[Milawe]

Why should I change my argument when the results of the "word change" are exactly the same? The ambiguity did not go away just because you casually reworded it. The problem has always been in the possible abuse and how different people define "in-game result/reward", causing the same problem we're having now with the word "free". How is result any better than reward? Seriously, just because you managed to change a word doesn't mean that you actually "fixed" the problem, and don't worry, I wasn't setting out to impress you or anyone else.

Nice straw man. I don't believe that ANYONE arguing this has said this. I, for one, don't have a problem with the idea of searching for money-accepted or no-money-accepted. I don't think I've made my posts unclear about this, so perhaps you are mistaking my opinion about the search with someone else's.

As it is, *I* am a player of MU*s and all manner of online games. My opinion does not become less worthy simply because I have a differing opinion of what is actually useful than others in this forum.

If you haven't noticed, most of the arguments and proponents of this are all mud administrators, and this post was started because of how other muds advertise themselves. New World's expanded two-choice system actually gives more options to administrators than the proposed four-choice ambiguous system. In the end, it lists muds as accurately as the expanded two-choice system, so why are we arguing against it? It is LESS ambiguous and has FAR less room for abuse.