28 Aug, 2008, Guest wrote in the 21st comment:
Votes: 0
Cratylus said:
Samson wrote:
Quote
but most of those people have migrated to the new one and brought their same attitude with them.


Welllll….I think I addressed that in my post, so I'll
just let it speak for itself.


I get what you're saying, but I think you're used to it after having been around them for years. Perhaps even desensitized to it. But I've read over some of the logs available of what goes on there and really, it's just not the kind of social environment I prefer, and I think quite a few IMC participants would agree with me. If that sort of thing took a real hold on IMC I honestly think it could lead to a network fork which would only continue to fragment things.



Cratylus said:
Yep, I've got a prototype in pre-alpha testing. The basic
functionality is not rocket science to translate and I've
got mudlists, channels, and tells working pretty ok.

It's completely doable, and wouldn't require much to
activate once I'm done with my translation code. It's
not at all a question of technical feasibility, but whether
we have the will to work it out socially.


I always figured it would be relatively easy. Probably no more difficult than the old I3 bridge code I used to have that handled packet translation through a client connected to both independent networks. The servers would just need to settle on what they'd use internally to keep track of it all. I'm not sure what the state of I3 router interoperation is these days, but the IMC2 setup is more than capable of handling the internal routing right now.
28 Aug, 2008, Cratylus wrote in the 22nd comment:
Votes: 0
Samson wrote:
Quote
I get what you're saying, but I think you're used to it after having been around them for years. Perhaps even desensitized to it.


Ok. Check it out. My big thing that I do is maintain
a codebase, and I am fanatically devoted to it. And
I am a fanatical defender of new adopters.

I do not enable "rude" channels for them. I police
the default "protected" channels ruthlessly. Ask
anyone on there. I'm a right pain in the ass about it.

It is important to me not to scare them away. Just
as it would be important to me not to terrify IMC2
people by bridging intergossip to ichat, for example.

There are channels for people who prefer not to hold
their tongues. Newcomers are *discouraged* from joining
those channels, and I would similarly discourage IMC2
people from tuning into intergossip.

Samson wrote:
Quote
But I've read over some of the logs available of what goes on there and really, it's just not the kind of social environment I prefer, and I think quite a few IMC participants would agree with me.


The funny thing is that ichat is actually more crude
and less acceptable than the default Dead Souls channels.
The swearing and graphic discussions there have given
me pause, and I've been considering making it opt-in,
rather than default, for the DS IMC2 client.

Samson wrote:
Quote
If that sort of thing took a real hold on IMC I honestly think it could lead to a network fork which would only continue to fragment things.


Well, that really depends on the channel, as I've said.
If you want to act like i3 == intergossip, then you could
indeed badmouth it all day. But that's just not so.

There's a channel where people can speak their minds. It's opt-in,
I don't encourage people to use it, and I agree it's gross.

So what?

Here's the log for dchat, the friendly i3 channel
that is pg-13 and intended for random chat about whatever:

http://ebspso.dnsalias.org/i3logs/index....

I invite folks to read it and judge for themselves. I
consider dchat to be the primary "chat" channel for normal people.

If you're ok with crude language and occasional rude
behavior, you can wade into the piranha pit that is
intergossip, whose log you can see here:

http://ebspso.dnsalias.org/i3logs/index....

You don't have to subscribe to either, and just as
the nastiness of intergossip is not permitted to spill
onto dchat, neither would it be allowed to find its way
onto ichat in a unified network.

Saying the i3 network is bad because some people use
an opt-in channel in ways you don't like is like
saying cable is bad because you can subscribe to pron.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net
28 Aug, 2008, Guest wrote in the 23rd comment:
Votes: 0
Cratylus said:
Samson wrote:
Quote
But I've read over some of the logs available of what goes on there and really, it's just not the kind of social environment I prefer, and I think quite a few IMC participants would agree with me.


The funny thing is that ichat is actually more crude
and less acceptable than the default Dead Souls channels.
The swearing and graphic discussions there have given
me pause, and I've been considering making it opt-in,
rather than default, for the DS IMC2 client.


I guess that tells you how little I'm paying attention to IMC these days since I hadn't really seen it becoming crude, though in all honesty I had noticed the general attitude on the channel taking a turn in a less mature direction than I was used to seeing. I suppose it's just continued along that line or something then which explains why other people I know have been using it less and less, to the point of almost not being there anymore themselves.
29 Aug, 2008, Vladaar wrote in the 24th comment:
Votes: 0
Yah at times the discussions due become vulgar, well at least every night. I remember talk a month or two ago about people trying not to use so much profanity and vulgar talk on the channels for IMC, but it clearly hasn't improved at all. However, I do agree with DH that though IMC is helpful for those starting out, once you start to get a player base, you don't want your players and STAFF distracted by outside things. You want them concentrating on your mud.

Vladaar
29 Aug, 2008, Kayle wrote in the 25th comment:
Votes: 0
Why do you capitalize all of Staff like it's an acronym? I'm curious.

As far as conversations getting crude, I'd not noticed, but I haven't really been paying attention to the channels all that much. But I have seen an escalation in the amount of people that I had assumed were from the LP or i3 communities, and some of them do seem to have a rather crude mouth on them. I personally have been trying to watch my language lately, as per Conner's request in the thread for rules/guidelines. Guess I'm going to have to keep a closer eye on things from now on if it's appearing crude.
29 Aug, 2008, Cratylus wrote in the 26th comment:
Votes: 0
Kayle said:
But I have seen an escalation in the amount of people that I had assumed were from the LP or i3 communities, and some of them do seem to have a rather crude mouth on them.


I have not seen LP people violate rules of decorum. And not that
many have been participating. If I am mistaken, please let me know
who and when. I will talk to them.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

PS I think that I swore once when the trivia bot cheated me
out of a point, actually. Won't happen again.
29 Aug, 2008, Kayle wrote in the 27th comment:
Votes: 0
I honestly don't mind swearing. But it was voiced that people on the network don't like excessive swearing. ANd since the game channel defaults to mortal perms on those, and I can agree that swearing is probably not something that can be seen by general player populace, especially since people seem to be trying to cater to the younger crowds lately.

I wasn't saying that the LP crowd had been breaking rules of decorum, I was merely stating that I had seen a lot more of them on lately. I probably should have built my paragraph better. :P
29 Aug, 2008, Cratylus wrote in the 28th comment:
Votes: 0
Kayle said:
I wasn't saying that the LP crowd had been breaking rules of decorum, I was merely stating that I had seen a lot more of them on lately. I probably should have built my paragraph better. :P


Thank you for clarifying. Sorry if I seem twitchy on the subject. I'd like
to be sure we at least agree on facts, if not interpretations of them.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net
29 Aug, 2008, Vladaar wrote in the 29th comment:
Votes: 0
Kayle said:
Why do you capitalize all of Staff like it's an acronym? I'm curious.


Well its not a good explanation, but it comes from the old days of seeing bouncers in bars with STAFF on
their shirt backs. Its been a hard habit for me to break, to write it with only the S capitalized.
29 Aug, 2008, Kayle wrote in the 30th comment:
Votes: 0
That's an amusing anecdote. And makes total sense. XD
29 Aug, 2008, Detah wrote in the 31st comment:
Votes: 0
I would like to reverberate the point Cratylus made about the default i3 channels. Potty mouths and other vulgar peoople are quickly shuffled to the intergossip or free_speech channels. Those two channels have not been on by default for several versions now. Any creator can access them if they wish, of course. But you will need to manually turn them.

I always keep intergossip, free_speech, and ichat(IMC2) off for all creators and all players. I have found that these three channels are inhabited by the kinds of people Samson was talking about. By choice, I do not surround myself with foul language. So I keep them off. I also run a kid-friendly mud, so I definitely do not want those kinds of channels 'running' during the game for anyone to hear (creator or player).

The default (on) channels for Dead Souls lib muds are: ds (channel for specific Dead Souls lib chat), dchat (general chatter channel), ds_test (for testing stuff) and intercre (usually technical coding discussions). I have been on these 4 channels for over 2 years now and I assure you, there is no foul language nor other inappropriate conversations there. I am a stickler on this point. I just will not put up with it.

If you have not been to these channels recently, I encourage you to check them out. We are always discussing some kind of design or coding issues.

Detah@Arcania

EDIT:
When I say on by default, I am talking about those channels which are on for Creators/Admin. The only channel that is on for players is the (local) newbie channel.
20.0/31