing up and running again. I feel strangely proud...

But my agenda may be a little different, now.

I'm interested in making a new option for the discerning player, but not in giving pay-for-play/perk muds a black mark to deliberately try to hurt their business, and I feel like that's what's on the agenda for more than a few folks.

If it can be done tastefully and in the spirit of fair play, I'm all for it. But I'm having trouble thinking of a good way to go about it even after all this time, and so I don't blame Synozeer for any hesitancy or outright washing his hands of the topic.

When a person posts on public forums, they are apt to receive all types of input. We are not robots and some of us are not afraid to show their true thoughts and feelings on a subject or person. You should easily be able to understand the substance of the post rather than concentrating on one sentence.

I'll apologize if anything I've written is ever proven incorrect.

Thanks for the advice on how to post, but I think I'll continue about my path. The day I need to ask my gf to proofread what I have to write is the day I stop posting. I guess I just haven't cared enough to write such offensive material to have needed to backspace and delete it, shrugs... although I guess I could of left out the first sentence-) But one slightly rude sentence out of the 100 I have written is hardly call for a proofreader...

Regarding the quote attributed to Matt, which may or may not be true. If it is true it certainly is not noticeable in game, perhaps it is used for borderline cases as someone suggested and only in a small way. I play Achaea regularly and I have seen severe punishments meted out to people who have spent enormous amounts when it was appropriate, and I have seen people who have spent nothing get let off or get a trivial punishment when the offence was small.

If money spent does make a difference (which I doubt), it makes very little. Don't rely on the fact that you have splashed out to mean you can go round acting like a total jerk, because you can't.

There are quite a few successful muds that have monthly or quarterly charges, a few minutes research would have told you that. Maybe Shane you need to take a break from posting all over these forums and look around you. Reviving this thread was a perfect example. This issue has been discussed over and over again.

Just because some of us take a strong stance does not mean we wish to injure an entire business model of MUD. As I've said before, I would never want any MUD to be shut down because of its business model, even if I didn't happen to agree with a "pay-for-perks system" for gameplay reasons. However, no MUD or admin should be able to use his commercial model as ammunition to gain favor over other MUDs that should be just as supported by our community as IRE.

Using money and threats as leverage to hurt non-commercial MUDs is just one more example of why many are vocal against Matt.

In this case - it would be a positive thing to add another choice in the listings(or a tag, or anything that helps further specify) for those seeking MUDs that would be "non-commercial". This is a resource site, and the argument goes back(again and again) to the fact that any such addition would only make the site more resourceful to players.

This is why so many players have asked for the addition from Synozeer. Matt is a sub-factor in all of this, not the reasoning for this idea's lobbying. He is merely an obstacle to it, for purely selfish reasons.

Well, before I say anything more, let's hear the selfish reasons. No sarcasm, just honest inquisitiveness.

Rufton wrote:
Oh, it's true. It's also 6 years old, which means 2/3rds of Iron Realms' time running commercial MUDs has elapsed since then. It's no surprise, I'm sure, that our policies have evolved over that time. The year after that, we opened Aetolia, and made our more or less official policy be that we don't give a damn how much money you've spent when it comes to customer service. Frankly, it's actually easier for us that way as then it's easy to say to big customers asking for special favors, "I'm sorry, but we have a policy, and if we violate that policy for you, we can't legitimately refuse to violate it for others as well. I'm sure you understand." Having said that, I have no problem at all with the idea of people who pay more receiving better service just like I don't have a problem with some guy at a hotel getting a better room because he paid more. In our case though, it's simply easier to treat everyone equally and aside from a few large customers who would -really- like to be treated differently, I think our players/customers prefer this method.


As an aside, most of the people doing customer service these days don't have access to purchase records, so aren't even capable of seeing how much a player has spent.

--matt

Going indepth with the specifics of a certain admin or company's intentions would just cause a chain of off-topic commentary - if it isn't obvious to you and you really are curious about the subject, feel free to PM or (better) IM me on AIM and I'd be happy to chat with you about it.

It's a little late in this thread, but I will share that I had a bad experience with a commercial MUD years ago (don't remember which, now) which wasn't clear about having fees. I played for several days, and then started getting messages about my time expiring and my needing to purchase credits for further playing time.

I was disappointed and felt slightly taken advantage of, because information about required payments to continue play was not made clear on their website--even after I got the messages and looked on the site, I found something about credits but no information about the requirement to purchase them in order to play.

Nope, it isn't a difference between them at all.

I realize the hobbyists here like to pretend their players are far superior to those on a dirty, rotten, disgusting commercial mud, but their players are just people- no different than the players on other games.

I was an admin on two pure hobbyists MUDs before I struck off on my own. When they sold any kind of merchandise, or when they accepted donations of any kind, perceptions and demands from the players (now customers) changed.

In fact, the moment they send money in ANY way, the relationship HAS changed. Like it or not, you have created a commercial relationship.

That's how the law views it. That's how the IRS views it. That is how many (if not most) people view it.

Pretending "our players are different!" is really silly and dishonest.

So when a customer pays money to someone they need "professional help" if they feel like they have engaged in a commercial transaction?

Now *that* is a ludicrous statement.

Sending in a "donation" (these aren't charities, by the way), buying a tshirt, or paying a subscription are not any different under the law, nor are they different in the minds of most logical, reasonable people. It is a commercial transaction- plain and simple.

Pretending they are different is silly and naive.

Yes, some players may expect favoritism for donations made, even on a completely free MUD. Players expect a lot of things, though, and sometimes their expectations are not reasonable.

If a 100% Free MUD asks for donations(or sells t-shirts) to help pay for the upkeep of the MUD, and they make it clear that there are no perks for those that donate, then the line is drawn. If a player expects more, that is a reflection on that player's personality and not the MUD; there is a difference with games that charge money for in-game service. You have agreed to exchange a service for payment.

If a pay-for-perks system makes it clear that buying "credits" or "paying for registration" or whatever other charges there may be will not grant the player better customer service than non-paying customers, then the player of that game has no more right to expect special service than the one who donates to a completely free game. The key is in being specific about what money is worth on a MUD.

On a truly 100% Free MUD, money gains you no in-game service, by the community's social definitions. This includes gameplay enhancements and customer service. It is not naive to make this distinction; it is specific and ethical.

The thing is, you keep telling me how our players are going to react, but I haven't seen any of it. Empirically, your theory doesn't seem as universal as you pronounce it to be.

I think you need to review my post. I stated that "someone thinking the purchase of a t-shirt or similar from a website entitles them to special in game treatment should seek professional help." I did not claim it was not a commercial transaction. I am not one to engage in flame wars but seriously, quote me at what I say, not what you want it to mean. "Special in game treatement" and "commercial transactions" are two entirely different things.

Threshold, May 08 2006,18:27
That's a very cheap shot and pure flamebait, (typical of the poster, regrettably).

Nowhere did I or anyone else pretend that the players on free Muds are 'superior' to those on commercial Muds. It is the goals, philosophy and policy of the Administrators that are different.

There are people who think that money should not buy you any advantages in a competitive game. In fact they see that as the very definition of a 'fair game'. (And yes, these people do exist and are not even uncommon, even if you cannot get the notion into your own head). People who have the opposite opinion naturally exist too. I wouldn't even try to make a guess about the proportion between the two types. However, it would be a rather natural assumption that the second type is more common in commercial muds, because that is the environment they'd primarily choose.

But what we really are talking about is the EXPECTATIONS from the players. It's very simple, really. A bit like Pavlov's dogs.

If you feed the dog a large, juicy bone every time a bell rings, or even if it just sees its mates getting fed at the signal, naturally it will be expecting it, and start salivating already when the bell rings. If the dog never gets anything connected to the signal there will be no salivation.

Likewise, if it is made totally clear in the policy from the start that nobody will ever get any in game benefits from money, and if this policy is upheld strictly from the beginning to the end, without any exceptions, there will also be no expectations.

So Threshold I have a serious question here: Outside of what players buy, how do you deal with their demands when they expect special treatment in unrelated areas in the game, over players who haven't spent as much as them on Threshold?

That hinges on an assumption though, doesn't it? It's equally meaningless in reality as for instance an argument that players who play commercial MUDs do it because of the stricter standards for admin-player interaction. I know many hobbyist MUDs are much more prone to unequal player treatment, because of relationships between players and admin, be they financial or otherwise, because the admin doesn't need to keep a presentable, market-viable face to the playerbase. Does that prove a point of any kind?

The whole argument is based on nothing but speculation in the end.

The threads continue to re-occur because that is the only way to get those with power to change the status quo to listen; repeated lobbying. The chances are greater that Syno understands the importance of this topic in relation to his forum users the more often we bring it up, and does something about it.

It's just how things work.

Oh Crapola Frye!!! You've been on a anti-the_logos rant ever since you registered on these forums! The only reason these threads are repeated is because of approx a dozen posters like you with an agenda, on both sides of the issues that feel the need to beat their chests repeatedly with the same tired arguments over & over & over. It's obvious to everyone that the website admins are aware of both sides' views, & choose not to change a thing, so grow up & live with it!

Oh, and Shane, why don't you try reading the 100's of pages of past threads re this pro/con commercial vs. non-commercial crap before you start throwing insults.

Should I have worded it as a thinly veiled flame?

I'm going to heartily agree with GuruPlayer here.

And seeking to force the site admin into doing what you want by keeping a wound like this open isn't exactly respectable. If you want something to change, you should just send an e-mail. One e-mail.

I think a far simpler solution would be for you to stop trolling and try reading the forum before posting. You have made over 100 posts in under 3 weeks. Get a clue.

1) One might ask who is the bigger problem: The person discussing the issue longer than you'd like, or the people who only post to complain that the thread is too long. The simpler solution is: If the topic no longer interests you, don't read it and don't bump it. It obviously interests the people who are discussing it, snce they're voting with their virtual feet.

2) If Synozeer didn't want suggestions (public or otherwise) on how to improve his website, he probably wouldn't have created this forum named "Bugs and Suggestions", and given it the description: "Please report any bugs you find on Top Mud Sites and post any suggestions you'd like to see implemented."

I assumed the initial question was rhetorical. Special treatment for those who spend extra implies 'unspecial' treatment for those who don't.

It's why we've made it clear to our playerbase that buying merchandise gets you merchandise, and not influence. Contrary to assertions made elsewhere in this thread, by all accounts they've been comfortable with that distinction-- I've handled the money for quite some time and I've only been approached once by someone who thought his financial support meant special favors. (It didn't. The ban he was protesting remains intact to this day.)

Exactly, and anyone who expects otherwise just isn't right upstairs. Donations are donations, merchandise is merchandise. This kind of policy is what I can respect and think is an outstanding example of what other MU*s should follow.

Meh, can't seem to find the delete button.

Anyhow, yeah. It agravates me when people try to control other people's conversation by insulting and bullying tactics. Can't seem to resist responding.

I'd forgotten about this, but there are MUDs that actually advertise that you'll get better customer service if you pay more.  Taken verbatim:

Separate, Speedier Queues for Assistance, Referrals and Feedback! ... As a Premium member, you will gain access to faster assistance lines to reach a GameHost and faster referral lines to speak to a GameMaster. And letters sent to our Feedback department by Premium members are also routed to a special mailbox and answered first!

At least they're open about less-paying (but still paying, on this game) customers having to sit at the back of the virtual bus.

I'm not sure what MUD you're referencing, but your implication that there's some analog between giving better customer service to people who pay more and segregationist policies is more than a little bit over the top.

Is it 'bad' when Disneyland sells less waiting in lines to people? Is it 'bad' when companies sell you different levels of customer service plans, such as Dell (along with many, many companies) do?

--matt

That's why I'm interested to see how Threshold copes with this phenomenon he claims is present in all muds.

1) At which point does it stop being a discussion? I'm pretty sure nothing new is being said, in fact, Donathin said it was actually 'lobbying'. Is that a proper use of the forum?

2) So how many times do you rehash something before it becomes 'a new suggestion'? Synozeer knows about what's being suggested already - the forum's served it's purpose.

"1) At which point does it stop being a discussion? I'm pretty sure nothing new is being said, in fact, Donathin said it was actually 'lobbying'. Is that a proper use of the forum?"

It never stops being a discussion. A person can lobby for change through discussion, much as you are trying to lobby for a change of topic on this thread rather than starting one of your own. It certainly does not stop being a discussion due to length.

"2) So how many times do you rehash something before it becomes 'a new suggestion'? Synozeer knows about what's being suggested already - the forum's served it's purpose."

The most obvious point is that the forum is not labelled "new suggestion" forum. Aside from that, new people can sometimes have new things to say about an old suggestion.

Just as you say that the website owner knows of the suggestion, I feel fairly sure he also knows about the ongoing debates regarding it.

But these answers are all too obvious. Yet again I implore you, instead of trying to control other people's topics of interest, why not go and read or start topics of your own, and leave people alone who want to discuss something of no interest to you. There really is NO problem with that from any sector. You are free at ANY time to stop messing with this thread and go deal with other ones.

Seriously.... not to be combative or anything, just up front, what is your issue with people posting notes on a forum about muds that deals with marketing and business model information for muds? How can you take issue with that, even if it has been going on for ages? Who cares if it has been going on for ages? Why do YOU care if it has been going on for ages?

Is it still a discussion when neither side is listening to the other? I understand that you're new to the discussion, but it's beyond old at this point. At this point it isn't being raised so it's merits are discussed, instead it's being spammed in what seems to be an attempt to exhaust the admin to the point of compliance.

It bothers me because along with the rehashing come the rehashed veiled insults and insinuations, which are leveled against the owner of a place I've chosen as a virtual playground.

Hey, if people want to go around in circles their whole lives, that's fine. Who knows, something might even change because of it.

If we're running under the assumption that Synozeer knows the arguments and knows the discussions, then I'm sure he'd have come down and made an announcement if he didn't want us saying the same things again and again. And he hasn't.

It's his site, and his whatever it takes to keep it running, and it's no skin off any of our asses if people want to play 'the chicken or the egg' the rest of their lives.

It's obvious that this subject is still important an interesting to a large number of the active forum population. Until things change and people are happy, it seems likely that people will keep beating this "dead horse" until it wakes up and rides again.