I think the stated concept ("sharing our knowledge, and increasing the player experience on all our games through group effort") has merit, although the rest of the post gives a somewhat conflicting message (closed forums, email your qualifications to the IRE admin to apply for membership). I think I'll reserve judgement for the time being though.
25 Mar, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 5th comment:
Votes: 0
Although I really dislike standards that are half-baked and made with only a small subsection of the world-to-be-standardized in mind, I also, frankly, have relatively little desire to be involved in Yet Another Standards Debate. They're tiresome and often boring. The difference this time is that major client developers are involved, and so whatever decisions made are extremely likely to actually be put into practice, for better or for worse. So, here's to hoping they come up with something useful.
Well the Wiki lists five protocols, two of which are known to be broken, MXP and MSP. As far as closed forums, I believe IRE's last community outreach effort was a closed forum as well. *shrug*
25 Mar, 2010, quixadhal wrote in the 11th comment:
Votes: 0
A closed forum, used to discuss "standards" that can only be discussed by a closed committee, hand-selected from a set of applicants so that the potential set of ideas or disagreements is kept to a minimum…
The difference this time is that major client developers are involved, and so whatever decisions made are extremely likely to actually be put into practice, for better or for worse.
That's my view, too, and is the reason I've signed up. I want to see what's happening, as it may well have an impact on me.
Tyche said:
As far as closed forums, I believe IRE's last community outreach effort was a closed forum as well. *shrug*
Was that the commercial mud "boys club" thing? If so, they didn't really have any influence over anyone else, so they could just be ignored. In this case we've got major client developers involved, and if they start changing their protocols it could impact a lot of muds.
I'm hoping the closed nature of the forum will just be a temporary thing.
Nick and Jeremy have both mentioned that the closed nature of the board has been brought up there as well, so hopefully we'll see them open up soon. I can understand why they want the wiki to be read-only in general, but the forums should certainly be public.
Well the Wiki lists five protocols, two of which are known to be broken, MXP and MSP.
Now, that's not fair. Isn't fixing stuff like that and proposing alternatives sort of the point?
I don't follow. What isn't fair?
It was a tongue-in-cheek "not fair". You said that two of the protocols they list are broken. Maybe I misread the tone of text, but it sounded like you thought that was a point against them.
We seem to have reached agreement at this point for the forum to be read-only for everyone, and a writable "general" section. Once that is done (sometime today perhaps) you could always post your views about everything being writable (if you have such views) in the General section.
I think the stated concept ("sharing our knowledge, and increasing the player experience on all our games through group effort") has merit, although the rest of the post gives a somewhat conflicting message (closed forums, email your qualifications to the IRE admin to apply for membership). I think I'll reserve judgement for the time being though.
I'm sorry to say that the "group effort", such as it is, is what I feared it would be.
Client devs with no practical experience with running or developing muds, determining the path for protocols aimed at improving the marketability of IRE muds and Aardwolf.
I've even seen a major client dev openly state that clients he thinks are inferior should die.
Unless there's a radical uptick in the demonstrated good faith there, I'm afraid I'm not going to grok what the point was of making a public show of that site, other than, again, marketing commercial interests.
31 Mar, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 18th comment:
Votes: 0
It's possible that we're still in the grandstanding phase: it's possible that the client dev you're referring to might come around given enough time and persuasion. (Then again, maybe not.)
It's possible that we're still in the grandstanding phase: it's possible that the client dev you're referring to might come around given enough time and persuasion. (Then again, maybe not.)
Grandstanding?
I move for a vote of no confidence in the leadership of this body! ;)
It's possible that we're still in the grandstanding phase: it's possible that the client dev you're referring to might come around given enough time and persuasion. (Then again, maybe not.)
Grandstanding?
Grandstanding - To behave in such a way that makes people pay attention to you instead of thinking about more important matters.
http://www.topmudsites.com/forums/mud-co...
Also, if crat could say here in English what he said at TMC, I'm curious.