[MUD-Dev] The Best Guy on the Mud Thing

Ilya Ilya
Tue Sep 14 10:57:16 New Zealand Standard Time 1999


On Tue, 14 Sep 1999 19:22:44 +0200, Ola Fosheim Gr stad wrote:

))It might be fruitful to rethink the basic structure, rather than just fixing the classic
))one.

This I will gladly accept -- it is more than possibly fruitful.  I'll always go with
rethinking of basic structures as a darned good idea.

))
))> If you always are going to have some players playing more often, and some
))> playing less, it seems to me unwise to punish the ones who play more often,
))> and help the ones who play less, or whatever it is you call it when you
))> try to "make it more fair."
))
))Yes, but it doesn't necessarily have to involve punishment.

My point exactly.  I am simply responding to systems that somehow
try to make things fair and, in my estimation, always end up either
making things easier for those with less time, or harder for those
with more.

))You may consider creating a
))basic general game for everybody and "special" games for those that have the extra time.
))(I'm not saying it is going to be easy to maintain perceived fairness though)

I think that is what I am suggesting, at least as a possibility.

))
))
))> I just don't see that people who have radically
))> different time commitments need some sort of handicapping system to keep them
))> "even."
))
))I guess that would depend on the gamesystem and how it is balanced... I'd like to see
))some conceptual models of different gamesystems and their basic concepts. That would
))make discussions like this easier.

I would like that too!

))
))> ))"monetary economy". (I'm vague, but I wan't to keep my own ideas for myself for
))> ))now, thank you :)
))>
))> You are welcome.  I have no idea what you are talking about, but it
))> doesn't hurt to be pleasant!
))
))I wasn't aware that I was unpleasant? (You asked for my ideas, I think?)

Ah! My apologies.  I do not use English as most do either, though not exactly
because I am a non-native speaker.  When I wrote "it doesn't hurt to be pleasant"
the meaning was "you have been pleasant, and written in a pleasant way, and that
is a good thing, even though I still have no idea what you are talking about."

I have long resisted many modern usages, mostly in American English.  This gets
me in no end of trouble since I do not anticipate interpretations having nothing
to do with my intention.  I'll try to think of some examples, since I find this
fascinating as well.  Hmm, okay, how about this: the present tense in modern
American English usage has come to be used only and exclusively for habitual
or continual action ("I write" means it is something I do all the time on a 
continuing basis).  To say that you are in the act of writing at this moment,
the only real construction left is "I am writing" though even that has the
possible meaning of "I am about to get to it, it's on my list of things to do,
to write."

Me, I just use the present tense (I go, I walk, I run, etc) to mean "I am doing
<whatever> now."  Gets me in all kinds of trouble.  I try not to do this, and
do succeed sometimes, but the curmudgeon rises up every now and then and I
use that dreaded present!

))
))> ))Make things motivating and fun would be my first goal. If that involves "fair" or
))> ))"even", well, then that would have to be included too.
))>
))> Agreement is.
))
))I'm afraid I don't quite understand what "agreement is" means. (I'm norwegian remember!)
))Ola.

Sorry again friend.  This is an archaic construction I got used to some
years ago.  It is not in use in the modern day to my knowledge, with
the possible exception of fans of Stranger in a Strange Land (the book).
It means "The state of agreement exists" (by implication, between us) or
"I agree with you."  

--
  Ilya, Game Commandos     http://www.gamecommandos.com     





_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev maillist  -  MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev



More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list