[MUD-Dev] curses and grief players

John Buehler johnbue at email.msn.com
Fri Jul 28 11:35:09 New Zealand Standard Time 2000

Patrick Dughi
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2000 7:55 AM

> 	The voting is to make the players feel good.  The changes could be
> made without their support but then there's a feeling that the admin is
> changing things without regards to the players, where the players are each
> individual by themselves.  However, by having a 'vote', players are
> implicitly involved.  Those that vote at all are already accepting the
> premise that they may loose.  For or against, they've already committed to
> the system.  Those that do not vote know they have given up their claim on
> the issue.  Either way, they've been involved in the decision and are more
> likely to not disagree with it.
> 	Whether or not you use the data from the voting is your own issue;
> as far as the players are concerned, they're fat and happy.  

  These two paragraphs are antithetical.  In the first, you say that the
purpose of voting is to make players feel good - with the implicit
assumption that they are involved.  In the second, you say that whether
their vote is significant or not is up to the admin.

  My point is that players shouldn't be left to vote unless their
opinions have weight.  If I ask your opinion and I don't really care,
why ask?  I'm lying to you.  When you realize that, you'll be annoyed,
hurt and less likely to trust me or believe me in the future.

> 	Because it's pointless to tell someone the truth just for the sake
> of being able to say "I told someone the truth," when that given truth is
> negative. Instead, you end up making them angry, confused, sad, or
> apathetic.  Do you go up to each ugly person on the street, stop them and
> say "You sir/madame, are as ugly as the day is long," just because it's
> the truth and they may not know it?  Of course not.  You politely lie and
> say things like "That dress looks great on you," or just "Have a nice
> day."  Truth, by itself is neither good nor bad, simply the 'state of
> being the case' (Merriam-Webster, Collegiate Dictionary).  Telling the
> truth all the time does not make you morally right in any given moral
> system.  Usually it just makes you appear like an unthinking clod.

  Truth is neither good nor bad?  We certainly are in different universes.
Suppose you knew someone who, when he spoke, always told the truth to the
best of his ability?  We value friendships because our friends can tell us
the truth.  We investigate the world around us because we value the truth.
We debate topics such as this because we really want to know the truth of
'the best way to administer a MUD'.

  Why is it always the case that those opposed to strict truthfullness
always use the case of the unthinking clod?  Brutality is not the ultimate
outcome of truth.  Brutality is the ultimate outcome of an individuals
true attitudes about others.  If the Pope tells you the truth about what
he thinks about things, you would be given insights into life.  If Charles
Manson tells you the truth about what he thinks about things, you would be
crushed by the brutality of his thoughts.

  Don't pretty up the words that you use when interacting with others.
Pretty up the thoughts so that you don't have to doctor the words.

> 	So if you're smart, you act like a politician, and tell people
> enough so they're happy, and content, and no more.  You make sure to get
> your spin team to go over your press releases, and you try to always
> appear as the benevolent, people's man that you claim to be.  Behind the
> scenes you deal with the fact that some of your decisisons could be
> unpopular, and rather than needlessly promote strife, you hide those sorts
> of facts.  Afterall, it's a stretch to claim that your players are
> rational enough to accept the fact that bad things happen. 

  This is one of those paragraphs that people will tell me that is said
tongue in cheek, yet I'm quite sure you mean it.  Patrick, you're telling
me that politicians are doing it right.  POLITICIANS?!?  Good Lord, man.
Read what you're writing.  You want admins to treat people the way that
politicians treat US?  I used the word 'detestable' in a prior post.  Now
I'll use another.  Aghast.  Lies beget lies and they just keep getting
bigger and messier.  Now we have your average Joe (average Patrick)
STARTING from the belief that subterfuge is the basis of dealing with

  I understand that this is getting rather off-list, but I have a very
difficult time letting words like these stand without comment - in a list
where I assume that these words represent the majority of the readership.

JB, trying very hard not to be the lead 'holier-than-thou' constituent

MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu

More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list