[Milawe]

My objection still applies with this new wording. It's not the actual WORD I have a problem with, which I thought I've been really clear in expressing. It's the ambiguity that can be found in the whole proposal. What do you mean by "result"? If there's a person who has a badge in game that says nothing more than "I'm a donator", is that an in-game result or not? "Result" is NO BETTER and potentially WORSE than "reward". Please don't state my opinions for me. I'm more than capable of stating them for myself.

It's kind of easy to be the majority voice when your (again, general you) muds follow the same general payment schemes, and you'd like to get a leg up on muds that advertise in a way in which you disapprove though are actually accurate. Also, the number of "free/donation" mud vastly outnumbers the number of "commercial" muds.

Besides, there are games that still wouldn't fit accurately under your 4 payment system. Take Threshold's old payment system. You paid a MANDATORY $50 registration fee for a lifetime membership of Threshold. You pay that ONCE, and you do get "perks" with it. You can cram it under payment/donations required to play, but it's VERY different from the $15/month fee that you pay to play a number of other games. But would you care about that since it's a COMMERCIAL mud? You guys care if people lump donation in with pay-for-perks, and let's seriously not even begin to delve in the million of ways that "donation" can be abused.

I'm beginning to feel that this whole discussion smacks of a police state mentality when people are continually forced to succumb to big brother and what they decide is "best". Seriously, how is this any different than if Wal-Mart went and harassed the town newspaper because they objected to K-mart's buy-one-get-one free advertisement by claiming it's a scam? Don't try to fool anyone into thinking it's for the benefit of the player because players are simply not as stupid as this thread keeps trying to make them out to be here. If you really want to help players, then you wouldn't object to New World's improvised Two-Choice system, and players who care about whether or not a game is free or not would still be able to find free games easily where NO MONEY changes hands.

This discussion exists for the benefit of mud administrators that object to the fact that you CAN play IRE games for free (free means you pay absolutely no money to play), you CAN play Nodeka for free, and you CAN play Threshold for free, but they feel that this somehow impedes their own mud's advertising. Take the pretty icing off and discuss the real issue. Don't try to sugar coat it and pretend that it's something altruistic. At least Valg has the integrity to state the real issue:

Let's stop trying to pretend this is about the players because it's really not.