[cratylus]

Only, I think, if you want to be intentionally argumentative. I think
that there is an understanding in the mud world about
what an in-game reward is, and it can be gleaned from
the statements made by a Diku author:

"I feel it is important that I make clear how I see the limits of the license; You should know I am not against donations as such, and he may sell his merchandise as he pleases, but he may not use the game directly for this. The way I usually define this is if the players get some tangible modification within the game for their donations. Then it becomes commercialized. They pay for a service that is within the game."
-- Hans-Henrik Staerfeldt

While not every mud is subject to Diku licensing, nor does every
member of the mud community necessarily agree with Staerfeldt's
comments, I think this aptly sums up the common-sense and generally
accepted idea of what an in-game reward is.


It is a reward.


It is a reward.


It is a reward.


It is a reward.


It is a reward.


Since it falls outside what Staerfeldt defined as an in-game reward, I'm
inclined to say no. A policy that promises you get more prompt/thorough attention
from admins if you donate does not qualify as a reward.

If you think this merchandise/support thing is so important, then let's just
add check boxes:

[ ] Payment and/or donations required to play.
[ ] Payment and/or donation accepted for out-of-game merchandise.
[ ] Payment and/or donation accepted for enhanced admin support.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, rewarded in-game.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, not rewarded in-game.
[ ] Neither Payment nor donations accepted.


A bit silly, if you ask me, but your objections argue for *more*
options, not *fewer*. I think you're the only one who misses that.


-Crat