[Davairus]

1) certification

How about some kinda certification. I'm saying this coz like, you get muds in the database that have jacked the code from some other mud. To get certification you should follow your license requirements. Certification handed out and revoked by the people that wrote the codebases (or their trustees), rather than the topmudsites admin, who's very busy. This will not have any effect on the operation of the site, votes, reviews, but it'll be in the mud listing for a player to look for incase he cares about that sort of thing, and doesnt want to play a mud that the community didnt certify.

2) improve the sort for the mud search

Searches should bring muds up by rank, i.e. amount of votes, instead of alphabetical order. I think the mud with the most votes deserves to top the search results lists as well. I can write the algorithm if needed but I don't know how to convert it into a cgi script type format for the ikonboard code.

3) remove post count

Did wonders for my forum =p

[prof1515]

[Davairus]

Well I dont use the search feature to circumvent ranks, or like it, but thats just me. My mud's name begins with an A, and its higher on the search than it is on the vote ranks.

My point is that the 'vote rank' is what attracts me to this site but I'd rather just search for pk/free/etc and then check the muds out in order of popularity instead of letter. Its a personal preference that I'm sure others can see the logic in (most votes implies best, after all). I don't see the purpose of a search as finding muds via a different method, I see the purpose of a search as finding the mud I'll enjoy the most. I don't see why vote rank and mud details shouldnt be integrated considering the name of this site.

Of course there is no reason it can't be optional and this is trivial code to write as well. I'd like it to be default or saved in preferences.

I already gave criteria for who determines who gets certified approval - the team that wrote the codebase, or the person they've entrusted to do it for them. Obviously Synozeer gets the final say on who gets to certify, we just get to see who certified them (e.g. Iron Realms, Synozeer, or Diku Team c/o Kavir, whatever works).

[prof1515]

There's your mistake. Most votes doesn't imply best, it implies most popular via a plurality of the system of balloting. Of my personal choice for the 10 best MUDs (RPI, H&S, and every other kind), only 4 appear on the first page (in other words out of the 20 most popular on TMS) and only one of my three favorites is there.

Because "Top" can have several meanings. Top as it relates to popularity? Top as it relates to quality? Top as it relates to size? Top as it relates to originality? "Top MUD Sites" does not define "top" via its name alone.

The latter preferably since it'd be a redundant default with the front page.

Personally, unless their codebase is opened up for examination, how do we know that Iron Realms didn't steal DIKU code and certify themselves? After all, Medievia claimed originality for a long time (now they're just remaining silent but still not admitting the lie), yet they were essentially thieves that your system is supposed to prevent certifying. What would stop them from claiming an original codebase, then certifying themselves?

And what's to keep one of them from not certifying MUDs that it deems as competition or with whom they hold a personal grudge? And again, is it one vote (the code originator) that's required or a percentage (ie, majority, 2/3, etc) of all the code originators?

The real difference that would be nice would be front-page columns, listing the top 5 or top 10 of each category (and expanding the categories). That way, while still using a flawed popularity-based system, it would more accurately reflect the diversity of MUD types out there.

Sorry, but it seems like your system would just be another way for the commercial MUDs to buy their way to the forefront of the search like they have the front page.

Take care,

Jason

[Davairus]

So you'd rather see the mud without the most votes (and descending) on my search list than search for "free/non-commercial PK" and get a list like this:

1-circle
3 castles
ANGELMUD
Aaaabaaa the DIKU

Instead of like this:

Carrion Fields
Turning Point
Feudal Realms
MUME
Abandoned Realms

Well, thats your opinion, and you're entitled to it. But I want to search by most popular, because I believe that the vote system ballots the player's satisfaction with their mud. I'm sorry you don't see the logic in this, but thats not really not my problem, other than you raining on my parade here.

[Jazuela]

I -think- I understand Devarius's idea on this. But rather than an addition to the search feature..I think it would be great to add a filter to the voting lists.

So - instead of having to wade through all the pages of mudlistings or do an alpha search, I could do something like this:

click on the filter option for the vote list.
click on the "theme" menu option.
pick "High Fantasy"
and get a vote list of -only- high fantasy muds, in the order of votes from high to low.

or maybe..

click on the filter option
click on the "codebase" menu option
pick "DIKU/DIKU DERIV"
and get a vote list of -only- Diku or deriv muds, in the order of votes from high to low.

Is that what you meant? I like it, if it is.

[the_logos]

Well, I know we'd never participate in this, at least, because nobody gets to "certify" us. We could just certify ourselves, of course, as we went to the trouble of creating original code, but still, my attitude would be, "We've got hundreds of players online and we rock. That's the only certification we need."


You've got a point, but then the people who mention that searches are for finding something different from the top muds list also have a point. I think one thing that would be nice would be to randomize the order of muds listed in a search. Having a MUD that starts with 'A' guarantees you more traffic the way it currently works, just like being at the top of a google search guarantees you more traffic.


Yes, that'd be good. I think post counts are crap, personally, and they tend to convey a false impression that those with high post counts have something more worthwhile to say than those with low post counts (in fact, there are certain members of this forum that will explicitly slam people with very low post counts for chiming in on an issue).

--matt

[the_logos]

The problem with this is then you diminish the value of the site's purpose as a traffic exchange for MUDs. By putting unpopular MUDs on the front page that can't send much traffic, you're basically wasting the time of the MUDs that do send a lot of traffic here.

--matt

[prof1515]

Again, some of the best MUDs out there don't get nearly the appreciation they should.  At last look the best H&S I've ever seen by a huge margin is on the third page.  It's innovative, features incredible code, and more enjoyable (as far as H&S goes) than all other H&S MUDs I've ever tried combined.  But right now, they just don't seem to be voting (they've easily been in the top 20 many, many times before).  Put them automatically in a list according to popularity (which rises and sinks due to player voting) and you end up having to slog through a list of some of the more popular crap that ranks higher but mobilizes its players better.

Additionally, when the vote resets, I've often seen some normally very-low-ranking MUDs register much higher because they timed their voting better.  A search run at that instant isn't going to reflect overall patterns, just the once-in-a-blue-moon anomoly.

Now,yes, a filter (much like filters for genre, codebase, etc) would be acceptable and I wouldn't have a problem with that.  But a default that corresponds with the rankings pretty much makes the search much less useful.

If say (hypothetically, I'm not going to go and count them right now) 12 of the top 20 are the same type of MUD (let's just pick on commercial MUDs since you're familiar with them), then a commercial MUD that comes in 12th of the top 12 commercial MUDs needs to work a bit harder.  But say a category of say Pure PK MUDs features none on the top 20, the highest ranking PK MUD in a less-popular (hypothetically again, since I suspect it's a more popular genre than this example suggests) wouldn't even be represented on the front page.  If one genre tends to attract more players, then a MUD of that genre which can't match others of the same offering really isn't popular, it's the genre which is.  The incentive of "let's get on the front page" which motivates so many smaller MUDs could inspire these MUDs with larger pbases to work all the harder to compete with MUDs of the same type who more successfully do get votes.

Take care,

Jason

[the_logos]

Best is, of course, a completely subjective and personal decision. There are no 'best' MUDs. Only 'best' MUDs from X point of view.

The ranking portion of the site isn't about giving attention to MUDs that aren't popular either. It's about rewarding MUDs with exposure that have, in turn, sent traffic here.

Yeah, it's not on the front page because it's not doing as much for the site as the MUDs in the top 20 are, so why should it be on the front page? What is it doing for the site? It's not sending as much traffic here, so it doesn't get as much exposure. It's all quite fair. Spending screenspace on unpopular MUDs drastically decreases the incentive for popular MUDs (who send the vast majority of the traffic here) to participate, as they're getting much less in return. The more MUDs that are listed on the front page (especially above the fold), the less value each listing has. Decrease the incentive for the most popular MUDs and the site loses most of its ranking traffic. The top 10 MUDs combined bring in more traffic than MUDs 11-90 combined. Heck, the top 5 combined almost bring in more traffic than 11-90 combined.

--matt

[prof1515]

The original post refered to the search options, upon which I was commenting. If a person's using a search, it means they're not satisfied with simply what's the most popular and whatever's thrown before them on the front page. They're looking for the type of MUD they want.

I am looking at it from the perspective of the site as a service to a person using the site to find a MUD, not only from the advertising perspective. If we're going to just look at those MUDs with more "value" to the site and " the top 10 MUDs combined bring in more traffic than MUDs 11-90 combined" you might as well just chop off the other 4 pages since they matter very little to the site from that perspective.

Take care,

Jason

[Davairus]

Yes Jazuela, yo'veu nailed it. I want to be able to filter the voting list, to my tastes. I figured the "advanced search" would be the ideal place.

the_logos, thanks for the responses. Not going to disagree with anything you've posted.