Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

While most if not all of your points are well taken, this is a rail split that is pulling off topic. I say we stay on topic. The current argument is 2 boxes with sub options or 4 boxes. I'm not sure this will ever be resolved to any satisfaction, which has reduced Chaosprime and me to fun humorous posts.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

But!!! Churches provide a sevice. They read a book you can buy yourself and repeat the interpretations of what it says, which you already interpretted that it says yourself, over and over again, kind of like a giant mirror. Oh wait... What they hell do they *actually* do? lol

But seriously, there are a lot of cases where people recieve money where the expectation is ***not*** a direct and immediate result to the person handing over the money. Some things do have some general tangible benefit. Donating money to help cancer research, if you have cancer, may have a more direct result "to you" than someone that donates, but never gets it. I think this is just another attempt to reframe donations to an otherwise moneyless game as something its not. I don't think I am the only one getting a bit tired of it. Framing something so it **looks** worse than it is just makes the person doing it look like a fool, to anyone recognizing that they are trying to do the equivalent of putting a 24k gold frame, with glass, over a crayon drawing. Just because you have framed the argument to try to make it sound reasonable doesn't mean it suddenly becomes reasonable.

That said, I still think the 4 box system, with some allowed clarification, is better. It gives more precise information. When you start reducing that to 2, you are just helping the people that want to reframe the whole thing in the best light for them, but the worst for actually figuring out what you are looking for.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Even when the 2 box system has 8 or more sub-options for better searchability? I would think these extra options would be more beneficial for the search engine? Or do you feel it makes it more convoluted?

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Sardonicism aside, your 2 + subs (+ text?) is pretty good -- another order of thing entirely from the straight 2 + text, about which I have nothing good or kind to say. I wouldn't cry if some version of what you're describing were implemented. I just like 4 + text a smidge better; 4 options seems exactly the right balance of partitioning and simplicity for this case, and I'm uncomfortable with having the top-level options feed the whole "any money involvement is exactly the same as any other" subtext.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I agree that there's probably not much more to say that doesn't retread old arguments.

So, I would suggest that either Lasher mull it over and come to a decision, or if there's a feeling that more "democracy" would help, post a poll for preferences (so that numbers can get counted, and so members don't have to stick their neck out too far to voice an opinion :) )

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

This thread has been an interesting ride (one that I thought would have spawned more threads than it has) and I am still interested to see where it will end.

Which brings up another thought... does anyone actually have an idea where all this is ? You are all just arguing back and forth, round and round. Makes you think, have you achieved your goal? I think the only person that can answer that one is Lasher.

I just wanted to post an "intermission" of sorts, just to get people to think what this thread is now all about.

Tricky

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

History Lesson: Originally Nodeka posted about having 100% Free game, and some folks took issue with the term 100 % Free. Some arguments ensued and from there people wanted to define 100% Free in a true context and what free really means. Halfway through this Lasher proposed a four part definition of boxes that would better define things for players when they searched the forums. A two part definition with options became the counter to this four part definition. Through numerous arguments, some redundant, some flaming, and some constructive we have ended at a stale mate: 4 options vs. 2 options and no one willing to bend either way.

What is this thread about? In a nutshell (forgive the pun): Free usage of the term Free when you have paying customers.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

This isn't a "game" with wins, losses and stalemates. This is a discussion, initiated by Lasher, and any outcome is entirely his decision.

The Thresholds want the listings to remain unchanged, so that they can continue to list their game as free. You want a 2-option listing, although you've yet to address the numerous problems with your proposal. Everyone else involved in this thread is in favour of (or at least willing to accept) the 4-option listing - for many of us it's not ideal, but it seems to be generally accepted as the best compromise and a clear step in the right direction.

As with creating a mud, any feature you add will receive a mixed reaction from the users. As an admin there are many reasons for rejecting an idea, including "I don't like it" - but dismissing ideas simply because they lack unanimous acceptance from the users will kill further development and result in stagnation.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

It is a stalemate because the discussion is virtually dead Kavir. What exactly in the last 2 pages of posts adds anything new to the discussion? What does your recent post add, besides claiming what people want or don't want?

What I pointed out was poignant and true:
What is this thread about? Free usage of the term Free when you have paying customers.

I think a good determination of what this thread is about could be easily identified in which box you would check if the four box option was put in place. Would anyone care to answer? Here are your choices:

a. [ ] Payment and/or donations required to play.
b. [ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, rewards in game.
c. [ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, no rewards in game.
d. [ ] Neither payment nor donations accepted.

I will start it off. I would check D.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I'm still leaning towards the 4 options with a text area for elaboration. There's very strong opinions and personalities on either side of the fence on this one but mostly involved with MUD administration or MUD sites in some way.

Putting myself in the place of a player looking for a new MUD, a piece of important information those 4 options don't cover is whether or not all content can be experienced without payment. "All" in this context would mean anything that has any impact on gameplay. A picture on the webpage, a bigger avatar on the forums would not be considered content. A better item, a bigger map, a new skill, etc, would be.

I'm still struggling with whether or not to make that option #5. It can be gamed but if it is completed honestly it is valuable information. Any MUD owner could lie about any of the search options, I think we just have to assume details will be entered correctly and build the site around that.

To answer the earlier question, there will almost certainly be a change. The 2 option is too broad. Right now it's between 4 and 5 with #5 (above) out there waving its arms to see if it has any support. Over to you....

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I've always supported #5, but I basically accepted arguments that it was too easily gamed and settled for supporting straight 4-option.

At minimum, I think it'd have to have wording requiring that there be no payment anywhere in a benefit's ownership/effect chain for the claim of "available without payment" to be meaningful. If one can make that claim because a player could, conceivably, buy an item for $1000 and then transfer it to you without payment, then the information is useless and MUD owners are disincentivized from following the spirit of the distinction (because if everyone else is claiming it on a BS technicality, you'd better too).

Special-event lotteries and so forth are an annoying technicality, too, but trying to address that raises the specter of the category becoming a five-page legal document.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I would check D as well, having refused every donation I've ever been offered (my usual answer is "If you want to help us out, write a review"). The 2-option suggestion would benefit my mud more than the 4-option suggestion, because there would be fewer muds in the same catagory. However it is my firm opinion that the 4-option suggestion would be far more useful for players.

I would also be strongly in favour of such an option, my only concern being that it's more easily "gamed" than the other four, as you pointed out (both here and earlier in the thread). In particular, the idea of making purchasable bonuses obtainable for free - but requiring several years of work, effectively making them unobtainable in any realistic sense.

An alternative, which I mentioned earlier, would be to have an option for "locked" bonuses - purchased bonuses that cannot be transferred between characters. The reasoning behind this is that if players can transfer bonuses between each other, they'll form their own economy based on supply and demand. If the Sword of Doom requires 10 years work to earn for free, then some players will purchase them for $10 and sell them in-game for something more realistic - you're effectively allow the players themselves to define the in-game value of the bonuses.

The drawback of such differentiation (both your #5 suggestion and the locked one) is that it comes down rather heavily on the games that sell purely cosmetic purchase-only locked rewards, such as a "donator" title. I guess the text area would allow them to clarify their stance though.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

That's a tough one, I think Kavir touched on that earlier - transferrable perks vs non-transferrable. Maybe this will lead to another 12 pages, but the last 12 were productive.

One possible answer is that if, for the thing to exist at all, someone had to buy it at some point in time, it is not "available without paying".

If I have to buy a "Sword of Chaosprime" in order for you to get it free of charge it's not "available without paying". If I can collect in-game gold and acquire a "Sword of Chaosprime" (now SoC) it is available without paying, regardless of whether or not I can also buy one with real money.

I highlighted possible because I didn't want to present it as a solution or lean the discussion towards it, it's just one potential definition.

In the idea I had for #5 a donator title would not be considered content as it has no affect on gameplay. We could argue that it does via perception of other players and game staff, but a listing site can't police that.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

To play devils advocate (though I don't agree with this) you could argue that it does, as it's something in-game someone managed to get that someone else can't via the in-game mechanics. For those players who have to have/collect everything in a game, it may seem unfair that they can't get that title without paying money.

Personally I'd be ok with the 5-option system. Yes, it can be gamed, it can be outright lied about, but at the end of the day so can everything. We can at least hope that a player who tries out one of these MUDs that has gamed/lied in their description will report it on here so we can investigate if they're breaking the spirit of the rules. Whilst people disagree with trying to apply to the spirit of rules or law and say only the precise, technical sense matters (haven't some of these types been pushing to get stuff written into the Constitution of the United States that a lot of other people think is completely against the original intent of the Founding Fathers, even if they didn't explicitly mention it?) I'm a firm believer that taking advantage of something just because there isn't a clear-cut rule against it is a Bad Thing. Sometimes common sense has to come into your decisions. The only things that need rules explicitly laid out to function are computers.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

The problem is that it crosses the clear boundry of "something" vs "nothing", which starts making the options more opinion-based. For example...

What about a donator channel, for talking with other donators?

What about clans being purchase-only, if all they do is give you a title and a clan channel?

What about cosmetic equipment rewards (restrings, donator-only bracelets, etc)?

What about the cosmetic "customise your character's appearance" donation reward?

What about the personalised in-game house, that doesn't give you any bonuses?

What about purchase-only classes, if those classes are just cool cosmetic variants of the free classes?

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Love threads like this... Always fun to try to keep up when people are posting 10 times more than you. lol But, yeah, sub-options do help. I would rather maybe find 3 that make sense, then add sub-options though, since otherwise you invariably get overlaps between, "Free as in beer", "Free as in, 'You can get in the building, but you are going to have to pay for the second. third, etc. beer.'", and "What? Free? You're not even getting in the door without a cover charge." Which is really what we are talking about here. In the first case, tossing some cash to the person shouldn't be an issue at all, other than maybe IRL they might not let you back if you keep showing up without cash (but we are not talking about RL here). There is still a clear difference between the later two. Sub-options need to be used as refinement, not as some people are going to "insist", by saying that the second category belongs with the third, while others invariably argue that it belongs with the first. In fact, it really isn't in **either**, but is imho, an entirely different animal all together.

At least that is my thinking on the issue.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Are you going to adjudicate what "rewarded in game" means?

What about MUDs that sell merchandise? They are getting a free ride under the 4 option system. They most certainly accept payments/donations.

What are you going to do about the fact that there is no way to prove ANY game does or does not provide rewards "in game", and how can you reconcile the fact that the 4 and 5 option systems creating a situation that rewards people for being deceitful?

What about the fact that Valg revealed the true motive behind all this? Is it really a good idea to cave to that kind of selfish motive hidden behind "providing information to players"?

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Titles can be just as significant and game altering as items. One's reputation counts for a lot more than their gear in any game, and fancy titles that signify you as a donator can have a powerful effect.

It also puts enormous pressure on people to "donate." It gives people an easy way to discriminate against non-donators (for example, having events for donators only), and just seeing the little fancy tag is itself a pretty huge pressure. Imagine being at a special event and you are the only one without the little tag. You'd stand out.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

They would full under "Payments not rewarded in game". A title is open to debate, a different color asterisk on the who list that signifies something is open to debate, sending me a mug with your MUDs logo has no bearing on the game whatsoever.

Like most of the options MUD owners can enter, we can't verify it. You could claim your MUD is newbie friendly with no PK when in reality it makes Armageddon and Genocide look like Neopets. If someone visits your MUD based on that description you lost a potential player.

Under the "5 option" system it is starting to seem that if we add the option at all it must be that anything and everything you can get from a payment in the game, even a tag, must be available without payment or there's too many grey areas.

I can't speak to Valg's motives but even if you're right, it doesn't make the information any less useful. Has nothing to do with caving to any one side or the other.

Let's keep this in context, we're talking about a search option on an already fairly heavily populated search page, not an in your face 600 pixel "Click here for nice free muds" banner. It will be featured no more or less than other options, but for players who know what they want the option is there. As with all other options, default search will be all.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I said earlier that a good a good determination of what this thread is about could be easily identified in which box you would check if the four box option was put in place.

I find it odd that Kavir is the only person who is for the 4 box system that is willing to state which box they would check. I'd like to know, if you are promoting the 4 box system, which box you would check, so we can get the cards on the table.

Here are your choices:

a. [ ] Payment and/or donations required to play.
b. [ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, rewards in game.
c. [ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, no rewards in game.
d. [ ] Neither payment nor donations accepted.

Likewise, those that are for the 2 box system which box would you check?

1. [ ] This mud has some donation, registration, and/or payment features.
2. [ ] This mud does not accept money (donations/registrations/credits) in any form.

I am for 2 box system and I would check 2.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I agree that knowing if a certain feature is available both by gameplay and payment would be valuable info. But then again, so would info about the magnitude of what rewards you could get for the payment, (for instance a mainly cosmetic tag for donating 10 $, versus various powerful advantages for an unlimited sum of $).

However, unlike the 4 options, which are fairly straightforward, both seem a bit ambiguous, and could too easily be dodged by mudowners interested in obscuring the truth. My own feeling is also that adding too many options to the system would make it so complicated that the average player wouldn't bother to use it.

Also I get the feeling that this discussion is headed into another 12 pages lap, which would delay the upgrading of the search engine that most of the posters think would be a good compromise and a valuable addition.

So here is a suggestion to Lasher: How about implementing the 4 option choice (with a text area for elaboration) to the search engine now?
Meanwhile keep the discussion open about further options that could be added - (probably best as drop down menus) - and if this leads to some kind of conclusion about what is feasible, it could always be added later.

Since you asked:

I am for 4 box system and I would check d, since I run a Circle based Mud, but also out of conviction that in-game rewards skew the balance of the gameplay.
In a 2 box system, I'd check 2.

I wouldn't hesitate to play a c Mud however.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I am for the 4 box option and, assuming the MUD I just started developing again ever gets released, I would check D. I'd search for anything that checked A, C, or D depending on my financial situation.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

a. [ ] Payment and/or donations required to play.
b. [ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, rewards in game.
c. [ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, no rewards in game.
d. [ ] Neither payment nor donations accepted.

They would check either b) or c), depending on whether their policies produced an in-game result. We plan to check c), as it's our written policy that purchasing a T-shirt (or whatever) comes with no in-game result.

What are you going to do about the fact that there is no way to prove ANY game does or does not provide rewards "in game", and how can you reconcile the fact that the 4 and 5 option systems creating a situation that rewards people for being deceitful?

It's as easy or easier to adjudicate this compared to any number of existing search options. How have you "proven" that roleplaying is required on Threshold? I'm guessing you refer to written rules or policies.

1) Again, the quality of the system has nothing to do with whether or not it helps me. Again, you continue to miss the irony that the system helps me only if it is a helpful tool to searchers. If the system is confusing or too broad, it doesn't help anyone. Please debate the idea's merits, and stop with the attributions.

2) Lasher didn't "cave", and it's an insulting verb to use there. I'm not nearly the only person in this conversation, and I haven't kidnapped his relatives or anything. He's just as welcome to agree with me as he is to agree with anyone else. Heck, I'm not even the one who proposed the system, nor do I have naked pictures of any of the people who did. You'll need to conjure a new boogeyman, sir.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Such an implication is even more ironic when you consider that both the four-choice proposal and the text area were originally Lasher's ideas; all the rest of us have done is give our views on the proposal's effectiveness, and slightly tweak the wording.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

If we really are headed into another 12 pages lap, there is actually one very straightforward paying system that I feel has fallen between the chairs in the 4 box system:

Payment (one-time or periodical) required to play, no rewards in game
(Possible additional text box info: Yearly subscription required, Free 1 month trial)

To me that is the fairest commercial system, although obviously not nearly as profitable to the owner as the pay-for-perks system, which I guess is why it is becoming increasingly rare.

I wouldn't hesitate to choose such a game myself, if I liked its other features. After all, I paid by the minute for the 'Free' Mud I played for years, while still being on dial-up. (Not to the game owners, but to the telephone company, but in praxis that distinction didn't really matter). Again - to some of us money in itself is not the issue.

On a side note, my original suggestion still stands:
Implement the 4-box system now, evaluate it in a year's time by checking how it is being used and the percentage of each search option being called for.
(Make the default choice A, in case no box is checked by the owner).
Meanwhile discuss possible improvements, and if necessary upgrade the system later.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

(This post is strictly for those MUD Administrators who are for or against the 4 box system.)

I think I now have a clear understanding why people want this system and why commercial games are against it. I asked my question about which box you would check to verify my thoughts on this and here is my conclusion: Those that want this system dislike any game that would check box b. This is very clear in the last posts and I suspected this from many of the posts earlier. Conversely, I believe the commercial games that would check boxes A and B feel that they are being put in a bad light. I'm sympathetic to this the same way I would be if the commercial games wanted non-commercial games to be forced to check one of these two boxes:

a. [ ] This is a professional, commercial game.
b. [ ] This is a non-professional, non-commercial game.

While checking box b for a non-commercial game is accurate, is it fair? Does it put the non-commercial game in a bad light? You could argue semantics and you would be right, and that is exactly why the commercial games resist box b.

Many of you probably came to this conclusion awhile ago and the arguments in this thread give credence to my supposition. I think in light of this we should perhaps not go forward with such a system without at least considering what I have stated here. I for one would not like the above examples of box a and b shoved down my throat as a non-commercial game, likewise I do not feel it fair to force the commercial games to accept what would put my game in a better light and force them into a poor light.

This is only my opinion and can be denounced or trounced as you see fit.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Really, I can't bring myself to have a response more sympathetic than "too freakin' bad".

If you're pursuing a business model that people in the community dislike (and the fact is, they have legitimate reasons to dislike it), maybe you should rethink your business model instead of trying to keep people from being able to construct a search that excludes it.

That's what I'm doing. I never thought ala-carte pay-for-perks was such a bad thing until I heard people describe some of the excesses it gets taken to, and now I'm rethinking whether I want to go further down that road or cease to have any association with it.

But if I do choose to commit to pay-for-perks, I'll damned well check that box and let the chips fall where they may. I have enough pride for that.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

As far as I'm aware, only one commercial game has posted against the four-choice proposal within this thread - Threshold. Conversely, the owner of the IRE games has stated "So, after talking with Lasher some I'll drop my objection to those four categories since it's hard to argue that less information is better than more when it comes to search", while the owner of Lost Souls (which I believe is also a box B "pay-for-perks" mud) has actively defended the four-option proposal.

I also don't believe there is any objection to box A, as "pay-to-play" is already one of the TMS options and is currently being used by 31 muds. These box A muds would actually be the only ones unaffected by this proposal.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I was about to write: They are not a pay for perks, but were only thinking about it, as shown in their last post:

But honestly, I can't tell, because they never said what box they would check in the four options. Regardless, it seems clear to me the reasons wanting the four boxes and that wasn't addressed nor have the reasons changed.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I don't think any of those other parameters compare to the issue of payment model.

Once you make a search option for it, you are creating the impression to a player that the information is accurate ACCORDING TO TMS. That's a can of worms you don't want to open.

But if you go with any such options, merchandise sales need to be included as no different than accepting any other form of payment.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

To clarify: I've done pay-for-perks in the past, but have let that go by the wayside at the moment, and (largely due to some new perspective on it from this thread and some on mudconnector) cannot quite figure out right now whether I want to go there again.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Random semi-tangential thing: an idea I've been kicking around is allowing people to bid on feature/content completions in a development ticket system.

Let's say that Joe is looking forward to the Princes of Amber affiliation so much that he's willing to commit to giving me $5 when it's done, thereby encouraging me to finish it. (If Joe makes this commitment and doesn't follow through, well, then I know what his word is worth next time.) This is clearly a species of pay-for-perks under the four-option system, but I think it's a rather interesting one, and I'd be interested in hearing people's thoughts on it.

What I like most about it is that it (normally) incentivizes doing things that benefit the entire MUD or populations within it, rather than solely a particular player. That's diluted somewhat if the ticket system allows user feature requests and people enter requests that disadvantage others ("make raise dead kill lich PCs instantly" e.g.), but you can always close the ticket on a "Denied" status.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

This is the attitude that has hamstrung the entire MUDding hobby since it began.

Community? We are talking about 5-10 posters. There is no need to exaggerate and treat this as something with sweeping support. It has never been more than the same handful of people pursuing a grudge against MUDs they want a competitive advantage against.

The issue here is mud administrators having the right to describe their payment model in the manner they feel is most accurate for their game. Having inaccurate terms forced upon them is not good for MUDs by any stretch of the imagination.

If this is a site for MUD promotion, then doing what is good for MUDs is more important than doing what a small handful of mud operators think is good for their specific MUD. This change is only good for people who are in this for pure personal gain, like those who have admitted such base motives in this thread.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Yes, I stopped actively arguing against it but the 4 box proposal is still very incomplete in my opinion. Threshold's objections tend to ring true for me.

I could have a two-checkbox system saying, "Does your country vote for its president" and we could classify every country in the world into these two simple categories, but it would completely fail to reflect useful information since what it means to vote for a president varies so massively from country to country. In some countries you are forced to vote (and you better vote for the correct candidate too), which is why some dictatorships call themselves democracies. In some countries, there's the appearance of voting for President (like the US) when in fact you're voting for the electoral college.

It's pretty muddy ground in other words.

--matt

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I don't know that you want to go there. You're liable to walk face-first into an examination of whether the site should be devoting itself to promoting all MUDs without distinction, including those with nice fat advertising budgets who can hardly be construed as needing it (as opposed to liking it and feeling they're entitled to it), or whether those MUDs can obviously look out for themselves as far as marketing goes and promotion of games that aren't raking in the bucks should be a higher priority.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Solution to that is if someone reports a MUD for listing false information, send that game a message informing them that they have 24/48 hours to either demonstrate that no error exists or, if the listing is inaccurate, to correct their listing or correct their game to conform to the listing details they have claimed to be. If they fail to do so, remove them permanently from the listing. Heck, maybe even create a Hall of Shame listing the names of MUDs (but no other information like connection info or website url) that have attempted to use deceitful listings to misrepresent that nature of their game.

The community, such as it is, needs to take a stronger stance on policing one another so that a few rotten eggs don't make everyone stink. It's time we as MUD administrators and players take some pride and responsibility toward representing our pasttime/hobby/career/obsession in a better light to those who are taking the first look at MUDs. Lasher's 4-box search option is one positive step toward doing just that. Public responsibility toward accurately representing our games is another step.

Take care,

Jason

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

You can't verify whether a MUD owner is taking payments from players and rewarding them for it unless they are open about it. Fundmentally, it can be a completely opaque process if the MUD owner chooses to make it so, and since a negative cannot be proven there is neither any way for a MUD owner to defend against this accusation if he's innocent nor any way for TMS to prove it happened.

That is different from most of the other checkboxes used to describe a MUD, even in the very 'grey' areas like "Encouraged" roleplay vs. "Mandatory" roleplay" vs. "Accepted" roleplay. Anything about the game itself can, at least in theory and with enough time, be checked using whatever definition of, for instance, "Encouraged" that TMS wishes. Behind the scenes actions have no reasonable possibility of ever being verified. Even in the completely absurd and hypothetical situation where a TMS administrator/moderator is given access to a MUD's logs, those logs are all completely in control of the MUD operator to begin with and have essentially no value as a way to audit the MUD as a result.

The point here is just that some things about a MUD can actually be verified. Some cannot, and whether a MUD's owner gains revenue from players or not cannot be verified, nor can whether players are rewarded for sending revenue to the MUD owner. Can't really call it donations either when it's just income that the MUD owner is free to spend on anything he/she wishes, barring the hypothetical case of a registered non-profit. What the MUD owner spends income from MUD players on is equally unverifiable in practice.

There is no other option in the 'advanced search' for MUDs that is fundamentally unverifiable.

--matt

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

What can be verified is of course the official policy of a MUD.

Because a few MUD owners possibly might lie, we cannot presume that everyone would.
And that goes for all the entries in the search options.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Well, the entries as is speak to what is actually happening, not what the official policy is. If one prefers they reflect whatever the administration wants to say, rather than what is relevant to the user experience, that's fine, but it's simply license to tell people whatever an admin wants. I tend to think that what is actually happening is a lot more important than what the admin wishes was happening (or simply outright lies about what is happening).

For instance, when one is discussing World of Warcraft, there can be no honest discussion about it without simply working with the baseline assumption that many, many people are violating the EULA and both buying and selling gold, characters, and leveling services (all of which is driven by player demand). Just because they're violating the EULA doesn't make it less impactful on the experience of other players. The fact is, in WoW (as in any MUD), the official policy doesn't mean much, insofar as it's often quite far removed from reality.

The official policy of the US government is that smoking pot is illegal. Do you think it'd be anything but an outright lie to say that America is a country "without pot" simply because the administration declares that smoking pot is illegal?

The ability/willingness to separate an assessment of reality from the drive to condemn or judge is an important part of fulfilling the needs of players.

--matt

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Oh I most certainly want to go there.

First, not a single active MUD on this site has a "nice fat advertising budget." The few MUDs listed here that might (like Runescape) do not maintain an active presence here.

Second, I wish Runescape did have an active presence here. Why? Because they would send an enormous amount of traffic to this site, and that would benefit ALL OF US. The top 10 MUDs already send the enormous majority of traffic to the site - traffic that benefits all the other games on the list. And they can make whatever claims they want about their game, and it doesn't bother me a bit. Who cares how they advertise or promote their game? People who focus on stuff like that have their priorities TOTALLY out of whack.

Third, your post just seethes jealousy. Your comments about "nice fat advertising budgets" and "raking in the bucks" are just gross. What is your problem with other people being successful and being able to make a living at making games? There is nothing stopping you from doing the same thing. In fact, your chances of success would be higher if you would support the hobby rather than sniping at the people who succeed and trying to drag them down.

Fourth, what you continue to do is exactly what keeps our hobby sublimated into such a niche. You, Valg, and others are so focused on your own specific, personal interests that you cannot see how everyone benefits when the whole hobby benefits. Do you ever read articles where Blizzard trashes Valve, or trashes their STEAM distribution model? Heck no. They are all part of the same industry, and they know that they both benefit from each other doing well. So they support each other. They don't trash each other. Yes, they compete. But they do so by trying to make the best game possible - not by going around to gaming sites and trying to make them change policies to suit their own personal interests.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I'd say that the extent to something is done is rather relevant here. It's when things are taken to a large scale that they become a real issue. And as soon as things happen on a large scale, they also tend to become public knowledge, like the EULA transactions on WOW that you mentioned. (On a side note, that's a bad example in this context, since no Mud Administrator can really be held responsible for what crooked players are doing, especially outside the game.
As has been pointed out before, the policy can only involve Admin-to-player transactions, since they basically have no control over player-to-player transactions.)

Now, if the official policy is 'No in-game-rewards' but some shifty Mudowner really wanted to make a considerable income from handing out unofficial ingame rewards for money in spite of this, it would make little sense to be totally 'opaque' about it.
After all, if the shifty Mudowner wanted his shifty players to actually pay him some money for those shifty rewards, he'd have to make the players aware of the possibility in some way.
Otherwise he'd just get the few-to-none legit donations that he'd be getting anyhow.

So, how do you think he'd go about it? By approaching each of his players privately over tell and inform them about it? Not very likely. By word of mouth? That would spread the bad rumor very quickly.

Added in retrospect:

Also, since most players and Mudowners are not crooked, and since pay-for-perks is a not only a legitimate, but also obviously popular system, wouldn't it be a lot more realistic for a player who wanted that kind of game to choose one of the MUDS that checked the b box, rather than going on the prowl for a potentially crooked Mudowner who checked the wrong box on purpose?

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

D, as I'm sure most people who picked #2 in your preferred system would choice in this one.

I'd play B, C, or D.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Amen, Brotha. Some may argue this, but our only true competitors are the Graphical RPG's. They are a style of gaming that many of us play and many players of the Graphical RPG's play and love muds. The only thing that can help us more, is getting more people who play the Graphical RPG's to learn about and play our Text Muds. Goooooo TEXT!

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

The argument seems to be that, "Since some places are going to cheat, we shouldn't give them the opertunity by letting anyone, including the honest ones say anything about what their muds official policy is."? Umm, sorry, but I don't agree here. People can leave comments about the muds here, if one is cheating **someone** is going to mention it, and when enough of them do, people are going to start looking closer at what is going on and report it even more strongly. Cheaters only prosper when there is no way to compare what they are doing to what they claim to be doing. The moment they state something, they tie their own hands, and they *will* get caught in the lie. Or do you really think the class of people that play these things are not going to notice or do anything about it?

If anything, I think holding them to giving a clear idea what they do means there is some real means to curtail such abuses. You can't abuse what doesn't exist, and if you do abuse something that does, it eventually bites you in the rear.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

There is one person directing attacks in this thread, and being moderated for it, and it's not me. My comments have been exclusively about how TMS should construct a useful search function, and supporting Lasher's proposal for doing so. I don't believe I've said anything about any specific game in this thread.

Also, I don't consider it insulting or "trashing" a game to accurately label it as pay-for-perks. Obviously, a lot of players like that model. As the_logos and others have posted, if you are short on time and want to see a lot of a game, being able to spend money to advance your character more quickly is an option some people want. Other people don't like the effect it has on the game. Having the ability to mark a game as such via Lasher's four-box system helps both of those groups of players find what they want.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I could use that same argument on the proposed check boxes of:

[ ] Professional, commercial game.

[ ] Non-professional, non-commercial game.

Would you object to having this listing as part of the search choices and a choice you have to make about your game? I would. I don't like it. It categorizes my mud accurately but has nuances that make it look poor, yet maybe players don't have a lot of time and want to know quickly who is professional and who is not? Think about it.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

The terms "professional" and "non-professional" could, in such context, be misinterpetted to mean something entirely unintended. Its also *still* way to vague.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

*gasp*

Are you suggesting that MUD admins actually look at this issue from a more objective perspective, rather than for what they think benefits them personally the most?

Good luck with that! :)

Imagine the good that could come of directing all this energy towards something that benefits MUDs as a hobby, rather than trying to whittle away at other MUDs for personal gain.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Aristotle, nothing about any option that has been proposed here is going to hurt Threshold. Seriously. Only people who already care about the issue are going to use the search option, and if someone already cares, the question of whether they're going to play Threshold has already been answered, one way or the other. All the option is doing is saving everyone some time and CPU cycles. Which is the entire purpose of a search engine.

What redounds to the benefit of MUDs as a hobby is if we're completely honest and up-front in our dealings with
money, rather than turning people off and making the entire exercise seem vaguely slimy by engaging in tactics like intentionally designing search engines to obfuscate the issue.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Shadowfyr is right, professional and non-professional could be misconstrued as whether or not the MUD is an amateur project or done by experienced MUD programmers.