Builder Commands Another Group??
Ross Williamson
builders or are on builder muds. What I'm interested in is that
there are all sorts of muds and building commands within muds.
Yet when players get the ability to build you end up with very
disjointed databases (in most cases) wouldn't it be nice if there was
a builders hand book of sorts. Maybe another group could be created
for this purpose?
Belarion ( Diku New Zealand )
+-----------------------------------------+--------------------+
| Name : Ross Williamson |Auckland University |
| E-Mail : ro...@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz | New Zealand |
| Of course these opinions are my own and thank *!!* for that |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
Gordon Henderson
> How many people out there in MUDing land are actually
>builders or are on builder muds. What I'm interested in is that
>there are all sorts of muds and building commands within muds.
>Yet when players get the ability to build you end up with very
>disjointed databases (in most cases) wouldn't it be nice if there was
>a builders hand book of sorts. Maybe another group could be created
>for this purpose?
I am creating a MUD and one of the things I have done to stop the mindless
creation of disjointed areas is to stop online building! (There are other
reasons for it in my MUD, but that was one of them!)
Disadvantages:
* Builders have to sumbit code/data to me for inclusion. This takes up my
time!
* Builders may be less inclined to "play"
* Builders may have difficulty in testing/modifying their areas.
* The databse grows slowly. I don't want to tell the world at large about
it until I have about 1000 locations. This may take quite some time!
Advantages:
* Nothing is out of scene or character.
* I have control of what weapons are created and what value objects are.
Hmm.. Seems to be more disadvantages than advantages. Oh well. I basically
want my MUD to be a player mud, but I won't stop people submitting stuff
to me for inclusion if they want to and it will fit in with the rest
of the universe.
----
Gordon (Irn-Bru) Henderson
Damon Gallaty
Actually, there exists two mud types for building. The MUSH type is
a little more chaotic, but lends itself to a large capacity for
building. A fine example of this is TinyTIM MUSH, which is quite large
and still has room to grow! Everyone is free to pursue their own
building ideas. There are some MUSHes like PernMUSH which require that
you build within the theme of the place, but generally, players are
free to build as much as they can spend to build.
Then, there's the MUSE type. Good examples of this type are TrekMUSE and
MicroMUSE, both of which have building requirements. In a MUSE, the
theme is strictly enforced. Wizards and other appointed officials check
the areas routinely to make sure that everything fits the theme of the
MUSE. These can also get quite large, although not as much as MUSHes
do.
Both of the above typically do not require a BUILDER bit to build. One
simply starts with a certain amount of money and can build with that.
There may also be quotas on the number of objects one owns. I suggest
you check out the MUSHes and MUSEs in Scott Goehring's Mud List.
--
"Have you ever danced with the Devil by the pale moonlight?
I ask that of all my prey. I just like the sound of it..." - the Joker
************************************************************************
Damon Gallaty E-mail: dg...@cad.gatech.edu
Jim
>In article <1992Jun18.0...@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz> ro...@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Ross Williamson) writes:
>
>I am creating a MUD and one of the things I have done to stop the mindless
>creation of disjointed areas is to stop online building! (There are other
>reasons for it in my MUD, but that was one of them!)
>
>Disadvantages:
> * Builders have to sumbit code/data to me for inclusion. This takes up my
> time!
> * Builders may be less inclined to "play"
> * Builders may have difficulty in testing/modifying their areas.
> * The databse grows slowly. I don't want to tell the world at large about
> it until I have about 1000 locations. This may take quite some time!
>
>Advantages:
> * Nothing is out of scene or character.
> * I have control of what weapons are created and what value objects are.
>
Well we build on our mud, and we have a different way to handle the problem
of poorly made, out of place areas by wizards.
1) no new wizard may open an area until it has been aproved by one of the
local wiz examiners.
This insures quality, continuity, and makes it easer for us to teach
new and better programming techinques and styles.
2) ALL new wizards are trained. We feel this is a must, while they might
know how to program, may have even been a wizard some place else...
it doesn't mean they know how to work our system, or work it well.
3) Wizarding is not a right it is a privlage! Players can not earn
wizardship by gaining a 'level' in the game. If someone want to be a wizard
and they can convince the local admins that they know something about
programming, have an active imagination(needed for building new places)
the time to contribute to the system, and have resonable people skills,
we give them a shot, now they may prove to not be the kind of wizard we
are looking for, and so we wouodn't keep them.
I think this system works well. We have good wizards, each fiting into there
own nich of things, we all work together as a team, and it maintains a
friendly atmaspher for all the wizards to work in, exerpience and non-
experienced alike. we don't suffer from WIZARD WARS, and if (God forbid) one
did happen I'd stop it as fast as it started.
Well, I think I've said enough on the subject for now :) Isn't it amazing
how mud admins get so opinionated about 'how' they run there mud ;)
Man-ing - Creator of Uri -
130.43.9.3 2000
Ross Williamson
> Well we build on our mud, and we have a different way to handle the problem
>of poorly made, out of place areas by wizards.
>1) no new wizard may open an area until it has been aproved by one of the
> local wiz examiners.
^^^^^^^^ This was one of the thing I was intending on doing. As you
say ..
> This insures quality, continuity, and makes it easer for us to teach
> new and better programming techinques and styles.
^^^^^^^^ ontop of that you can also make the locations more fluid. ie
you don't jump around. Lets facce it muds are meant to be an extension of
some form of real life. And we don't jump from a lush green pasture into
a nomadic wonderland in one step do we.
>2) ALL new wizards are trained. We feel this is a must, while they might
> know how to program, may have even been a wizard some place else...
> it doesn't mean they know how to work our system, or work it well.
^^^^^^^^ This sort of idea was really the intention of my first post.
This idea occured to me when talking to some of the people who are thinking
of building on my mud. What I noticed was that the "training" was missing.
To build successfully for any mud you have to understand how it functions,
also there's the idea of conforming to some MUD structure. This is where
I have problems with MUDs like EVIL!mud ( I have played it and other than
this minor objection I thought it was great!) where all players can
do building almost in a haphazard way. I think along the lines that at the
end of the day MUDs are a sort of extension of real life and as such
having a torture chamber in the middle of a residential area is a little
<different>.
>3) Wizarding is not a right it is a privlage! Players can not earn
> wizardship by gaining a 'level' in the game. If someone want to be a wizard
> and they can convince the local admins that they know something about
> programming, have an active imagination(needed for building new places)
> the time to contribute to the system, and have resonable people skills,
> we give them a shot, now they may prove to not be the kind of wizard we
> are looking for, and so we wouodn't keep them.
^^^^^^^ This is definately a good idea for building/wizards, players must
NOT be allow wizard privledges just by playing. If this was not so what
I could see happening would be something like .....
Bob the Fighter gets to level 21 (Wizard)
The god doesn't realise and Bob goes around making lots and lots and lots......
( you get the idea ) of rooms. Now the God notices that his database is
getting a little large. And he/she looks over the players and sees that bob
is now a wizard. Ah the god say's and complains to bob about the rooms he
has created. Meanwhile some other characters wander though these new rooms
and the rooms aren't consistent and the Mud crashes.
And the long day wears on.............
So builder/wiazards should only really be appointed by the God or
ArchGod etc....
> I think this system works well. We have good wizards, each fiting into there
> own nich of things, we all work together as a team, and it maintains a
> friendly atmaspher for all the wizards to work in, exerpience and non-
> experienced alike. we don't suffer from WIZARD WARS, and if (God forbid) one
> did happen I'd stop it as fast as it started.
^^^^^^^ Team work Yay....... Just what a good Mud needs.
Belarion ( Diku , DruidMud( under construction ) New Zealand )
Scott D Anderson
In article <61...@hydra.gatech.EDU>, gt6...@prism.gatech.EDU (Damon Gallaty) writes:
> In <1992Jun18.0...@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz> ro...@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Ross Williamson) writes:
>
>
>
> Actually, there exists two mud types for building. The MUSH type is
NOT. You forgot MOO, which has in general much more coherent building
commands than MUSH and MUSE. MOO is entirely object oriented, and
extrememly easy to learn. There are two bits, programmer and wizard.
No bits set means you can create objects, describe them, etc. A
programmer bit allows you to add code to your objects to make them do
things. A wiz bit gives you everything :)
MOO works on a quota system. Every object you make costs one quota point.
In general, widespread building leads to EXTREME chaos (look into LambdaMOO
for an example... almost everyone there has a programmer bit. I believe that
they are cracking down on that, but the damage has been done.
At the GodNet MOO, we have a small core of programmers, and a theme that
we all follow. Programmers are not allowed to build non-theme items. The
result is a nicely cohesive environment.
> --
> "Have you ever danced with the Devil by the pale moonlight?
> I ask that of all my prey. I just like the sound of it..." - the Joker
> ************************************************************************
> Damon Gallaty E-mail: dg...@cad.gatech.edu
Baal@GodNet
--
CHOOSE CHEAP Scott Anderson
TWO: / \ san...@engin.umich.edu
/ \ Entropy at its finest:
FAST---------EASY "Spam, spam, spam! Wonderful SPAM!"
Bruce Woodcock
>At the GodNet MOO, we have a small core of programmers, and a theme that
>we all follow. Programmers are not allowed to build non-theme items. The
>result is a nicely cohesive environment.
Of course, you neglect to mention that any description that mentions breasts
in an alluring or attractive fashion is also considered "non-theme" and
therefore not allowed....
Bruce
--
| ster...@netcom.com | How To Play Truth or Dare - as told by Druid |
| sirb...@gnu.ai.mit.edu | Civilized Rules - Everyone asks each-other |
| bwoo...@isis.cs.du.edu | questions and eventually ends up in one big orgy |
| ster...@maria.wustl.edu | FurryMUCK Rules - They skip the questions part |
Scott D Anderson
>In article <bqA-Ka=@engin.umich.edu> san...@macavity.engin.umich.edu (Scott D Anderson) writes:
>>At the GodNet MOO, we have a small core of programmers, and a theme that
>>we all follow. Programmers are not allowed to build non-theme items. The
>>result is a nicely cohesive environment.
>
>Of course, you neglect to mention that any description that mentions breasts
>in an alluring or attractive fashion is also considered "non-theme" and
>therefore not allowed....
Damn straight. Our rules, not yours.
Couldn't leave this one alone, eh, Bruce?
>
>Bruce
>
>--
>| ster...@netcom.com | How To Play Truth or Dare - as told by Druid |
>| sirb...@gnu.ai.mit.edu | Civilized Rules - Everyone asks each-other |
>| bwoo...@isis.cs.du.edu | questions and eventually ends up in one big orgy |
>| ster...@maria.wustl.edu | FurryMUCK Rules - They skip the questions part |
Santiago Zorzopulos
>In <1992Jun18.0...@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz> ro...@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Ross Williamson) writes:
>> How many people out there in MUDing land are actually
>>builders or are on builder muds. What I'm interested in is that
>>there are all sorts of muds and building commands within muds.
>>Yet when players get the ability to build you end up with very
>>disjointed databases (in most cases) wouldn't it be nice if there was
>>a builders hand book of sorts. Maybe another group could be created
>>for this purpose?
>>Belarion ( Diku New Zealand )
>>+-----------------------------------------+--------------------+
>>| Name : Ross Williamson |Auckland University |
>>| E-Mail : ro...@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz | New Zealand |
>>| Of course these opinions are my own and thank *!!* for that |
>>+--------------------------------------------------------------+
>Actually, there exists two mud types for building. The MUSH type is
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Not true... There are lots of DikuMUDs that have online creation code (including
my own, Armageddon), that is almost as extensive as any MUSH or MUSE. Other
Diku imps have written similar code, and online creation is available on
many DikuMUDs now.
Jennifer Smith
>>[...MUSH/MUSE building merits discussed...]
>NOT. You forgot MOO, which has in general much more coherent building
>commands than MUSH and MUSE. MOO is entirely object oriented, and
>extrememly easy to learn. There are two bits, programmer and wizard.
>No bits set means you can create objects, describe them, etc. A
>programmer bit allows you to add code to your objects to make them do
>things. A wiz bit gives you everything :)
>MOO works on a quota system. Every object you make costs one quota point.
I think everyone is being just a little bit close-minded, perhaps not
intentionally. Most of the Tiny* family of muds (yes, this includes
MUSE, MUSH, and MUCK), along with MOO, UberMUD, and UnterMUD, all have
quite good building commands, in their own way. They're all fairly
easy to learn, they all allow for on-line building. As a side point,
I'm of the opinion that people should 'break out' from the one server
that they're used to from time to time, and go give other servers a
serious chance. This means all you rabid MUSE fanatics should go try a
MUCK sometime. You MOOers should go try a MUSH. The entire Tiny* crowd
as a whole should go take a poke at a LP sometime (although admittedly,
most would be more interested in the "behind the scenes" programming.)
>In general, widespread building leads to EXTREME chaos (look into LambdaMOO
>for an example... almost everyone there has a programmer bit. I believe that
>they are cracking down on that, but the damage has been done.
And what, pray tell, is wrong with extreme chaos? Seems to me Random and
myself have run several quit successful/popular muds, all of which had
a weak central theme that allowed for anything and everything to be built.
If you want cohesiveness, good logical topology, in-theme-ness, etc, you
don't go looking at your building commands. The server is not there to
solve social problems. What/how people build is a social problem. The
wizards deal with that. If you want people to stay within a certain
theme, make rules to that effect. Works all the time.
--
Jennifer Smith
j...@math.okstate.edu
On MUDs: Moira, RosaLil, Jasra, etc. | It's the terror of knowing
Here, have a clue. Take two, they're small. | What this world is about
Bruce Woodcock
>In article <fclls6p....@netcom.com> ster...@netcom.com (Bruce Woodcock) writes:
>>Of course, you neglect to mention that any description that mentions breasts
>>in an alluring or attractive fashion is also considered "non-theme" and
>>therefore not allowed....
>Damn straight. Our rules, not yours.
>Couldn't leave this one alone, eh, Bruce?
Damn straight. Your stupidity, not mine.
I am simply informing the rest of the mudding crowd that there are some very
strict policies on GodNet. It should be noted that most of the other wizards
do not feel the way Baal does, but at the moment the policy on descriptions
is very ill-defined, and I think as such unreasonable. There is simply no
reason within the logical framework of the GodNet future that someone could
not have breasts that were readily noticable... how other players may treat
such a person within that environment is certainly a concern, but not the
basis for disallowing such descriptions.
Bruce Woodcock
>And what, pray tell, is wrong with extreme chaos? Seems to me Random and
>myself have run several quit successful/popular muds, all of which had
>a weak central theme that allowed for anything and everything to be built.
Uhhh, Moira, this is not intended as a flame... honest... but I was wondering
exactly what qualifies as a quite succesful mud, other than just being popular?
Checking my list, in the past three years you've gone through: TinyHELL,
TinyHELL II, Chaos, Asylum, UnterHELL, DreamScape, and Space Madness. I
may have missed one or two, but this is roughly the sequence, yes?
It also seems, roughly, that each mud has lasted less time than the one before
it... wouldn't it be more correct to say a succesful mud is one that actually
lasts a while, say like TinyTIM or Islandia? Sure, there are reasons why
each of your muds had to be taken down, because of size or admin or other
problems, but you always seem to start a new one anyway, and to be honest you
you don't seem to be having much luck. :) I've found a lot of players want
some stability in their servers before they start building, and the prospect
of the mud dying every five months in order to be replaced by the latest and
greatest isn't exactly inspiring...
Jon Blow
> Damn straight. Your stupidity, not mine.
> I am simply informing the rest of the mudding crowd that there are some very
> strict policies on GodNet. It should be noted that most of the other wizards
> do not feel the way Baal does, but at the moment the policy on descriptions
> is very ill-defined, and I think as such unreasonable. There is simply no
> reason within the logical framework of the GodNet future that someone could
> not have breasts that were readily noticable...
I tend to think that Bruce is being really silly here, and to show you why,
I have to go off on a bit of a tangent. Here is a certain person's desc
from TimeTraveller:
| Standing at about 5'9" Lori greets you with twinkling green eyes. Her
| reddish-blonde hair falls delicately about her shoulders as she laughs
| and gives you a mischievous grin. Her cute little upturned nose and high
| cheekbones stand out as she blushes. Her body is well-proportioned, with
| nice cleavage and legs that go on for miles. She winks at you with a
| sparkle in her eye and then quickly looks away.
Whenever I read a description like this, it tends to disrupt the illusion
of mental volition that MUDs try to create. When I look at a woman, it is
rare that I stare at her cleavage and admire her legs, and on the rare
occasion that I do I end up feeling quite unproud of the action.
However, this description attempts to force me into a mindset which I find
to be stupid. Therefore, I effectively end up fighting what the MUD is
telling me about reality.
This is not conducive to good storytelling.
In fact, most MUDs make blunders like this most of the time. It is far too
often that I look at an object that tells me how I feel, or that I look at
someone who tells me what I think of them. In fact, most of my "constructive
criticism" (read: complaints) during the construction of the original Islandia
database had to do with this sort of description.
I am quite ingnorant of Baal's basis for the decision about Bruce's breasts,
but I support it fully. The GodNet is an attempt at a continuing story; the
people who run it have a vision of what it should be, and I don't think that
every random whiny user who comes along has a say in shaping that vision.
The internet is a big place. It will only get bigger. The number of MUDs
available to us will only grow. In the past, MUDs have mostly been generic
and aimless in terms of purpose; recently, we have begun to see a shift
toward the implementation of "ordered" worlds. The variety which will arise
as this continues can only be healthy.
People like Bruce feel insulted when a place exists that won't accept them
as they want to be. They want to effectively shape these into places that
will accept them, but this leads only to conformity and a greater uniformity
in terms of MUD atmosphere, which takes us back where we came from.
It's been said a million times, but I'll say it again: If you don't like
the way a particular MUD is run, don't go there. There are plenty of other
places for you to be. If everyone agrees that a MUD is being run badly,
none will attend, and it will die. I seriously doubt that GodNet will die
this way.
-Jon
Scott D Anderson
In article <BLOJO.92J...@sting.berkeley>, bl...@sting.berkeley (Jon Blow) writes:
> Bruce writes:
>
> > Damn straight. Your stupidity, not mine.
>
> > I am simply informing the rest of the mudding crowd that there are some very
> > strict policies on GodNet. It should be noted that most of the other wizards
The discussion was about builder commands, not your particular beef
with our genre decisions... *I* was talking about building commands,
and how to enforce a genre. You inserted a barb about *what* was
considered genre on one particular MUD... hardly a general
set of statements like the rest of the thread.
> > do not feel the way Baal does, but at the moment the policy on descriptions
where do you get this information?
> > is very ill-defined, and I think as such unreasonable. There is simply no
> > reason within the logical framework of the GodNet future that someone could
> > not have breasts that were readily noticable...
readily noticible is not 'full breasts straining against the fabric'...
The description in question read like a trashy romance novel. It was
a) demeaning to women
b) non-genre in that:
I) these people in the godnet are fighting for their lives. they don't
have time for such friviolities as cheap sexual thrills
II) the GodNet is not a physical place, and as such it is not the place
to show off fleshy concerns
REGARDLESS of my reasons, the decision stood, as it was MY call, not
a players... Bruce kept insisting that he had a say in what WE thought
was genre... which is not true at all. The GodNet IS a fascist
dictatorship. One of the worst.
>
> I tend to think that Bruce is being really silly here, and to show you why,
> I have to go off on a bit of a tangent. Here is a certain person's desc
> from TimeTraveller:
>
> | Standing at about 5'9" Lori greets you with twinkling green eyes. Her
> | reddish-blonde hair falls delicately about her shoulders as she laughs
> | and gives you a mischievous grin. Her cute little upturned nose and high
> | cheekbones stand out as she blushes. Her body is well-proportioned, with
> | nice cleavage and legs that go on for miles. She winks at you with a
> | sparkle in her eye and then quickly looks away.
>
> Whenever I read a description like this, it tends to disrupt the illusion
> of mental volition that MUDs try to create. When I look at a woman, it is
> rare that I stare at her cleavage and admire her legs, and on the rare
> occasion that I do I end up feeling quite unproud of the action.
> However, this description attempts to force me into a mindset which I find
> to be stupid. Therefore, I effectively end up fighting what the MUD is
> telling me about reality.
>
> This is not conducive to good storytelling.
>
> In fact, most MUDs make blunders like this most of the time. It is far too
> often that I look at an object that tells me how I feel, or that I look at
> someone who tells me what I think of them. In fact, most of my "constructive
> criticism" (read: complaints) during the construction of the original Islandia
> database had to do with this sort of description.
nicely put.
>
> I am quite ingnorant of Baal's basis for the decision about Bruce's breasts,
> but I support it fully. The GodNet is an attempt at a continuing story; the
> people who run it have a vision of what it should be, and I don't think that
> every random whiny user who comes along has a say in shaping that vision.
And I actively oppose such whining whenever it occurs. I have found that
the people who have had complaints have been those that we can readily
do without. We have some VERY fine role players there now, NONE of whom
have had any problems with our theme...
[...]
>
> People like Bruce feel insulted when a place exists that won't accept them
> as they want to be. They want to effectively shape these into places that
> will accept them, but this leads only to conformity and a greater uniformity
> in terms of MUD atmosphere, which takes us back where we came from.
*nod* exactly. The GodNet is a place for people who wish to play GodNet
characters, not for those who wish to bring in other characters from
other places and play them in yet another mud... In fact, I have already
had to talk to two separate 'Terminator' individuals this week :P
>
> It's been said a million times, but I'll say it again: If you don't like
> the way a particular MUD is run, don't go there. There are plenty of other
> places for you to be. If everyone agrees that a MUD is being run badly,
> none will attend, and it will die. I seriously doubt that GodNet will die
> this way.
>
> -Jon
Baal@GodNet
Clay Luther
>*nod* exactly. The GodNet is a place for people who wish to play GodNet
>characters, not for those who wish to bring in other characters from
>other places and play them in yet another mud... In fact, I have already
>had to talk to two separate 'Terminator' individuals this week :P
Since then, we've had yet-another-terminator-wheenie :).
T1000, Description: Shiny, liquid metal.
Frankly, if I had a choice between either "Shiny, liquid metal" or Bruce's
blouse popping tits, I'd have to take Bruce's tits simply because they at
least showed some effort (however inappropriate).
Luckily, I run a fascist mud and I don't have to accept either. Thank god.
Of course, Bruce is welcomed anytime he can overcome his tits-n-ass-n-
pouty-lips and come up with a real description.
Just remember, folx, the GodNet wizards are busy and have very little time for
whiners. Also, remember, the GodNet *IS* unfair. It is not a evenly balanced
game. It is designed to be unfair, biased, and just fucking
difficult. Some people find these obstacles challenging, and those are the
people we want to play.
Never accuse a GodNet wizard of being unfair because you will be right :).
Just keep in mind that the *world* the GodNet portrays is at war, and that
the GodNet is an *evil* place, when you get right down to it. The role-playing
events in the GodNet are designed to challenge. Wizards (out of their
role-playing capacities) will be fair to players abused by an error or
circumstance, if the situation merits. After all, GodNet wizards, with one
exception, are not perfect and make mistakes and will gladly fix them.
Did I ramble, or what???
Malraux@GodNet
--
Clay W. Luther clu...@morticia.cnns.unt.edu
Macintosh/Unix Programmer for Vortech Data, Inc.
Virtual System Consultant for the UNT Center for Network Neuroscience
(214) 994-1377
Brennan Underwood
>>>Of course, you neglect to mention that any description that mentions breasts
>>>in an alluring or attractive fashion is also considered "non-theme" and
>>>therefore not allowed....
Then why the hell would you want to play?
(i'm just KIDDING)
(sort of)
--
evi...@vesta.unm.edu OR uunet.uu.net!nyx.cs.du.edu!chaos.cs.brandeis.edu!
AKBAR! =IC:D~ c , cs.utexas.edu!cornell.edu!rutgers.edu!berkeley.edu!
JEFF! =IC:D~ --v#`' intel.com!ucdavis.edu!arizona.edu!carina.unm.edu!
<`\ leo!atlas!ariel!pictor!lacerta!triton!vesta!evilted
Chris
Bruce is yet again sticking his nose into another Muds policies? Geez...
What is he? A Net-Narc? Let people run thier Muds as they see fit and if you
don't like it....Go elsewhere.
I guess I should have quoted a bit but I didn't want to get my hands slimy
while editting the drivel.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher R. Boggs, InterNet at gt9...@prism.gatech.edu,
"If you can't baffle them with bull, dazzle them with dexterity"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sean Christopher Simmons
> In article <bqA-Ka=@engin.umich.edu> san...@macavity.engin.umich.edu (Scott D \
> Anderson) writes:
> >At the GodNet MOO, we have a small core of programmers, and a theme that
> >we all follow. Programmers are not allowed to build non-theme items. The
> >result is a nicely cohesive environment.
>
> Of course, you neglect to mention that any description that mentions breasts
> in an alluring or attractive fashion is also considered "non-theme" and
> therefore not allowed....
And you consider descriptions of alluring breasts to be appropriate
everywhere?
Sample:
You see a Cathedral made of marble with large stain-glassed windows.
Protruding from the front are two breasts clad in a skin-tight bikini
top, you feel a wetness in you pants.
Come on, either get with the program and purchase a clue, or stay in
your adolescent wet dreams for the rest of your life, but don't start
preaching to me as to what is appropriate. And with the theme that
the GodNet supports, alluring breasts are not appropriate. If you
want alluring breasts, try SexMUSH or watch a porno. Not all of life
revolves around sex and mudding, try to seperate the two and get a
life, maybe even a real girlfriend (one that isn't just a description
in plain-text).
Joe
Balthazar@GodNet
Patrick Hayes
And with the theme that
the GodNet supports, alluring breasts are not appropriate.
I can understand them not being appropriate in the Exchange, but it seems
that breasts would be quite apropos in Hell. He could have been
damned for licentiousness or something.
PCH
Russ Random Smith
: Uhhh, Moira, this is not intended as a flame... honest... but I was wondering
: exactly what qualifies as a quite succesful mud, other than just being popular?
: Checking my list, in the past three years you've gone through: TinyHELL,
: TinyHELL II, Chaos, Asylum, UnterHELL, DreamScape, and Space Madness. I
: may have missed one or two, but this is roughly the sequence, yes?
UnterHELL should be disregarded as a totally failed experiment. My conversion
program sucked wet farts from dead pigeons. It happens.
Otherwise, it's a fair summary.
: It also seems, roughly, that each mud has lasted less time than the one before
: it...
Roughly, you're wrong. Each one lasted longer, in point of fact.
: wouldn't it be more correct to say a succesful mud is one that actually
: lasts a while, say like TinyTIM or Islandia?
I won't argue Islandia. As far as TIM...I dunno. How many people play TIM
to this day? And is it a 'success' to stagnate on code to preserve what was
once considered cutting edge building, but now...? (Not to pick on TIM. This
is my observation in several cases.)
: Sure, there are reasons why
: each of your muds had to be taken down, because of size or admin or other
: problems, but you always seem to start a new one anyway, and to be honest you
: you don't seem to be having much luck. :)
Oh? You misinterpret badly.
: I've found a lot of players want
: some stability in their servers before they start building, and the prospect
: of the mud dying every five months in order to be replaced by the latest and
: greatest isn't exactly inspiring...
To each their own. We could ALL think that the mud WE play is the Only One In
The World, I guess, but I have no intention of promoting it. If the price is
having to learn (a) offline building (a useful thing) and (b) to CONTINUE to
create, instead of just standing and going 'look, isn't the OU campus on
TinyMUD just great'...well, so be it.
Pushing the limit isn't easy. From always running the newest TinyMUD version..
some so new as to not be named...to introducing a larger populace to TinyMUCK,
and indeed keeping on the front edge of that...to an experiment with updated
building assistance on a more compact setup, to, hell, mjr's way-out advances,
and yeah, to MUSH 2.0, which I think is worth looking at, or we wouldn't be
running it...each time, we've decided to try something new. Sometimes people
like what they see. Sometimes they don't quite as much. TinyHELL II was the
introduction of registration to TinyMUDs, and frankly, it wasn't that popular.
TinyHELL I had the first appearances of HAVEN and whispering, and those went
over better.
But I'm straying a bit.
I do not have _bad_luck_. I simply dislike stagnating. There are plenty of
people out there content to run yesterday's code for three years; I need not
participate. The fact that each time, we have pushed the interval a little
longer is attributable probably to the fact that new MU* systems don't quite
pop up as quick as they used to.
But your original question is why do we DARE to call ourselves successful?
After 2 and a half years of, by your reckoning, horrible abuse at our hands,
we have a core of followers, a lot of name recognition, and a list of
innovations to the systems that goes on and on. And most importantly, we're
happy with how it's gone. Ergo, we've succeeded.
Lecture over.
--
Russ "Random" Smith
+----===Comedy! Sudden, violent comedy!===-------...@okstate.edu--------+
| Godfather of the Random Gang; Diplomat of the Brotherhood of Evil MUDders |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Happiness and Light
Woodcock) writes:
|Uhhh, Moira, this is not intended as a flame... honest... but [...]
Well, this IS intended as a flame. Just thought you'd like to know.
|It also seems, roughly, that each mud has lasted less time than the
|one before it... wouldn't it be more correct to say a succesful mud
|is one that actually lasts a while, say like TinyTIM or Islandia?
Oh, Islandia, which lasted around 8 months? And was continuing on
life support the last 3 months or so? Seems that some of us forget
'Daytime Islandia', eh? If length of existance is a good criterion,
what about, say, Mbongo, which lasted a lot longer? Even (EVIL!)Mud
has been around for over a year now, quite a bit longer than Islandia.
(Obligatory disclaimer for pedants: I don't count Islandia in its
Unter reincarnation, because nobody goes there.)
|Sure, there are reasons why each of your muds had to be taken down,
|because of size or admin or other problems, but you always seem to
|start a new one anyway, and to be honest you you don't seem to be
|having much luck. :) I've found a lot of players want some stability
|in their servers before they start building, and the prospect of the
|mud dying every five months in order to be replaced by the latest and
|greatest isn't exactly inspiring...
As opposed to a place like TinyTIM, which is running this ancient and
decrepid version of MUSH, a version closer to TinyMUD 1.3 than to Mush
2.0. Besides, you can build all you want, but if the mud becomes a
slum like TinyMUD Classic and Islandia did in their late days, it's
better off that the mud just go down.
Finrod's Mud Ranking Scheme: take the WHO list for a given mud, take
the number of days each person on there has been mudding, and add.
The mud with the highest average score wins.
Finrod, borrowing one of {Jasper, Tourmaline}'s accts
Bruce Woodcock
>ster...@netcom.com (Bruce Woodcock) writes:
>:Checking my list, in the past three years you've gone through: TinyHELL,
>:TinyHELL II, Chaos, Asylum, UnterHELL, DreamScape, and Space Madness. I
>:may have missed one or two, but this is roughly the sequence, yes?
>UnterHELL should be disregarded as a totally failed experiment. My conversion
>program sucked wet farts from dead pigeons. It happens.
>Otherwise, it's a fair summary.
>:It also seems, roughly, that each mud has lasted less time than the one before
>:it...
>Roughly, you're wrong. Each one lasted longer, in point of fact.
Could you support this with dates? No fudging, please... but it sure seemed
like they lasted shorter periods of time... and shorter than most of the
muds around them at the time. I wouldn't be surprised if there are a couple
of exceptions to the trend, or even if they all lasted roughly the same
time period, but I would be quite surprised to learn that each one lasted
longer than the previous. Please, Russ, inform me.
>: wouldn't it be more correct to say a succesful mud is one that actually
>
>I won't argue Islandia. As far as TIM...I dunno. How many people play TIM
>to this day? And is it a 'success' to stagnate on code to preserve what was
>once considered cutting edge building, but now...? (Not to pick on TIM. This
>is my observation in several cases.)
I think TIM averages more players than SM, though I couldn't tell you for sure.
It's not usccess to stagnate, no, but it IS success (within the context of
Moira's orginal article) to HAVE good building, both past and current...
as someone pointed out to me, both Asylum and DreamScape were noted for their
LACK of building.
>: I've found a lot of players want
>: some stability in their servers before they start building, and the prospect
>: of the mud dying every five months in order to be replaced by the latest and
>: greatest isn't exactly inspiring...
>To each their own. We could ALL think that the mud WE play is the Only One In
>The World, I guess, but I have no intention of promoting it. If the price is
>having to learn (a) offline building (a useful thing) and (b) to CONTINUE to
>create, instead of just standing and going 'look, isn't the OU campus on
>TinyMUD just great'...well, so be it.
I don't see this as a war of mud code, but simply poiting that that in order
to have good building, the mud needs to stick around for more than a few
months, not only to have a large base to work from, but also to give players
an incentive for their work, knowing that it will stick around and be used,
rather than be lost in the next server change.
>Pushing the limit isn't easy. From always running the newest TinyMUD version..
>some so new as to not be named...to introducing a larger populace to TinyMUCK,
>and indeed keeping on the front edge of that...to an experiment with updated
>building assistance on a more compact setup, to, hell, mjr's way-out advances,
>and yeah, to MUSH 2.0, which I think is worth looking at, or we wouldn't be
>running it...each time, we've decided to try something new. Sometimes people
>like what they see. Sometimes they don't quite as much. TinyHELL II was the
>introduction of registration to TinyMUDs, and frankly, it wasn't that popular.
>TinyHELL I had the first appearances of HAVEN and whispering, and those went
>over better.
I will certainly admit you've always been trying to push the envelope, and I'm
not faulting you for that. Most of the innovations have been quite good. But
I think it's rather objective that in doing so your muds don't last very long
camparitively, and I think therefore do not lend themselves to being examples
of good building muds. How one gauges the overall success of a mud is very
subjective, but in terms of building and longevity, I think there are better
examples.
>But your original question is why do we DARE to call ourselves successful?
>After 2 and a half years of, by your reckoning, horrible abuse at our hands,
>we have a core of followers, a lot of name recognition, and a list of
>innovations to the systems that goes on and on. And most importantly, we're
>happy with how it's gone. Ergo, we've succeeded.
My original question was not how you DARE to call yourselves successful, but
rather, dare to say you're succesful on the building front, because I just
don't think you are. If someone wanted to socialize with the crowd of
followers that generally hangs on your muds, or wanted to play with some of
the newer systems available, I might indeed recommend they go to you. But
if they are looking for a good place to build, then I'd probably recommend
someplace else where it is more likely to survive more than a few months,
and/or more likely to be frequented than the out-of-the-way place on an
ordinary chat mud.
Bruce Woodcock
>In article <86llqf_....@netcom.com> ster...@netcom.com (Bruce
> Woodcock) writes:
>|It also seems, roughly, that each mud has lasted less time than the
>|one before it... wouldn't it be more correct to say a succesful mud
>|is one that actually lasts a while, say like TinyTIM or Islandia?
>Oh, Islandia, which lasted around 8 months? And was continuing on
>life support the last 3 months or so? Seems that some of us forget
>'Daytime Islandia', eh? If length of existance is a good criterion,
>what about, say, Mbongo, which lasted a lot longer? Even (EVIL!)Mud
>has been around for over a year now, quite a bit longer than Islandia.
Did Islandia only last 8 months? I remember starting in March, and the db
was already over 10k, and I know it was still running on Chris' machine in
November. I think it lasted closer to a year. In any case, other muds
may have lasted longer... I did not deny that. I don't think many Random &
Moira muds have, though, which was my point.
>(Obligatory disclaimer for pedants: I don't count Islandia in its
>Unter reincarnation, because nobody goes there.)
Well, people do go there, but I wasn't counting it either.
>|Sure, there are reasons why each of your muds had to be taken down,
>|because of size or admin or other problems, but you always seem to
>|start a new one anyway, and to be honest you you don't seem to be
>|having much luck. :) I've found a lot of players want some stability
>|in their servers before they start building, and the prospect of the
>|mud dying every five months in order to be replaced by the latest and
>|greatest isn't exactly inspiring...
>As opposed to a place like TinyTIM, which is running this ancient and
>decrepid version of MUSH, a version closer to TinyMUD 1.3 than to Mush
>2.0. Besides, you can build all you want, but if the mud becomes a
>slum like TinyMUD Classic and Islandia did in their late days, it's
>better off that the mud just go down.
From a social point of view, yes... this is what we mean by muds becoming
a "slum" in the social sense. However, from a builder's point of view, I
would say no, because they want their building to last for a bit and be
seen by many... hard to do if the mud only lasts 5 months. Several muds
have managed to last a long time (over a year) without becoming slums, too,
and so I might recommend those to both social and building players.
>Finrod's Mud Ranking Scheme: take the WHO list for a given mud, take
>the number of days each person on there has been mudding, and add.
>The mud with the highest average score wins.
An interesting scheme for social success, yes... not to start a mud war
here, but I think if you used it, TimeTraveller, TinyTIM, FurryMUCK,
and PernMUSH would all outperform SpaceMadness for the most part...
Russ Random Smith
: My original question was not how you DARE to call yourselves successful, but
: rather, dare to say you're succesful on the building front, because I just
: don't think you are. If someone wanted to socialize with the crowd of
: followers that generally hangs on your muds, or wanted to play with some of
: the newer systems available, I might indeed recommend they go to you. But
: if they are looking for a good place to build, then I'd probably recommend
: someplace else where it is more likely to survive more than a few months,
: and/or more likely to be frequented than the out-of-the-way place on an
: ordinary chat mud.
I leave you at the mercy of the people busting their butts building on
Space Madness, many of which have never touched one of our muds before.
Frankly, I hope they take your spleen.
Gym Z. Quirk
Well as far as PernMUSH is concerned, the proportion of newbies to
dinos seems to be growing daily. ;-)
>| ster...@netcom.com | How To Play Truth or Dare - as told by Druid |
>| sirb...@gnu.ai.mit.edu | Civilized Rules - Everyone asks each-other |
>| bwoo...@isis.cs.du.edu | questions and eventually ends up in one big orgy |
>| ster...@maria.wustl.edu | FurryMUCK Rules - They skip the questions part |
--
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk (Known to some as Taki Kogoma) tko...@triton.unm.edu
I'll get a life when someone demonstrates that it would be superior to
what I have now...
Russ Random Smith
:
: An interesting scheme for social success, yes... not to start a mud war
: here, but I think if you used it, TimeTraveller, TinyTIM, FurryMUCK,
: and PernMUSH would all outperform SpaceMadness for the most part...
Hey, swell. We can compare places I wizard on.
Say, Bruce, do you have a point here, except that you don't like the folk
on S.M. and ergo felt the urge to blather some more when you saw Moira
post?
Many people like Aslyum. Ergo, it was successful. That's it. There is no
better qualifier, because I'm not doing this for artistic value.
jason downs
>Space Madness, many of which have never touched one of our muds before.
an example of "MUSH syndrome" in action.
any MUSH, even an utterly shitty one, will have more building than any
other type of server, running a mud of comparable quality. it really makes
one wonder...
--
\-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-/
\ - jason downs - /\ - dow...@cs.pdx.edu - /
/ zeppelin/amiga release 2/insane guy \/ led/vasudeva/lord of fear of death \
/-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-\
Bruce Woodcock
>I leave you at the mercy of the people busting their butts building on
>Space Madness, many of which have never touched one of our muds before.
>Frankly, I hope they take your spleen.
At their mercy? What do they have to do with it?
Russ, Russ... I didn't say your mud had no builders... I said I wouldn't
recommend it as a place to build, based on past experience with your muds.
I'll tell you what... if the place is still running in a year, I'll admit
I was wrong... though I think I had good basis for my belief.
You didn't answer any of my questions about the source of my belief...
specifically, you didn't give a record of how long each of your muds lasted.
I said in general they lasted shorter amounts of time, you said each one
lasted longer than the one before. I am very curious now...
Bruce Woodcock
>Well as far as PernMUSH is concerned, the proportion of newbies to
>dinos seems to be growing daily. ;-)
But there are a LOT of them who play... with mudding only 2-3 years old, even
a mud full of 20 or so die-hard dinos would be even-matched with 60 or so
relative newcomers... (under Finrod's scheme.)
Bruce
--
Bruce Woodcock
>: An interesting scheme for social success, yes... not to start a mud war
>: here, but I think if you used it, TimeTraveller, TinyTIM, FurryMUCK,
>: and PernMUSH would all outperform SpaceMadness for the most part...
>on S.M. and ergo felt the urge to blather some more when you saw Moira
>post?
Yes, I do. Do YOU have a point here, except that you are currently taking
a break from beating your wife and hence had some spare time to post more
drivel?
Now, see where name-calling gets us? Not very far. Let's be polite, and
stop taking things so personally, hmm?
My point was, under Finrod's proposed scheme, Space Madness still wouldn't
be doing so hot compared to other muds. I'm not saying I agree with the
scheme, or that I agree with its results... I think your muds have been
very succesful on the social scene, because it pleased most of the people
who were involved.
>Many people like Aslyum. Ergo, it was successful. That's it. There is no
>better qualifier, because I'm not doing this for artistic value.
I couldn't agree more. But from an objective building standpoint, I think
there are better building muds, and from Finrod's proposed scheme, you're
not that succesful socially either. That's all I said... stop taking things
so personally.
I mean, Classic ran under my control for 2 months or so, and so was not
very succesful from a longevity standpoint. It DID have more users on
than the other muds round at the time, but not by wide margins. It did
not accomplish the goal of a full clean-up of the db, and it was an
excrutiatingly painful example of how NOT to wizard by committee, and who
you should trust and who you shouldn't. Now, I do think it was succesful
for it's time... most of the wizards and players had a good time, and I
learned a lot about how to be a more effective administrator by learning
from my mistakes. But I'm open about many of its flaws, and I'm not going
to get hostile when someone gives some (legitimate) criticisms. Especially
subjective ones such as on J. Random Poster's scale, my mud scored only 3
PKPS (Player Killings Per Second), while Asylum had 150.
Russ Smith
->In article <1992Jun22....@math.okstate.edu> ru...@math.okstate.edu (Russ "Random" Smith) writes:
->Russ, Russ... I didn't say your mud had no builders... I said I wouldn't
->recommend it as a place to build, based on past experience with your muds.
->I'll tell you what... if the place is still running in a year, I'll admit
->I was wrong... though I think I had good basis for my belief.
I never said I accepted your criteria. I still don't. I believe that a mud
can get along fine without your approval, and indeed, your dislike of Space
Madness is often perceived as a virtue.
But I digress.
->You didn't answer any of my questions about the source of my belief...
->specifically, you didn't give a record of how long each of your muds lasted.
->I said in general they lasted shorter amounts of time, you said each one
->lasted longer than the one before. I am very curious now...
->
Okay, if you WANT me to prove you wrong, fine.
TinyHELL I opened 12/89 (it was up as early as 10/89), closed 4/90.
TinyHELL II was a trimmed database from TinyHELL I, same software, added
registration, so I suspect it might be considered one and the same. Opened 4/90
and closed 6/90, due to lack of interest in registration and enforced
topology. (Those of us who forget the lessons of history are doomed to repeat
it, take note.)
Chaos opened 6/90 as a display of a programmable MUD: MUCK 2.0. It went to
2.1, and finally closed due to administrative pressure and people giving me
a freaking headache in general in 11/90.
Asylum opened 1/91 (TinyMUCK 1.2, smalled system, much more favorable to
admins), and ran until UnterMUD was ready, since I had promised I would help
mjr introduce his new software to the world. That happened in 8/91...
Brigadoon Day. UnterHELL went up for a few days, then we discovered that my
handy dandy converter sucked mud, so we decided to start an UnterMUD from
scratch instead...
DreamScape opened 8/91, closed 5/92 since I was convinced that for several
reasons UnterMUD wasn't working out, and that TinyMUSH 2.x would be a boon,
and frankly DreamScape seemed kind of aimless.
Space Madness has been up since.
TinyHELL I: 4 months
TinyHELL II: 2 months
Chaos: 5 months
Asylum: 7 months
DreamScape: 9 months
Hell, Bruce, I'd call that a trend towards longer running, wouldn't you?
Be a dear and let the facts get in your way, just this once.
Russ Smith
->a mud full of 20 or so die-hard dinos would be even-matched with 60 or so
->relative newcomers... (under Finrod's scheme.)
->
->Bruce
Clearly you missed the line in Finrod's post which said 'average'. Back to
school.
Ken Arromdee
>->a mud full of 20 or so die-hard dinos would be even-matched with 60 or so
>->relative newcomers... (under Finrod's scheme.)
>school.
>>Finrod's Mud Ranking Scheme: take the WHO list for a given mud, take
>>the number of days each person on there has been mudding, and add.
>>The mud with the highest average score wins.
One doesn't get an average-per-person by adding the number of days without
dividing (the algorithm indicated above). A more reasonable interpretation
of "average score" would be to take the number which is average for the mud,
not the average per person.
Average-per-person would mean that the best mud is a one-person mud where the
single user is an old-timer. It would also mean that adding people is
probably going to lower the score: a mud with 10 old-timers and one newbie is
"worse" than one with just the 10 old-timers.
--
"When you whine like a stuck pig, or flame like a blowtorch, then
people get angry. If you want to ACCOMPLISH something, p'raps you should
learn some tact."
-- Random, on rec.games.mud
Ken Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
INTERNET: arro...@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)
jim miller
ster...@netcom.com (Bruce Woodcock) writes:
>In article <5ap...@lynx.unm.edu> tko...@triton.unm.edu (Gym Z. Quirk) writes:
>>Well as far as PernMUSH is concerned, the proportion of newbies to
>>dinos seems to be growing daily. ;-)
>
>But there are a LOT of them who play... with mudding only 2-3 years old, even
>a mud full of 20 or so die-hard dinos would be even-matched with 60 or so
>relative newcomers... (under Finrod's scheme.)
I wonder why Finrod thinks that a dino's presence on a mud contributes
more to it's successfulness than a newcomer, and that therefore dinos
should be weighted more? Or is it that he thinks dinos naturally
gravitate toward successful muds?
I rather think that the percentage of dinos on the mud should be factored
in. The higher the percentage, the less successful the mud -- obviously
if there's a high % of the same people that have been hanging around
together forever, that indicates only recidivism and a dogged stubbornness
to leave comfortable surroundings. A dynamic mud like TimeTraveller,
which has passed through many periods of popularity with different
groups of people, maintains a middling dino population but isn't stuck
to itself in too many places, would be more successful in my reckoning.
S = average WHO length/average % dinos
Ken Arromdee
> OBTW, some folks have asked why I call myself a Random Fan, so I'll
>answer that quickly. It's the same answer for chup, and a few of the
>other dino's that I've heard maligned in the past. It seems that for
>most of the time that I've been MU*'ing, it's been 'hip' to knock
>newbies, put them down, and generally make them feel like shit. It's
>a classic joke...
It's also one of the things the Random Gang gets sneered at for. Unless you're
trying to say that they do it _less_ than the "average" mudder-who's-been-
around-a-while, something which I rather doubt.
Now, it _is_ true that their reputation is somewhat exaggerated, and not
everyone who plays on a Random and Moira run mud acts like Random and Moira
anyway. (I have to say that, since under many definitions I would myself be
considered a member of the Random Gang.) But there is some kernel of truth
there, too.
> It's a bad way to do things, and it's self-repeating. Thankfully, I
>was given some help Way Back When by various dino's, including Random,
>Moira, chupchup[s], and (if I remember the name correctly) fuzzy. It's
>interesting for me to wonder if the people who attack the 'Random Gang'
>were ever as helpful as the Random Gang were back then...
Actually, yes.
--
"Am I still reading rec.games.mud? In MY day, flames were much better than
that. We didn't HAVE those nansie-pansie four letter words to swing around,
we dug up hard FACTS when we flamed, AND WE LIKED IT!"
-- Doran, on rec.games.mud
Morgan Schweers
Just to stick my neck into the middle of a obviously long-running battle
here, I'd like to comment on something Random said a while back. It's not
exact, but "learning offline building is a useful thing."
I'm aware of only *ONE* MU* code that explicitly HELPS you do offline
building. It's a modification of MUCK called MUCK2.something-or-other FB
(for Fuzzball, I believe). It has 'name registration' which makes it easier
to refer to things you're creating by name, as opposed to whatever number
the server assigns to it. Moreover, it has a 'deconstruct' capability
which will dump to your connect all the commands that would be necessary to
reconstruct your building area on another system. (I think it would be a
'bad idea' to deconstruct as Wizard, however, since I think it relies on
what you can access... *grin*)
I'd just like to make a plea for people to start including similar
code or ideas in their MU*'s in the future. (Heck, it'd be Way Cool(tm) if
they were even, like, COMPATIBLE, y'know? *sarcastic grin*) Remember,
a user who builds a large area on your code would often *LIKE* to be able to
port it to another system. And if a system goes down, it is often a REAL
pain to have to re-build everything. I'd guess that most MU* coders would
prefer to leave things like that up to the player, and make them use strange
or complicated clients to do everything, but a little concern for the players
would probably go a long way!
OBTW, some folks have asked why I call myself a Random Fan, so I'll
answer that quickly. It's the same answer for chup, and a few of the
other dino's that I've heard maligned in the past. It seems that for
most of the time that I've been MU*'ing, it's been 'hip' to knock
newbies, put them down, and generally make them feel like shit. It's
a classic joke... "So this newbie logs into a MU* for the first time.
As soon as he steps out of the starting area, some character with a
"You see nothing special" for a description kill =100's him. As soon as
he steps out again, the guy's gone. Another newbie logs in behind him, and
steps in. The first newbie's really pissed, so he kills the new guy, then
walks away."
It's a bad way to do things, and it's self-repeating. Thankfully, I
was given some help Way Back When by various dino's, including Random,
Moira, chupchup[s], and (if I remember the name correctly) fuzzy. It's
interesting for me to wonder if the people who attack the 'Random Gang'
were ever as helpful as the Random Gang were back then...
Your friendly quiet flame-like-thought for the day, from
-- Morgan Schweers
Edwin Huang
>>answer that quickly. It's the same answer for chup, and a few of the
>>other dino's that I've heard maligned in the past. It seems that for
>>most of the time that I've been MU*'ing, it's been 'hip' to knock
>>newbies, put them down, and generally make them feel like shit. It's
>>a classic joke...
>It's also one of the things the Random Gang gets sneered at for.
Unless >you're
>trying to say that they do it _less_ than the "average" mudder-who's-been-
>around-a-while, something which I rather doubt.
Speaking as an alleged member of the Random Gang, I want to clear
something up. I do not sneer at you because you are a newbie. I sneer at
you because you are an idiot. I do not persecute people because they
are newer than I am because, hell, almost everyone is newer than I am,
but in the years that past I have admittly developed little tolerance
for stupid people and stupid actions.
If there is a consistant theme to R&M muds, it is: "Learn to Deal".
Random and Moira are with one exception usually the only wizards on the
MUD, ever. That means if you expect the Islandian school of wizardry,
where the wizards did everything for you on their hands and knees with
the exception of giving you a blowjob- Forget it. You lose. Cope. People
rarely have a problem that only a wizard can solve, yet they go crying
to one anyways. Learn to solve your own problems. We'll even help. But
if you demand attention or demand to be helped as if it is some
God-given right, no. Sorry. Bye.
This means that the players who play R&MMUDs are usually better able to
take care of themselves. If a tinyjerk comes on, he is quicklly driven
away, by the players, not the wizards. Players have a lot of say of what
is allowed and what is not. Is that good? You decide.
This attitude of coping contributes largely to the idea that there is a
conspiracy or an elite group of people who want to dominate and crush
any complaints people have with MUDs on r.g.m. EVIL! The Random Gang,
The Hellfire Club. Actually it's the idea that whining to r.g.m. is
comprable to crying to mommy. "waaaaah, he.. that bad man, wouldn't let
my breasts strain against my shirt tightly with my nipples poking out
alluringly... waaah.. *sniff* mommy? Do something? He shouldn't do
that." and then told that he or she should stop, saying, "waah, you all
hate me! You're all in on this together and just are scared of what I am
saying!"
>Now, it _is_ true that their reputation is somewhat exaggerated, and not
>everyone who plays on a Random and Moira run mud acts like Random and Moira
>anyway. (I have to say that, since under many definitions I would myself be
>considered a member of the Random Gang.) But there is some kernel of truth
>there, too.
Everyone on R&M Muds, act like R&M? Well I suppose everyone on Furry for
the post part act Furry and everyone on a PernMUSh act Pern-like.
Everyone on TinyTIM acts like TinyTimsters, Everyone on TrekMUSE act
like trekkies. Well not everyone, but there is some kernal of truth
there.
>> It's a bad way to do things, and it's self-repeating. Thankfully, I
>>was given some help Way Back When by various dino's, including Random,
>>Moira, chupchup[s], and (if I remember the name correctly) fuzzy. It's
>>interesting for me to wonder if the people who attack the 'Random Gang'
>>were ever as helpful as the Random Gang were back then...
>Actually, yes.
Well let's go on to see what contributions members of the "Random Gang"
have made. Shall we?
MUCK, MOO, UnterMUD, UberMUD, TinyTalk, TinyFugue, TinyWar, (versions
of) TinyMUD, VaporTalk, TCLTT, mud.el (original), COOL, TinyMUSH 2.0 db
layer, TeenyMUD, Antibuilder to name a few.
Is that, or was that helpful?
Actually, yes.
Ken Arromdee
>If there is a consistant theme to R&M muds, it is: "Learn to Deal".
>Random and Moira are with one exception usually the only wizards on the
>MUD, ever. That means if you expect the Islandian school of wizardry,
>where the wizards did everything for you on their hands and knees with
>the exception of giving you a blowjob- Forget it. You lose. Cope. People
>rarely have a problem that only a wizard can solve, yet they go crying
>to one anyways. Learn to solve your own problems. We'll even help. But
>if you demand attention or demand to be helped as if it is some
>God-given right, no. Sorry. Bye.
>
>This means that the players who play R&MMUDs are usually better able to
>take care of themselves. If a tinyjerk comes on, he is quicklly driven
>away, by the players, not the wizards. Players have a lot of say of what
>is allowed and what is not. Is that good? You decide.
Actually, I agree with you here.
>This attitude of coping contributes largely to the idea that there is a
>conspiracy or an elite group of people who want to dominate and crush
>any complaints people have with MUDs on r.g.m. EVIL! The Random Gang,
>The Hellfire Club. Actually it's the idea that whining to r.g.m. is
>comprable to crying to mommy. "waaaaah, he.. that bad man, wouldn't let
>my breasts strain against my shirt tightly with my nipples poking out
>alluringly... waaah.. *sniff* mommy? Do something? He shouldn't do
>that."
It seems to me that the breast pseudo-flamewar was more a case of "I'm warning
other potential players" than "I'm whining until the gods change something".
If you don't like it, don't go there; but you can still tell others that they
might not want to go there either. There didn't happen to be anyone who
appreciated the warning and said so, but it's hard to tell such things in
advance.
>Everyone on R&M Muds, act like R&M? Well I suppose everyone on Furry for
>the post part act Furry and everyone on a PernMUSh act Pern-like.
>Everyone on TinyTIM acts like TinyTimsters, Everyone on TrekMUSE act
>like trekkies. Well not everyone, but there is some kernal of truth
>there.
Of course. (Tautologies? What tautologies?) People gather together because
they have certain common interests, so it's no surprise the "Random Gang" will
seem more alike than some randomly selected (no pun intended) group.
Jean Marie Diaz
Moreover, it has a 'deconstruct' capability
which will dump to your connect all the commands that would be necessary to
reconstruct your building area on another system.
Mush 2.0 (and for all I know, PennMUSH ghu-knows-what) has called this
@decompile. I believe whatever version of MUSE that MicroMUSE and
DragonsFire are running has it as well.
AMBAR
Joshua Bell
I got the impression from the original article that 'deconstruct'
would store the commands for a whole area (everything the player
owns?), so that constructions would be saved. Is this right? If
so I wannit! :)
@decompile does single objects, exits, or rooms, so its
practicality for doing more than saving changes to contruction is
limited (ie, build a house bare-bones, desc/program it,
@decompile everything, and hope that when the MUSH goes down the
bare-bones are still there or you have to redo that from scratch
and change the object #s in the @decompile to reconstruct it.)
Going back to the original topic, Random uses this funky-cool
offline building program (ask him for the location and name, but
I'll wager there's a copy on ftp.math.okstate.edu, but don't hold
me to that). What you do is write a building 'script' for the
construct (its generic for MUSH/MUSE/MUD/whatever), give it your
MU*'s building primitives (ie, @open, @desc, etc), then log onto
the MU* and @dig X rooms. Store the dbref#s of those rooms in a
table, feed that to the offline program, and I think it spits out
a script suitible for /quoting (I might be wrong - might log on
and do it live, I'm not positive).
Sounds cool, and is probably a good idea (he rebuilds holds on
PernMUSH in 2 minutes after a DB 'wipe' :) but some of us are
slow and tedious about building, and don't plan everthing out
ahead of time - explore/build, I guess. @deconstruct <objectlist>
that managed to avoid object references (just @dig/teleport to
rooms as you build them, make up a pointer list on an object or
something?) would be fun. Probably a creeping feature tho, so
unlikely in MUSH 2.0. :(
Joshua
"Why is it you get formal when you're about to say something stupid?"
/ _ \ - Princess Leia
|=(_)=| jsb...@acs.ucalgary.ca
\ / Academic Computing Services, University of Calgary
jim miller
Edwin Huang <eh...@andrew.cmu.edu> writes...
>This attitude of coping contributes largely to the idea that there is a
>conspiracy or an elite group of people who want to dominate and crush
>any complaints people have with MUDs on r.g.m. EVIL! The Random Gang,
>The Hellfire Club. Actually it's the idea that whining to r.g.m. is
>comprable to crying to mommy. "waaaaah, he.. that bad man, wouldn't let
>my breasts strain against my shirt tightly with my nipples poking out
>alluringly... waaah.. *sniff* mommy? Do something? He shouldn't do
>that." and then told that he or she should stop, saying, "waah, you all
>hate me! You're all in on this together and just are scared of what I am
>saying!"
I think you all ought to get a new de facto spokesman. No, maybe I'm being
too harsh. We can look at this as the continual process of Edwin exploring
gender issues and questioning long-held beliefs and societal "truths" and
confronting them in front of us all. The writer wrestling with an uneasy
soul. Turbulent in its uncovering, cathartic in its expression. Huang is
a sensitive this age of the world has not seen.
>Well let's go on to see what contributions members of the "Random Gang"
>have made. Shall we?
>
>MUCK, MOO, UnterMUD, UberMUD, TinyTalk, TinyFugue, TinyWar, (versions
>of) TinyMUD, VaporTalk, TCLTT, mud.el (original), COOL, TinyMUSH 2.0 db
>layer, TeenyMUD, Antibuilder to name a few.
>
>Is that, or was that helpful?
>
>Actually, yes.
Indeed it was. Edwin, my hat off to you and all of your colleagues.
Surely you are an estimable group to have produced these marvels in
such modesty.
-----
"I do not sneer at you because you are a newbie. I sneer at you
because you are an idiot."
-- Edwin Huang (.sigquoted in same article!)
Edwin Huang
muds (A .. by jim mil...@ais.org
> too harsh. We can look at this as the continual process of Edwin exploring
> gender issues and questioning long-held beliefs and societal "truths" and
> confronting them in front of us all. The writer wrestling with an uneasy
> soul. Turbulent in its uncovering, cathartic in its expression. Huang is
> a sensitive this age of the world has not seen.
I never said I was anyone's spokesman, but regardless. I have only one
thing to say.
Your momma.
It is also nice to say from looking at your .sig file that you have
finally gotten the hang of quoting from other people's posts.
-Ed/irque