Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

Burr · 02-18-2003, 10:42 AM

1) The scripting suggestion. This has already been implemented in every necessary sense. Every time a mud is added to the listing, a link to its description is put up on the front page of the site. This happens regardless of how many people vote for or review that mud.

2) The substanciality suggestion. The benefit and substance of the review seems to be that someone in high standing in the mud community is doing it. If you agree with Brody's opinions about muds in general, then you can expect to agree about the muds he spotlights, however much or little he actually describes them. Simply put, Brody had the balls to pin his social equity (e.g., credibility) on the muds he suggests, and that says something for the muds he picks out.

While it may be true that more substance would be helpful, if Brody doesn't have the time to add in that substance, then you'd have to get someone else to do it. If nobody else with Brody's credibility (e.g., Kavir) is willing to do it themselves, then you lose the whole point of the reviews. In any case, if people want substance, they can go check out the mud themselves, or analyze reviews available elsewhere (such as the reviews page). Brody's reviews best serve by providing, not substance, but credibility to the substance already provided elsewhere. At least in my opinion.

02-18-2003, 10:42 AM	#72
Burr Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 123	1) The scripting suggestion. This has already been implemented in every necessary sense. Every time a mud is added to the listing, a link to its description is put up on the front page of the site. This happens regardless of how many people vote for or review that mud. 2) The substanciality suggestion. The benefit and substance of the review seems to be that someone in high standing in the mud community is doing it. If you agree with Brody's opinions about muds in general, then you can expect to agree about the muds he spotlights, however much or little he actually describes them. Simply put, Brody had the balls to pin his social equity (e.g., credibility) on the muds he suggests, and that says something for the muds he picks out. While it may be true that more substance would be helpful, if Brody doesn't have the time to add in that substance, then you'd have to get someone else to do it. If nobody else with Brody's credibility (e.g., Kavir) is willing to do it themselves, then you lose the whole point of the reviews. In any case, if people want substance, they can go check out the mud themselves, or analyze reviews available elsewhere (such as the reviews page). Brody's reviews best serve by providing, not substance, but credibility to the substance already provided elsewhere. At least in my opinion.