Posts made by Thenomain

@crayon said:

The purpose of such a thread of conversation, for me, would be education rather than debate, because I don't have many, if any, firm opinions except what I've seen observationally from my own play and interactions.

Sure, then let me explain: A Mush is a game-creation tool with a following based largely on understanding the tool. There is no single culture behind it, but the history of how the tool has been used is informative as to what expectations a "Musher" might have.

Now it's your turn to educate.

@Jennkryst said:

As is my standard wish, it should include SPACE of some kind.

Space:1889

It will download v2.0, yes. Testing now. edit Works. No longer half-hilited %qx code. Woot.

I cannot get the built-in Atom system to download v0.5 after it's downloaded v1.0, even if I uninstall first.

@il-volpe said:

@Thenomain

My point is that the expertise that @crayon needs to have the authority to make claims about the overlap between the two communities would include expertise about this community, and cray-cray hasn't got that.

Well I don't think @crayon claims to be a Soapbox authority, and I think it's only @Justin (whatever his name is, not @Jeshin) that has tried to claim Mush authority on all three of their behalves.

To be honest, I don't see the difference between "philosophies of game design" and straight up "game design". Worrying whether or not your game's code is automated enough is one of those things that I consider poisonous to game-playing, not beneficial to it. (Comment directly for the benefit of @Jeshin and @crayon.)

@il-volpe said:

Yet you are the newcomer to the community.

See one of the interesting things about this discussion is that there is argument over 1) what is meant by 'this community', 2) who represents which community, and 3) whether or not 'this community' is subservient to 'that community' since 'they' were around first.

I'd rather talk about authority. Since this is an academic discussion, what does 'authority' mean? I don't mean it as in one person having power over the other, but who is an expert on what. It's pretty easy to say that a lot of people here are authorities on MUSH, but there are a precious few authorities here on MOO or even MUCK.

To us, it looks like the OR staffers are saying they have authority because of their home games being a Mush, not long before there being argument that a Mush is not a code-base but a design philosophy. (I find this even more interesting, because I would bet that the majority of Mushes throughout history fail the Three Laws of Optional Realities.)

I'm sure that to them, we here look like we're doing the same thing. "Trust us, we know" is easier to say, IMO, when you enter a community site based on the thing we believe we are authorities upon. Like if I went into a Jackie Chan fan site and started telling the others there they were wrong.

Being a newcomer to a community is fine.

It's too bad that RPI is taken to mean a MUD codebase. It's a nice term meaning ... well, admittedly nothing outside the MUD community. Context, yo.

Firan was a Mush derivative, since they had their own not-quite-but-often-considered-forked code. A lot of the concepts were folded in, but many of the hard-coded things that Firan needed were not and you must still compile them that way.

Right, @ide, but a wiki is a system that is set up to note who added what information with high levels of inter-article linking.

@crayon said:

@Thenomain said:

Can you explain to me where I said there were 9 MUDs on that list?

@Thenomain said:

Final Count. Mush-types: 2. Mud-types: 9. Moo/Muck-types: 1.

Oh for fuck's sake, Theno.

No, you're right. Edited.

Also, I'm sorry for the exploding part of that.

I'll look for your What Is A... thread because it's interesting, but I'm not sure if I'll have much to contribute to it personally, though we'll have to see when it splits.

If you're not going to participate, then what's the point? This is to explore what you think a Mush is, since you're ready to redefine how we describe things, which is a very common theme in this thread. Again, on both sides. In the interests of bridge-building, I thought it might help.

It's like a lot of people here saying that RPI means something different than you do. Would you want to understand, or would you say, 'No, you're wrong.' Both heavily rely upon authority of the topic at hand, and social dynamics.

Again, a common theme in this thread.

@crayon (in http://musoapbox.net/topic/341/optional-realities-project-redshift/643) said:

In any event, the type of code being utilized doesn't really much matter so much as the design philosophy behind the game. Haven's actually an interesting case in that while it's exceptionally heavily automated and almost certainly a "MUD", I want to say, its design takes a lot of prototypically "MUSH" approaches in terms of how roleplay happens. Tangential, really.

So, what makes a Mush?

@crayon,

Can you explain to me where I said there were 9 MUDs on that list? Like I said, I really don't understand what you think I'm saying, but I don't think it's what I'm actually saying.

I like the word "rhetoric". I think I'll use it here more often. Thanks.

The What Is A ... question I'll split into a different thread.

edit: A different thread.

How about a Wiki?

@crayon said:

Your sum isn't even accurate to the number of community partners we have, total.

I explained where my information came from. "No it isn't" isn't really what I would call a convincing reply.

I think the burden of proof is actually on you, here, to explain why it does matter in this particular context.

I don't know what you think I'm talking about, but you said there were several MUDs that you would classify as MUSHes. I don't know how that's up to me to disprove.

If you're asking me to explain what I think a MUSH is, then that's one thing. Saying it like this, however, is just being a dick.

I don't mean this to be a "no, you", but I think my points are pretty salient.

edit: Sorry, I missed the actual question at the very bottom of @crayon's excessive and inappropriate antagonism. The buried lede:

What argument are you trying to make by counting the games in our community partnership, and miscounting at that?

Because you can't read, doesn't give you the right to get all pissy at other people, Sancho Panzer:

@Jaunt said, in post http://musoapbox.net/topic/341/optional-realities-project-redshift/624:

Half of our community are MUSHes.

Now, what Jaunt has also been doing is defending the Three Laws as to what your site represents, and that other people can come along too, but his overall thrust has been the site is for games following The Three Laws.

So sure, let's count the list from your site of partners. Go on. Look up what your website says. Here, since you can't seem to figure it out, and are happy to blame other people for your dementia, let me list the URL.

http://optionalrealities.com/partners/

OH WOW! THAT WAS SO HARD TO FIND!

Now, Captain Know-It-All, let's count the number of games. It's under +Games.

Nnnnnniiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnne?

Oh, yes, it's nine. My total? Nine. My oh my, how stupid I am, what an idiot I must be for getting it right as per the conditions I explained not one line above the list of games.

Did I mention you were being a dick? Excessively so? Now either counter with facts or I shall taunt you a second time.

And a third.

I have the time to waste, now. Just for you.

Oh for fuck's sake, OR forums. Entering both 'game' and 'games' here kicked me out.

@Alzie said:

@thenomain You could simulate it pretty easy. Set something dark, code your room parent to check if they should show. Though it'd just be a hack. Nothing like that exists inherently.

This would require giving every room on the game the permissions to see dark objects. Fuck. No.

@crayon said:

I believe you mathed wrong?

Then math correctly, please.

In any event, the type of code being utilized doesn't really much matter so much as the design philosophy

Explain? Or ask for an explanation and don't just assume that I mathed wrong because you disagree on how I'm evaluating? That is, don't just assert; discuss.

It's little things like your statement being definitive ("you're wrong because I'm judging on a different context") is what I believe is your part of creating the us-versus-them atmosphere.

I'd like to have a discussion about what makes a MUSH and not an RPI, or at the very least what the heck you mean. If I opened a new thread, would you participate?

Mind you, a due warning: I think you're wrong, and I believe people here have a more vested interest in this distinction than you do so that you should listen to them. I am biased, but I am willing, nay eager, to be wrong. I'm more eager to transform this thread into something productive.

Because it's, y'know, very one-sided on both sides, and I'd rather build bridges than ... this.

Thanks.

edit: Another due warning: If you don't want to discuss here, I will gladly take Soapbox to the Mountain. I hear that this kind of stuff goes on at OR all the time.

Holy shit, you can resize the reply area?! Holy 21st Century, Batman!

@Ide said:

For a lot of people mu* is online TT with a few extras, and that's all they want out of it. I'd like a game to break out of that box.

Examples of what's outside that box?