From: snarflrd@leland.Stanford.EDU (NM156)
Subject: Re: Transcript of the "God Conference on Players' Rights"
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 23:40:52 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.194804.7818@leland.Stanford.EDU> whale@leland.Stanford.EDU (Stephen Schmidt) writes:
>
>I think the only way to handle a situation like this is just not play
>the MUD. Vote with your feet! I still think it is the player's responsibility
>to know the rules of social conduct: but if the MUD doesn't make it possible
>for you to know them, then find another MUD. There are plenty of them lying
>around, especially if you're not picky about which kind you play, and the
>mudlist makes it real easy to find them.

[don't take this too seriously, Steve, i'm just venting since i've heard this
 a few dozen times this week...]

i'm a little tired of two of the popular non-answers that keep getting SHOUTED
out in reply to the 'i wish there were muds with consistent ethics privileges'
discussion.  they are:
1) if you don't like things, go somewhere else.  (aka. "if you're not happy
   with this country, leave.")
2) the problems can all be solved by technical/server changes to limit
   player privileges.

My frantic screams of reply:
1)a) if everyone thought like you, nothing would ever change.
  b) perhaps some administrators (myself included) would LIKE general player
     privileges IN WRITING to remove ambiguity in inevitable arguments.  on
     THEIR MU*s ... and would like to talk these over with others who would
     like to do something similar ... for a CHANGE.
  c) going somewhere else is incredibly time- and effort-consuming, and at
     the new places, the same problem exists:  no statement of what privileges
     will try to be extended to me upon reaching there.  if a well-run MU*
     HAD something like what i proposed, i have a hunch I (and many other
     MU*ers) would flock there.
  d) therefore, it's a popularity decision ... i'm trying to get people to
     realize that a concrete codification of my privileges will increase your
     population ... which is what it's all about, isn't it?  No one gets
     flamed for saying, "if a MU* had a graphical interface, i'd play." but
     for some reason, it's heretical to say, "if a MU* had a ethical interface,
     i'd play."

2)a) rule #1 of computers:  no matter what you do, there's still going to be
     a bug.  that's just the facts.  i don't care what your server is, within
     the next year, someone is going to exploit a loophole in a way that
     treats other players like shit.
  b) at least half of the things we discussed have NOTHING to do with the
     mechanism of the MU*.  (e.g. harrassment.)
  c) there is no statement numbered 2)c)

*sigh*  if you're happy with the way things are on the MU*s you play on, then
good for you.  here's a scooby snack.
the sheer number of people who have expressed concern shows that we would
appreciate it if SOME MU*s would establish a set of player privileges, and
they will receive talented and socially well-adjusted players as a result.

th

-- 
Ingredients: chopped pork shoulder with ham, salt, water, sugar, sodium
             nitrate, snarflrd@leland.stanford.edu
Xref: sparky rec.games.mud.admin:1120 rec.games.mud.tiny:1340 rec.games.mud.lp:4806