[MUD-Dev] Re: Spoofing (Psychopaths)
Mon Oct 5 15:42:54 New Zealand Daylight Time 1998
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ola Fosheim Gr=F8stad [mailto:olag at ifi.uio.no]
> Sent: Monday, October 05, 1998 3:45 PM
> To: mud-dev at kanga.nu
> Subject: [MUD-Dev] Spoofing (Psychopaths)
> Koster, Raph wrote:
> > > From: Ola Fosheim Gr=F8stad [mailto:olag at ifi.uio.no]
> > > Why are developers so eager to embrace the more
> > > hysterical/stereotypical
> > > writings on muds? (Dibbell, Bartle...)
> > Well, they also happen to be two of the best things written=20
> about muds,
> > IMHO.
> I guess I must be blind then. :) (Farmer, Turkle, Suler, Kim,=20
> Cherny and even the VR guys do better I think.
I find all of their writings to be very good as well. This doesn't
detract from what I said...
> Dibbell is entertaining.
It's a good dramatization of a particular incident, nothing more,
> Bartle is oversimplifying and selling a simple solution to a complex =
> problem with no apparent support.
I don't actually see very many real solutions in the essay. The =
offered ("keep the differing groups in the right proportion") is vague
enough to not be a solution at all.=20
> Btw, did you notice how many references he=20
> has that has
> zero to do with the problem he is writing about?)
Yes, I did note that. :)
> > I find Bartle's paper useful in that is classifies and presents =
> > classic dichotomies clearly. Like all classifications, it=20
> is inexact and
> > cannot be regarded as an absolute. But it serves as a great=20
> > for discussion.
> Great springboard for not-so-great discussions in which that=20
> player motivation/psychology is neglected. IMHO. Taking=20
> "things" at surface
> value isn't a good thing, especially when you are dealing with =
Hmm... I don't know, I've seen some very good discussions on this very
list that had that essay or its classifications as a springboard...
Certainly many of those discussions have touched upon player
motivations, as well.
> What I mean is that the main idea with the "rape" is to make the user
> control over his/her most personal sphere. In a MUD this is the
> This can be prevented by design.
[snip example of spoof versus emote]
> It is primarily attributed to you,
> not to me. You are not invading my privacy yet, you are=20
> attacking it. I admit that you can make the latter more intense by
> it over a long period of time.
Yes; most players in my experience would term this harassment just from
a single case, though they might not call an admin over it after just
> (What I find interesting about The Palace is that "spoofing"=20
> is actually a deliberate design choice, and social control is
> over removing the functionality.)
Interesting. I had never noticed that about The Palace. How does it =
More information about the MUD-Dev