19 Oct, 2009, Davion wrote in the 222nd comment:
19 Oct, 2009, Kayle wrote in the 223rd comment:
All three versions of the FUSS Bases, (SmaugFUSS, SWRFUSS, and SWFotEFUSS) support the plaintext version, as does the latest version of AFKMud. Whether or not the copies in this repository here contain the MSSP Patches is beyond me, but the ones with it can certainly be found at SmaugMUDs.org in the Files section.
08 Mar, 2010, KaVir wrote in the 225th comment:
Scandum said:
My last count was 19 muds supporting the telnet version, and 12 supporting plain text.
There's a minor problem with muds not precisely following the specification, so I have my crawler list incorrect fields in red: http://tintin.sourceforge.net/mssp/mudli...
mudstats.com has implemented MSSP, MudBytes is supposed to implement it, TMS was interested but Lasher was pretty busy irl last time I checked, and just emailed TMC to see where they stand.
There's a minor problem with muds not precisely following the specification, so I have my crawler list incorrect fields in red: http://tintin.sourceforge.net/mssp/mudli...
mudstats.com has implemented MSSP, MudBytes is supposed to implement it, TMS was interested but Lasher was pretty busy irl last time I checked, and just emailed TMC to see where they stand.
Any more news on this, Scandum? I've heard nothing more, no other sites seem to use it, and even your crawler appears to have stopped updating.
08 Mar, 2010, Scandum wrote in the 226th comment:
KaVir said:
Any more news on this, Scandum? I've heard nothing more, no other sites seem to use it, and even your crawler appears to have stopped updating.
20 muds supporting telnet, and 17 supporting plain text. I only run the crawler whenever I add a new mud to the crawl list.
It's slow going, not sure if there's anything that can be done to speed it up.
08 Mar, 2010, KaVir wrote in the 227th comment:
Well you could spruce the list up a bit, perhaps even organise it more like a proper searchable mud database. If you look around the TMC and TMS forums there are numerous mud requests from players, simply because many things aren't covered by the listings. You could use that to find ideas for extending MSSP with new optional fields. There is clearly a demand that existing mud listing sites aren't supplying, and if you set a strong example it'll increase the chances of others following.
Is the MSSP list used by tintin at all? If not, that might be another way to get people interested in supporting the protocol.
Have you tried pushing the idea on other forums, encouraging muds to join up and providing them with links to easily-installable MSSP snippets?
Is the MSSP list used by tintin at all? If not, that might be another way to get people interested in supporting the protocol.
Have you tried pushing the idea on other forums, encouraging muds to join up and providing them with links to easily-installable MSSP snippets?
11 Mar, 2010, Hades_Kane wrote in the 228th comment:
Since I've been out of the loop the last six months, I was wondering how this was going as well, because when I stepped back from everything, this was still a bit controversial.
Did MudBytes end up implementing this as the primary means of supporting their MUD listing? Did you ever hear back from TMC?
Did MudBytes end up implementing this as the primary means of supporting their MUD listing? Did you ever hear back from TMC?
11 Mar, 2010, Davion wrote in the 229th comment:
Hades_Kane said:
Since I've been out of the loop the last six months, I was wondering how this was going as well, because when I stepped back from everything, this was still a bit controversial.
Did MudBytes end up implementing this as the primary means of supporting their MUD listing? Did you ever hear back from TMC?
Did MudBytes end up implementing this as the primary means of supporting their MUD listing? Did you ever hear back from TMC?
It's definitely not implemented as a primary means of supporting a MUD listing. Far to few MUDs on our listing support it. However! Those that do are given another page here which generates a cloud of the MSSP tags for surfin
11 Mar, 2010, Scandum wrote in the 230th comment:
Mudpedia uses some of MSSP's organization, and as such is a way to flesh out the fuzzy sub-genre categories. The biggest weakness of MSSP is that it's difficult to correct MUDs that add incorrect information, but a Wiki isn't the most ideal way to go about it either.
Not really interested in creating yet another mud list. The crawler page gives a free link, which is all I can offer. There is MTH which makes it fairly easy to implement MSSP, and also adds NAWS, TTYPE, and MCCP while at it.
[link=file]2608[/link]
http://mudstats.com actively promotes MSSP and links to the specificationwhich in turn links to a bunch of resources.
Not really interested in creating yet another mud list. The crawler page gives a free link, which is all I can offer. There is MTH which makes it fairly easy to implement MSSP, and also adds NAWS, TTYPE, and MCCP while at it.
[link=file]2608[/link]
http://mudstats.com actively promotes MSSP and links to the specificationwhich in turn links to a bunch of resources.
26 Mar, 2011, quixadhal wrote in the 231st comment:
This listing itself is cool, but I think the data is a bit suspect:
A MUD I've never heard of claims to have 928 connections, yet one I know is popular has only 13?
Maybe that's true, but since I see several claiming to have over 500 connections, when in this day and age, 100 is phenomenal, I think something isn't working quite right. Either "Connections" means something non-intuitive, or some of these games are reporting incorrect (or intentionally faked) numbers.
A MUD I've never heard of claims to have 928 connections, yet one I know is popular has only 13?
Malicious Bliss http://darrens.ca 8052 928 RoT 8/21/06, 1:32 pm
Discworld http://discworld.atuin.net 4242 13 LP 3/26/09, 7:19 pm
Maybe that's true, but since I see several claiming to have over 500 connections, when in this day and age, 100 is phenomenal, I think something isn't working quite right. Either "Connections" means something non-intuitive, or some of these games are reporting incorrect (or intentionally faked) numbers.
26 Mar, 2011, KaVir wrote in the 232nd comment:
quixadhal said:
This listing itself is cool, but I think the data is a bit suspect:
Which listing, exactly? You necro'd a year old thread without quoting anyone, and the figures you're providing don't match either Scandum's list or MudStats.
13 Apr, 2011, Scandum wrote in the 233rd comment:
Time for a small update.
I added "UTF-8", "MSDP", and "GMCP" to the list of protocol variables. I also performed a global crawl, which brought the total number of MSSP enabled muds to date to 65 of which 46 have a TELNET implementation. Most of the newly listed are TinyMUD derivatives.
I also made some minor improvements to the crawler.
http://tintin.sourceforge.net/mssp/mudli...
I added "UTF-8", "MSDP", and "GMCP" to the list of protocol variables. I also performed a global crawl, which brought the total number of MSSP enabled muds to date to 65 of which 46 have a TELNET implementation. Most of the newly listed are TinyMUD derivatives.
I also made some minor improvements to the crawler.
http://tintin.sourceforge.net/mssp/mudli...
13 Apr, 2011, Kayle wrote in the 234th comment:
All of the FUSS codebases (SmaugFUSS, SWRFUSS, an SWFotEFUSS) support MSSP out of the box.
I also noticed that no information is available for MW, you have the Greeting, but no displayed information. Just a "#SESSION "mssp" DIED." Care to explain why?
It's not like I'm going to fix anything in the old copy that I'm still not sure why it's running, but I'd still be curious as to why.
I also noticed that no information is available for MW, you have the Greeting, but no displayed information. Just a "#SESSION "mssp" DIED." Care to explain why?
It's not like I'm going to fix anything in the old copy that I'm still not sure why it's running, but I'd still be curious as to why.
13 Apr, 2011, KaVir wrote in the 235th comment:
Scandum said:
I added "UTF-8", "MSDP", and "GMCP" to the list of protocol variables.
UTF-8 and MSDP were already listed as extended variables, so they're already included in my snippet, but if I release an update I'll add a GMCP variable as well.
Scandum said:
I also performed a global crawl, which brought the total number of MSSP enabled muds to date to 65 of which 46 have a TELNET implementation. Most of the newly listed are TinyMUD derivatives.
I still reckon you should include the extended variables and turn it into a proper mud list. Sure, there would still be some issues (like Locke's mud which returns a random number between 2 and 20 for PLAYERBASE every time you send MSSP-REQUEST), but in most cases it would be far more accurate than TMC or TMS.
13 Apr, 2011, Scandum wrote in the 236th comment:
Kayle said:
Care to explain why?
I've dealt with too much verbal abuse from you and your buddies to care.
KaVir said:
I still reckon you should include the extended variables and turn it into a proper mud list. Sure, there would still be some issues (like Locke's mud which returns a random number between 2 and 20 for PLAYERBASE every time you send MSSP-REQUEST), but in most cases it would be far more accurate than TMC or TMS.
Most of the LPMud and TinyMUD entries are poorly filled out, but it's something I've been considering to undertake.
13 Apr, 2011, KaVir wrote in the 237th comment:
Scandum said:
Most of the LPMud and TinyMUD entries are poorly filled out, but it's something I've been considering to undertake.
To be honest there's currently no reason to fill in most of the fields, as no websites actually use them. An MSSP mud list would change that.
13 Apr, 2011, Scandum wrote in the 238th comment:
KaVir said:
To be honest there's currently no reason to fill in most of the fields, as no websites actually use them. An MSSP mud list would change that.
Scandum said:
Most of the LPMud and TinyMUD entries are poorly filled out, but it's something I've been considering to undertake.
To be honest there's currently no reason to fill in most of the fields, as no websites actually use them. An MSSP mud list would change that.
MudBytes has a search cloud which is a fairly elegant way to go about it, though it only uses a limited set of variables.
http://www.mudbytes.net/index.php?a=mudl...
I'm not sure if the MB crawler is still running.
13 Apr, 2011, Cratylus wrote in the 239th comment:
Scandum said:
I've dealt with too much verbal abuse from you and your buddies to care.
That's a dumb attitude. Just because you don't like Kayle and whoever his "buddies" might be (as if he has any), doesn't
mean it's a question to be ignored. it's a valid question that people you do approve of might find usefully answered.
Be a proper maintainer.
Scandum said:
it's something I've been considering to undertake.
One of the most surprising things about the MSSP row was all the people bitching about how their mud was
getting unwanted probes, as if they had some kind of guarantee on the Internet of not being poked at. I wonder
to what extent this was a genuinely felt gripe independent of MSSP being a Scandum thing, or if they just disliked
Scandum so hard that an MSSP probe was tantamount to UFIA.
I'm inclined to think that it was more the latter than the former, and I think that the "you and your buddies"
attitude just perpetuates the perception of you that undermines what might otherwise be perfectly acceptable
and adoptable protocols.
-Crat
http://lpmuds.net
13 Apr, 2011, Scandum wrote in the 240th comment:
Kayle said:
I have hostility towards Scandum, for all the dumb shit he's said in the past, and I don't trust anything he's ever written with regards to clients, or snippets for various codebases. And I will continue to ignore just about everything he works on, until someone I do trust to have a clue in what they're talking about or doing gets involved. Hence why MSSP DID NOT go into any FUSS Project Codebase until after the MSSP protocol was well out of Scandum's control.
Cratylus said:
Be a proper maintainer.
I thought it was well out of my control, not too mention I'm apparently too stupid to help out Kayle.
This maintainer is done dealing with assholes.
Random Picks
There's a minor problem with muds not precisely following the specification, so I have my crawler list incorrect fields in red: http://tintin.sourceforge.net/mssp/mudli...
mudstats.com has implemented MSSP, MudBytes is supposed to implement it, TMS was interested but Lasher was pretty busy irl last time I checked, and just emailed TMC to see where they stand.