[MUD-Dev] Re: Unix is a mud (Re: Ugh, IS Diablo a mud?)

Kylotan kylotan at globalnet.co.uk
Sat Sep 26 21:46:03 New Zealand Standard Time 1998


Ola Fosheim Gr=F8stad <olag at ifi.uio.no> wrote :
>What's the bloody point in discussing a classification system without
>discussing the purpose? It is certainly more political than rational whe=
n
>one are motivated by usage but lists technical requirements. If the goal
is
>usage, then the usage is also a suitable measure. There are usually many
>classification hierarchies that could be used to order a given set of
>phenomenas (in biology: genes, mating, geographical, looks, habitat, foo=
d
>etc). Purpose before classification is essential, at least in the
rational
>world, maybe not in the political :P

I think that this discussion came up because there is some disagreement
about what games and servers are suitable for discussion on this list,
since it states clearly in the list charter:

 "DOOM, -Diablo-, Duke Nukem etc are not MUDs."

 I agree with you in that virtually anything can be considered a mud, and
that we should not say "X is not a mud - Y, however, is.".  Trying to fin=
d
common threads throughout the entities that we call 'MUDs' as well as
those we may not have previously considered a MUD,  allows us to draw
parallels with our own developments, and maybe lead to new sources of
inspiration as a result. There are undoubtedly lessons to be learnt and
ideas to be taken from -all- areas. However isolating those of most
relevance may help us make more productive use of our research and
development time.

Kylotan.






More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list