From: Edward.L.Wallace@dartmouth.edu (Edward L. Wallace)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mud.admin
Subject: One-person vs. Council and other random tangents.
Date: 20 Aug 92 16:38:28 GMT
 <86195@netnews.upenn.edu> <1992Aug14.150730.18118@sol.cs.wmich.edu> 
 <1992Aug19.162300.5624@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>  
 <michael.714256259@pv322d.vincent.iastate.edu>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <michael.714256259@pv322d.vincent.iastate.edu>
michael@iastate.edu (Michael M. Huang) writes:

> Whoa... no "never results in ... intense online politics"?  I don't know
> what kind of people play your mu* :)  but i think we can all safely bet 
> that there will be "more" intense online politics in a "council" setting 
> than in a one-man operation setting.  Ever heard of Axis and Allies? :)
> 
> -michael

Not true. In a one-man operation, you are a 'dictator'. There are bound
to be several people who won't like policies you come up with --
including the people who help administrate the MU*.  I've direct
experience with being a so-called 'Director' on a MUSE with a God who
_ruled_ and expected us to perform (lord knows how)... This was at best
a stupid way to run the place.  If you want to run it yourself - set it
up that way, and good luck.  But when you add in a number of higher
level people who have the *task* (wizarding is never all play) of
insuring the smooth running of the MU*, you'd better give them a say in
policy - and you'd better find a good way of doing that.

_Never_ was a bit of an exaggeration. Let me restate that as: to date,
I've not seen _online_ politics between the directors. Any
disagreements are handled where they _should_ be - in email. The
directors present a united front to the MU*.  There is nothing quite
like Director/Wizard politics to sour a user's enjoyment of a game. 
(other than perhaps constant crashing).

'Politics' should _not_ be defined as productive discussion about
policies. Politics is the furtherance of 'your' policies to further
increase your 'power' and 'influence' in the silly world of MU*'s (or
even on just the one MU*).  You _will_ get a lot more discussion with a
council than a one-person operation (assuming the 'one-person' isn't
highly schizo..). And that is how it should be.  MU*'s are fluid places
with constantly changing environments, ideals and users -- the policies
of a well-run MU* should reflect the ability to deal with this: either
by adapting, or consciously working against the fluidity.

I have a hard time believing that one person can _really_ have a
complete picture of what is happening on a MU* - unless its really
small.  The council shares power, responsibility, and the somewhat
enjoyable task of creating and maintaining an place where users can go
and play - not go and bicker.

Anyway - in my personal experience - I've seen several 'Godded' MU*'s
beset with varying level of truly childish infighting and politics. I
guess the best question to ask myself, and all of you: Is that a
function of thier _form_ of government or is it the _people_ governing.

I think strong cases can be made for either point - and believe it's an
interaction between these two points.

Then again - maybe I've managed to wiz places where the other folks are
truly responsible people.  It could be a bizarre coincidence - but is
as likely an explanation as any other I guess...

comments? flames? insults about my mother?

Falryx @ Most places.
F'lyr @ some others..