28 Aug, 2010, Koron wrote in the 21st comment:
Votes: 0
Quote
And the ultimate question, is it really a bad thing when admins cheat?

If they're playing a single player game, of course not.
28 Aug, 2010, Oliver wrote in the 22nd comment:
Votes: 0
Koron said:
Quote
And the ultimate question, is it really a bad thing when admins cheat?

If they're playing a single player game, of course not.


I think Scandum's point might have been lost there.
28 Aug, 2010, Rudha wrote in the 23rd comment:
Votes: 0
Adminstrators have to be someone the community can trust. While my mud has a bevy of internal auditing tools to catch admin abuses, the simple solution is to only appoint people whom are trusted to positions of trust.

I dont prevent immortals from interacting with players, either on their immortal or just a normal alt, in fact I encourge it insomuch as their individual roles allow. However, I -do- admonish them that their roleplay is going to be held to a much higher standard.

It is worth noting that it can keep things fun and help mitigate burnouts when an admin can take off the wizard hat for a while and just play.

Maya/Rudha
28 Aug, 2010, Ssolvarain wrote in the 24th comment:
Votes: 0
Some immortals aren't necessarily interested in playing the game. For example, Hades Kane/Diablos has disabled my wiz-level from using slay/toast on a PC.

Actually, I wasn't even to blame for that one. Midboss was the one who really screwed it for me.

The bombs we used to have, that would insta-gib a person and scatter their items/body parts into surrounding rooms, were also disabled. Apparently people didn't like us passing out exploding red-headed orphans.

Edit: They were adorable little bastards, too.
28 Aug, 2010, ATT_Turan wrote in the 25th comment:
Votes: 0
I'm not sure why this was semi-necroed, as the conversation doesn't seem to have taken a turn for the enlighteningly awesome, but I do have this to say:

Oliver said:
To be fair, admins who don't play their own games suck.

Oliver said:
Players don't understand the game from the perspective of the developer, so they aren't flawless playtesters. Additionally, an admin who doesn't test his game doesn't understand the game from the perspective of the players, so he isn't a flawless admin.


I would argue that there is a wide band of existence between being not flawless and sucking. Despite my frequent claims, I'm told that I'm not a flawless person (and you probably aren't either) - does that mean we both suck? I can agree with the latter of your quotes, but find the former absurd.
28 Aug, 2010, Oliver wrote in the 26th comment:
Votes: 0
ATT_Turan said:
I'm not sure why this was semi-necroed, as the conversation doesn't seem to have taken a turn for the enlighteningly awesome, but I do have this to say:

Oliver said:
To be fair, admins who don't play their own games suck.

Oliver said:
Players don't understand the game from the perspective of the developer, so they aren't flawless playtesters. Additionally, an admin who doesn't test his game doesn't understand the game from the perspective of the players, so he isn't a flawless admin.


I would argue that there is a wide band of existence between being not flawless and sucking. Despite my frequent claims, I'm told that I'm not a flawless person (and you probably aren't either) - does that mean we both suck? I can agree with the latter of your quotes, but find the former absurd.


There's a difference between "it's not humanly possible for me to be flawless" and "look at me not even trying." While I understand that those administrators who choose not to play their own games (most often) think they are doing the best thing, it happens to be my personal opinion that they fall somewhere between "willfully delusional" and "dangerously misguided." So– yeah. Pretty much suck as administrators, yes.
29 Aug, 2010, donky wrote in the 27th comment:
Votes: 0
Why you are so hostile towards a certain type of administrator that you would just insult them and dismiss their approach outright? Frankly it is "willfully delusional" and "dangerously misguided." Yeah - you pretty much suck as an advocate of administrators playing their own games.
29 Aug, 2010, Oliver wrote in the 28th comment:
Votes: 0
donky said:
Why you are so hostile towards a certain type of administrator that you would just insult them and dismiss their approach outright? Frankly it is "willfully delusional" and "dangerously misguided." Yeah - you pretty much suck as an advocate of administrators playing their own games.


I'm not trying to advocate anything. Far me it from me to tell someone how to run their game. I'm still going to keep on thinking they're doing it wrong, if they are.
29 Aug, 2010, Runter wrote in the 29th comment:
Votes: 0
Far be it from me to make the blanket statement that people who make blanket statements suck. I'd never do that. But ill keep on thinking it secretly… Opps.
29 Aug, 2010, Vladaar wrote in the 30th comment:
Votes: 0
I think the best games are the games the Staff take an active role
playing in. Everything else is a crap shoot. It maybe good it may
not how you change things you never know how it affects players.
Other then some base testing.
29 Aug, 2010, ATT_Turan wrote in the 31st comment:
Votes: 0
Oliver said:
There's a difference between "it's not humanly possible for me to be flawless" and "look at me not even trying." While I understand that those administrators who choose not to play their own games (most often) think they are doing the best thing, it happens to be my personal opinion that they fall somewhere between "willfully delusional" and "dangerously misguided." So– yeah. Pretty much suck as administrators, yes.


It's a game. Even if their game ends up being worse than others because the admins don't play it, that can in no sense be construed as dangerous. As far as not even trying, who are you to tell someone who spent years of their life working on the code and theme of a game they don't play a character on that they haven't tried to make one? I posit that your statements will not convince any non-playing admins to change their mind, and are offensive to no few people of both camps.
30 Aug, 2010, Koron wrote in the 32nd comment:
Votes: 0
Oliver said:
I think Scandum's point might have been lost there.

What a coincidence; I think mine was lost right here.

Rudha said:
Adminstrators have to be someone the community can trust. While my mud has a bevy of internal auditing tools to catch admin abuses, the simple solution is to only appoint people whom are trusted to positions of trust.

This right here is a Pretty Big Deal(TM).

Ssolvarain said:
The bombs we used to have, that would insta-gib a person and scatter their items/body parts into surrounding rooms, were also disabled. Apparently people didn't like us passing out exploding red-headed orphans.

I don't see any reason why a mud would ever need imm commands to do this. It might be fun as part of an RPed storyline thing, or even as a normal in-game mechanic, but certainly not as the sort of thing reserved for any old imm. It strikes me as needlessly sadistic. Why not just delete or ban the person and call it a day? (Then again, I guess all the nearby players would appreciate the free loot. This might distract them from the fact that you just did something permanent to one of their fellows that could still be done to them by any drunk on a power trip. But hey, now I've come full circle to the thing I quoted Rudha on.)
30 Aug, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 33rd comment:
Votes: 0
Koron said:
I don't see any reason why a mud would ever need imm commands to do this. It might be fun as part of an RPed storyline thing, or even as a normal in-game mechanic, but certainly not as the sort of thing reserved for any old imm. It strikes me as needlessly sadistic. Why not just delete or ban the person and call it a day? (Then again, I guess all the nearby players would appreciate the free loot. This might distract them from the fact that you just did something permanent to one of their fellows that could still be done to them by any drunk on a power trip. But hey, now I've come full circle to the thing I quoted Rudha on.)

The existence of such commands, and furthermore the consideration of who was wielding them, makes me somewhat uneasy about the game…
30 Aug, 2010, Runter wrote in the 34th comment:
Votes: 0
Commands like that are dangerously misguided.
30 Aug, 2010, Ssolvarain wrote in the 35th comment:
Votes: 0
"I don't see any reason why a mud would ever need imm commands to do this."
"and furthermore the consideration of who was wielding them"
"Commands like that are dangerously misguided."

You're all assuming that I used them wantonly with nothing but malice in my heart. Couldn't be further from the truth.

Get a sense of humor!

The only time I used it specifically to bother someone, they were breaking the rules. I exercised my right to blow him across the landscape. :biggrin:
30 Aug, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 36th comment:
Votes: 0
The mere fact that you say yourself that you were using them to "bother" somebody, regardless that they were breaking the rules, is I think exactly what people were commenting on.
30 Aug, 2010, Cratylus wrote in the 37th comment:
Votes: 0
Ssolvarain said:
Get a sense of humor!

The only time I used it specifically to bother someone, they were breaking the rules. I exercised my right to blow him across the landscape. :biggrin:


This is the sort of thing that makes me wonder, despite the revocation if the imm grenade,
why HK would have placed any trust in your exercise of authority on his behalf in the first place.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net
30 Aug, 2010, Ssolvarain wrote in the 38th comment:
Votes: 0
Crat, stop trying to troll me. Didn't work last time.

David, when someone breaks the rules, I have complete discretion as to what the punishment is. Freezing, nochannels, banning, detention, etc. etc. etc I can get creative and petty if I choose. Diablos can, of course, overrule anything I do. The problem here being is that it's not YOUR decision if I'm to be trusted. So I'm not sure why you're taking the extra time out of your day to try to belittle me and my moral integrity. AND that of HK, him being my boss.

If you want to preach about "what's acceptable on MB" then maybe you should adhere to it?
30 Aug, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 39th comment:
Votes: 0
This is a thread about MUD admins playing games that segued into a general topic about how MUD admins should view their games. You are right that it is obviously not for me to decide if HK trusts you; however I fail to see what is wrong with commenting that I believe that the attitude you are displaying is inappropriate for a MUD administrator and that I (and apparently others) would feel it unwise to run a MUD this way. You're free to believe that your attitude is appropriate, too, naturally. (That said, the fact that the toys were taken away is interesting.) In what way did I do something unacceptable on MB in your mind?
30 Aug, 2010, Mudder wrote in the 40th comment:
Votes: 0
I'm having trouble wrapping my head around why "the existence of such commands" worries people? The alternative's mentioned have been a ban or delete.

Do you think this grenade thing is even on the same grounds of permanence as those two? In the dealing out of punishment, what do you feel is acceptable? Where is the line where it becomes worrisome or unacceptable?

What context? Would these commands worry you in an RP mud setting, where even punishments were dealt with in an RP manner?
20.0/145