[Threshold]

You are a sad, sad man.

So even when I don't agree with Matt, it doesn't count. Only the times I agree with him count. It must be convenient for you to ignore absolutely everything that contradicts your twisted view of reality.

You could at least admit you were wrong when you accused me of agreeeing with "every single point" Matt makes. But you won't because it doesn't further your irrational vendetta.

KaVir, I hope you and your ilk here enjoy riding the sinking ship right to the bottom of the ocean.

[KaVir]

Only the times you post count.  Show me one single post you've made here where you've disagreed with him.   Or come to think of it, any post in the last few months (other than that 'gay rights' one) where you've not posted to defend him or his muds.

[Threshold]

Here's a thought KaVir: Naming your codebase God Wars doesn't make you God. You have no right to make irrational demands upon me or tell me what I must do. Your arrogance seems to know no bounds.

If you want to accuse me of something, *YOU* prove it. Don't make arrogant demands that I disprove it. Why don't you search back to when I disagreed with the IRE practice of logging voter IPs and rewarding people who actually voted. It was quite a controversial issue, if you recall.

Now you change your argument and say if I'm not actively disagreeing with Matt, it doesn't count. Too bad KaVir. You don't run the universe. You don't get to tell me how I choose to disagree with someone.

Furthermore, let us not forget: You said I agree with "every single point" (exact and direct quote) Matt makes. I provided a very recent example to the contrary. Like a child throwing a tantrum, that isn't good enough for you.

KaVir, you are just a joke now. A sad shadow of a once interesting and erudite contributor to the mudding community. You have been consumed by your hatred and can do nothing more than label everyone who disagrees with you a lapdog.

I pity you.

[tehScarecrow]

[Hardestadt]

Quoted for Truth, and Great Justice!

-H

[Jaregarde]

Threshold wrote:
Hmm...I'm a bit curious about this actually, about how Achaea was rewarding players for voting...because they are still doing it, to some extent. There's a guild ranking system called 'TopGuilds' and one of the criteria on which guilds are scored is the 'Vote Score', based on the number of votes contributed by members of that guild the previous day. The ranking doesn't bring any tangible benefits, though, but I'm still curious if this is allowed.

[Hardestadt]

Oh yes, because tracking who votes is so rewarding and all.

-H

[the_logos]

If it's ok for someone to try to intentionally hurt our fine Topmudsites administrator, Synozeer, over Medievia, it's certainly ok for me to ensure he is -not- hurt over Medievia, and to help out other MUDs in the meantime.

[the_logos]

Hahah.

So he's a lapdog if he speaks up, and he's a lap dog if he doesn't speak up? The only way he's not a lap dog is if he agrees with you, right?

--matt

[Soleil]

No, then he'd be KaVir's lapdog!

[the_logos]

No no, it's only when you agree with someone Kavir doesn't like that you're a lapdog. If you agree with him, then you're thinking for yourself, obviously.

[Soleil]

[Jeena]

I really do not understand why this is such a controversy. Is it a bad thing that noncommercial muds get a chance to advertise themselves? Or is it bad where the money is coming from? Or what?
Seems to me that this would be a good thing...an opportunity for more muds to get the news out about themselves. *shrug*

[Ashon]

The problem being the arrogance of the way that it was done. That is the problem here, at least it is in my opinion.

And there's the division between the as Threshold is putting it, the successful muds (I imagine what he means is the Commercial Muds), and their players, versus, most people minus a couple who just don't give a ####. The mud's which take payment, seem to have ego's about them, thinking that because they are making money, that the hobbyist have no right to get ****ed off when one of them tries to make a living off of their hard work.

It's not their problem that someone that counts themselves in the company of "successful muds" stole the work of hobbyist. No. It's our problem for being jealous that we didn't do it first.

And then there are the people who say, why spend time complaining when you could write something better. Well, I'll tell you what, there are innovative games out there. They may not be able to advertise, and they may not be on the top ten, heck they may not even have any players, but they are as innovative and as fun as anything else.

Heck, I remember a time when you had to crawl through gopher to find a mud, you know the time before the WWW. Before ad banners? Oh yah those were some good times.

[Juganothion]

[Jeena]

Still, it seems that people are complaining about a good deed by saying that the motivation isn't pure. I'm not sure the motivation matters as long as the end result is positive. I think that if there are innovative noncommercial muds out there, then this is an excellent means of getting the word about about them.
Saying someone is arrogant because they make an offer, because they can make the offer, seems a little self defeating.

[Ashon]

If someone came up to you and said, "Yah, I make enough cash to buy you a Lexus, want one?" -- isn't arrogant? I think it is. Ted Turner could have given A Billion dollars to a a 3 world country, to help better them, but instead donates it to the UN. Giving it to a country would be arrogant. Giving it to the UN is humble.

[Shao_Long]

How cute. If the only thing you care about is money, it doesn't mean every other person only cares about money. You have to realize most MUD'ers/MUD admins/coders/whatever never did anything with MUDs for money, because it is ... I don't really know how to explain this, especially if you don't seem to understand the whole subject at all. Besides I'm not much of an admin or whatever myself.
For me though, the whole situation can be compared to the "music industry".

The "right" way - at least how I perceive it - is play for the sake of playing, for the sake of creating, bringing something to your listeners, sending some message of your own, some thoughts of yours, something that comes from your very heart - even if it doesn't go along with what the listener WANTS to hear or whatever; being sincere and being open about what and how you feel and think is the priority.
Such musicians rarely get much credit, aside from a few examples, and more often than not have full time jobs and their music is rarely even enough to pay for whatever gear and whatnot.

And then there are "musicians" - I put that in quotes for a reason - who play for money. They don't care much about the "message", they don't care much about being creative or about being honest - they only care about doing something that would sell well enough to pay their bills. You could say, if people listen to their music it has to be good. That's true to certain extent. But it's called "selling out" for a reason.

You can't be good for many, and the best for one at the same time.

And there's a reason why the "sell outs" are disliked; aside from going away from, I don't know, traditions of their craft, they also take away people from the works of others, those who perhaps put less time (since they have to work to pay for food...), but much, much more heart and much more real effort into their work.
For someone who was raised on boy bands and pop rock, it may be difficult to actually hear and understand more serious, much more beautiful - but also always so much more complicated - music of bands that choose to remain free from commercialism.

[KaVir]

It is not possible to disprove a negative.  Might as well ask me to prove that unicorns don't exist.

He's a lapdog when the only time he speaks up is to defend you.

And I see you're well on your way to recruiting another - looks like the bad publicity from supporting Mercthievia didn't all go to waste, after all.

[Delerak]

I just wanna say one thing...