[MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev digest, Vol 1 #142 - 4 msgs

Marian Griffith gryphon at iaehv.nl
Sat Sep 18 20:56:09 New Zealand Standard Time 1999


On Sat 04 Sep, Greg Miller wrote:
> Marian Griffith wrote:

> > I was, of course,  refering to systems where players can do whatever
> > they want  as long as  no other player is stopping them.  As long as
> > they have the 'might' to do something the have the 'right' to do so.
> > This is the essence of player run justice systems on mud.

> Indeed. You have basically the same thing in other systems, except that
> admins are far more powerful. Personally, I find that at least as
> distasteful, and more importantly it's high-maintenance. :)

The later is a bigger problem than the first I suspect.
Admins in general have more interest in the well being of their muds so
they tend to be a bit more carefull about how they treat their players.
Enlightened despotism versus anarchy  if you like.  For the players who
do not care for chaos the first system may well be more palatable.

> > It's fairly simple to create a system that does not follow this rule
> > simply by taking law enforcement out of the hands of the players and
> > putting it in the hands of either the game or the imms.

> See above.

Of course  we both bring our personal preferences into this discussion.
That makes it a bit more difficult to compare systems on their morality
and practicality. Both systems (and many others) can work but they will
lead to vastly different games. Socially speaking.

> > Also a system where players can opt to be immune from attacks by the
> > other players  (and this works both ways)  has put the rules outside
> > the domain of the players with the power to force others.

> Not really. Violence is hardly the only way to punish people. When you
> offer this option, the first people who take you up on the offer are the
> most obnoxious, harassing, morally devoid people.

Perhaps, but there are very few of those and you can not deal with them
in a reasonable manner anyway.
Also,  by giving players the option to be immune from violence by other
players  (and be incapable of affecting others in the same way)  you at
least  have significantly reduced the harm players can do,  even if you
can not totally prevent it. Like all social interactions you have given
a strong signal  that such behaviour is undesirable  in that particular
game. It will encourage the aggressive players to find their entertain-
ment elsewhere,  and it will discourage the players who would not start
with such behaviour  but who will join if others start with it.  I have
played a mud  where a group of players came along who used strong lang-
uage. A lot of it was offensive and sexist.  At first it was only a few
players who talked like that, but soon others began to follow their ex-
ample. At some point I decided that I had had enough and I began to ask
people to mind their language a little, explaining why it was offensive
to me. A couple of other girls on the mud followed my example. With one
exception all players agreed to tone down their language some.
Most people are like that.  They follow examples set by others.  If you
can reach those players,  then you have solved  most social problems on
your mud.


Marian
--
Yes - at last - You. I Choose you. Out of all the world,
out of all the seeking, I have found you, young sister of
my heart! You are mine and I am yours - and never again
will there be loneliness ...

Rolan Choosing Talia,
Arrows of the Queen, by Mercedes Lackey




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



More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list