RFD: rec.games.dungeon.* hierarchy
Andrew Solovay
I would like to propose formally that a new hierarchy be created,
namely rec.games.dungeon. This hierarchy would contain groups
dedicated to discussion of rogue-type games. These games share the
following characteristics:
* They are character-based; that is, the game generally presents a map
of the current playing area, with different characters representing
the player, opponents, objects, etc. Text is a secondary element at
most. This is in contradistinction to other, "text-based" adventure
games, such as Adventure, Zork (a.k.a. "Dungeon"), etc.
* They are very portable. The games are usually written in a
high-level langauge, and as noted, they use character graphics; this
makes them easy to port to various architectures (mainframes,
workstations, and different types of personal computers). As a
result, they don't fit into any of the comp.sys.*.games groups,
which are machine-specific.
There are several advantages to having such a hierarchy, notably:
* Most people who play any of these games are interested in other
games of the type. Thus, if the newsgroups were grouped together,
people could easily find other groups that interested them.
* It would provide an area for discussing dungeon games that do not
currently have a USENET group (e.g. larn), and for discussing the
relative merits of different games.
* It would provide a uniform framework for adding new groups for
dungeon-type games that become popular.
The reorganization would rename three existing groups thus:
rec.games.rogue -> rec.games.dungeon.rogue
rec.games.hack -> rec.games.dungeon.nethack(*)
rec.games.moria -> rec.games.dungeon.moria
All of these groups would remain unmoderated.
(*) The rec.games.hack newsgroup has long been exclusively for the
discussion of "nethack", not of "hack". Accordingly, this seems like a
good time to rename it. If people on rec.games.hack object to this
renaming, we can instead change it to rec.games.dungeon.hack.
Two additional groups would be created:
rec.games.dungeon.info (moderated)
rec.games.dungeon.misc (unmoderated)
rec.games.dungeon.info would be a forum for informational postings
about games (well-maintained spoiler files, announcements of new
revisions or patches, etc.). Every posting to this group would be
cross-posted to the most appropriate other rec.games.dungeon group,
and follows-up would be directed to that group. The moderator could,
at his/her discretion, change the subject line of postings (esp. to
add the word [SPOILERS] where appropriate).
I would be willing, though not eager, to moderate this group, but if
someone else wants to volunteer, that would be fine by me. A moderator
could be removed by a public vote with a two-thirds majority in favor
of removal.
rec.games.dungeon.misc would be a forum for discussion of dungeon-type
games that do not yet have mainstream groups (e.g. larn). It would
also be used for discussion that, e.g., compares different dungeon
games ("NetHack sucks! Moria rules!" "No, MORIA sucks! NETHACK rules!"
"No, *NETHACK* sucks..."). Postings to rec.games.dungeon.misc ought to
contain the name of the game in question in the subject line (e.g.
"Subject: [larn] How to I kill the Evil Frozzle?")
Things to Decide
================
First: Should the hierarchy actually be named "rec.games.dungeon"?
Some have expressed concerns about this name. They note that many
text-based adventure games (e.g. "Zork") are set in dungeons; indeed,
one early version of Zork was named "dungeon". Another concern: The
unifying characteristic of these games is *not* that they're set in
dungeons, but rather the style of interface. There is no reason one of
these games couldn't be set, e.g., on the Death Star or in a gulag,
and yet remain appropriate for the hierarchy. Again, perhaps
"dungeon" is a misleading name.
Perhaps, since "rogue" is the granddaddy of these games, the hierarchy
ought to be called "rec.games.roguelike". Or perhaps some other name
would be better. Any ideas?
Second: rec.games.dungeon.nethack, or rec.games.dungeon.hack? I think
"nethack", but I could be wrong.
What else?
FYI: I've contacted David Grabiner, the man who posted the RFD for
rec.games.angband. He and I agree that we should hold the reorg vote
first. WHen the reorg vote is concluded, he will restart the RFD for
rec.games.angband or rec.games.dungeon.angband, depending on how the
vote turns out.
--
Andrew Solovay
"But that was in another country;
and besides, the wench is dead." ---Marlowe
Andrew Solovay
[This is a second RFD, proposing a different name for the hierarchy.
The first RFD was issued for a rec.games.dungeon hierarchy.]
NEW STUFF
=========
There is general consenus that "rec.games.dungeon" would be a bad name
for the hierarchy. The main problem is that "dungeon" describes far
too wide a variety of games, including pencil-and-paper FRP games,
games like ZORK (one version of which was actually called "dungeon"),
graphic-oriented computer games, etc.
"roguelike" seems to me much superior. It describes all the games in
the proposed hierarchy, and no other games. The one thing all these
games have in common is that they're descended from "rogue", and have
a basically rogue-style interface.
Some object that "roguelike" is a mystifying term to new players, who
may not know that (for example) Moria is descended from a game like
"rogue". But this shouldn't be a real problem.
rec.games.roguelike.moria will be at least as easy to find as
rec.games.moria, so even if people don't know what "roguelike" means,
they'll still be able to participate. And "rec.games.roguelike.misc"
is a much more accurate and descriptive name for a group than are any
of the alternatives I've seen.
Also: In the first RFD, I offered to be the moderator of the proposed
.info group. I wish to retract and recant that offer; I just don't
think I'll have time. So, if anyone wants to moderate this group, let
me know. If no potential moderator comes forward by the time of the
CFV, I will not issue a CFV for rec.games.roguelike.info; but anyone
who wants to do so, at a later date, may feel free.
The rest of the RFD is mostly the same as the first RFD. There seems
to be a consensus to name the Nethack group ".nethack", not ".hack";
that's reflected in this RFD.
OLD STUFF
=========
I would like to propose formally that a new hierarchy be created,
namely rec.games.roguelike. This hierarchy would contain groups
dedicated to discussion of rogue-type games. These games share the
following characteristics:
* They are usually ASCII-character-based; that is, the game generally
presents a map of the current playing area, with different
characters representing the player, opponents, objects, etc. Text is
a secondary element at most. This is in contradistinction to other,
"text-based" adventure games, such as Adventure, Zork (a.k.a.
"Dungeon"), etc.
* They are very portable. The games are usually written in a
high-level langauge, and as noted, they use character graphics; this
makes them easy to port to various architectures (mainframes,
workstations, and different types of personal computers). As a
result, they don't fit into any of the comp.sys.*.games groups,
which are machine-specific.
There are several advantages to having such a hierarchy, notably:
* Most people who play any of these games are interested in other
games of the type. Thus, if the newsgroups were grouped together,
people could easily find other groups that interested them.
* It would provide an area for discussing dungeon games that do not
currently have a USENET group (e.g. larn), and for discussing the
relative merits of different games.
* It would provide a uniform framework for adding new groups for
dungeon-type games that become popular.
The reorganization would rename three existing groups thus:
rec.games.rogue -> rec.games.roguelike.rogue
rec.games.hack -> rec.games.roguelike.nethack(*)
rec.games.moria -> rec.games.roguelike.moria
All of these groups would remain unmoderated.
(*) The rec.games.hack newsgroup has long been exclusively for the
discussion of "nethack", not of "hack". Accordingly, this seems like a
good time to rename it.
Two additional groups would be created:
rec.games.roguelike.info (moderated)
rec.games.roguelike.misc (unmoderated)
rec.games.roguelike.info would be a forum for informational postings
about games (well-maintained spoiler files, announcements of new
revisions or patches, etc.). Every posting to this group would be
cross-posted to the most appropriate other rec.games.roguelike group,
and follows-up would be directed to that group. The moderator could,
at his/her discretion, change the subject line of postings (esp. to
add the word [SPOILERS] where appropriate). A moderator could be
removed by a public vote with a two-thirds majority in favor of
removal.
As yet, nobody has offered to moderate the .info group. If no
volunteer comes forward by the time the CFV is issued, I will not put
the .info group on the CFV. So act now! Fame and adulation as an
Official Usenet Moderator await!
rec.games.roguelike.misc would be a forum for discussion of
dungeon-type games that do not yet have mainstream groups (e.g. larn).
It would also be used for discussion that, e.g., compares different
dungeon games. Postings to rec.games.roguelike.misc ought to contain
the name of the game in question in the subject line (e.g.
"Subject: [larn] How to I kill the Evil Frozzle?")
Andrew Solovay
this proposed hierarchy is taking place.]
Status report:
I have a volunteer to moderate the fifth group. Ms. Aliza Panitz
<bug...@bronze.lcs.mit.edu> has volunteered to moderate the group.
The group would be called rec.games.roguelike.announce; it would be
for annoncements of new releases and patches, postings of FAQ lists,
and similar informational material.
Second: The big unresolved question is, still, the name of the
hierarchy. (That is, the big, unresolvced question other than "should
we do this at all", which will be resolved by the vote. ;-) So far,
there have been a great many suggestions; but very few of these have
attracted support from anyone but the suggester. The only one which
has a reasonable following is the (admittedly ugly) compromise of
"rec.games.roguelike". This has the virtue of specifying the one thing
these games have in common with each other, and not with other games;
that is, rogueish ancestry and a rogue-like game interface.
I am willing to have a straw poll for the hierarchy name, if others
think it warranted. However, as I've said, I haven't seen any other
suggested group name gather any support, so I don't think a straw poll
will really be necessary.
--
Andrew Solovay
"What better proof of love can there be than money? A ten-shilling
note showed incontrovertibly just how mad about you a man is."
--- Quentin Crisp
Andrew Solovay
[This is a third RFD. The discussion seems to have reached its
conclusions; I don't think many people will change their minds at this
point, and people are mainly repeating the same points. Those people
who agree on a name seem to favor "roguelike" as the least of all
available evils.
If no new discussion roars up, this posting will be the basis of a
forthcoming CFV.
Not that all discussion of newgroup proposals traditionally takes
place on news.groups; accordingly, follow-up postings have been
directed to nes.groups.]
Proposal
=========
I would like to propose formally that a new hierarchy be created,
namely rec.games.roguelike. This hierarchy would contain groups
dedicated to discussion of rogue-type games. These games share the
following characteristics:
* They are usually ASCII-character-based; that is, the game generally
presents a map of the current playing area, with different
characters representing the player, opponents, objects, etc. Text is
a secondary element at most. This is in contradistinction to other,
"text-based" adventure games, such as Adventure, Zork (a.k.a.
"Dungeon"), etc.
* They are very portable. The games are usually written in a
high-level langauge, and as noted, they use character graphics; this
makes them easy to port to various architectures (mainframes,
workstations, and different types of personal computers). As a
result, they don't fit into any of the comp.sys.*.games groups,
which are machine-specific.
The reorganization would rename three existing groups thus:
rec.games.rogue -> rec.games.roguelike.rogue
rec.games.hack -> rec.games.roguelike.nethack
rec.games.moria -> rec.games.roguelike.moria
All of these groups would remain unmoderated. The groups would remain
essentially unchanged.
(rec.games.hack has long been a forum for discussion of the game
"nethack", not the archaic "Hack"; accordingly, the new group would be
named .nethack.)
Two additional groups would be created:
rec.games.roguelike.announce (moderated)
rec.games.roguelike.misc (unmoderated)
rec.games.roguelike.announce would be a forum for postings of FAQ
lists, announcements of new patches and versions of existing games,
postings of small "official" patches, and announcements of new
rogue-style games. Every posting to this group would be cross-posted
to the most appropriate other rec.games.roguelike group, and
follows-up would be directed to that group. The moderator could, at
his/her discretion, change the subject line of postings (esp. to add
the word [SPOILERS] where appropriate).
rec.games.roguelike.announce would be initially moderated by Aliza R.
Panitz <bug...@bronze.lcs.mit.edu>. The moderator will at all times
be free to appoint a backup-moderator and/or a replacement if he or
she must leave the post. Such an appointment must be announced on
rec.games.roguelike.announce. If it becomes necessary to
replace the moderator, this could be done with a public vote,
announced on new.announce.newgroups (and crossposted to all the
rec.games.roguelike groups). A two-thirds vote would be necessary to
replace the moderator. [It is possible that the moderator of
news.annouunce.newgroups, group-advice, and such people will come up
with an "official" way to replace a moderator; in such a case, their
approved method would take precedence over this one.]
rec.games.roguelike.misc would be a forum for discussion of
dungeon-type games that do not yet have mainstream groups (e.g. larn).
It would also be used for discussion that, e.g., compares different
dungeon games. Postings to rec.games.roguelike.misc ought to contain
the name of the game in question in the subject line (e.g.
"Subject: [larn] How to I kill the Evil Frozzle?")
RATIONALE
=========
There are several advantages to having such a hierarchy, notably:
* Most people who play any of these games are interested in other
games of the type. Thus, if the newsgroups were grouped together,
people could easily find other groups that interested them.
* It would provide an area for discussing dungeon games that do not
currently have a USENET group (e.g. larn), and for discussing the
relative merits of different games.
* It would provide a uniform framework for adding new groups for
rogue-style games that might be written and become popular.
* Many people play a given game until they beat it, then stop playing
the game until a new version comes out. An .announce group would
make it easy for such people to find out about such new releases.