On Mon, 19 Jan 1998, Bowes, Chris wrote:
->hmmm, so if I code a shit load of spells/skills/features to enable
->me to run a PK-mud,would you consider that a bad mud just
->because i didn`t change things about circle that
->i happen to like (for example the interface) ?
Two things: more isn't better; and I think Fili made a point of saying
that it isn't a matter of changing CircleMUD (as that would take the
"circlemud" out of "circlemud"--whatever that means). Any kind of
change--whether it is an addition or a modifcation or even a
subtraction--can increase the originality of a MUD.
->and you haven`t
->considered that people get their muds up and running at different
->stages - one implementor may wait bloody ages until hes made
->shit loads of changes to put the mud up and playable, whereas
->another may choose to make the mud playable and code the
->changes while the game is being played/tested ... both muds
->may end up with nice new things and equally origional, but your
->list would already brand the mud which goes up straigh away as
->crap even though it is being developed to origionality...
That's not even a consideration. The implementor that takes ages to
put up a MUD that meets the guide lines of the SPCC will have to wait
those ages before he becomes a member of the SPCC. The implementor
that does it right away, can apply to the SPCC right away. I doubt
the SPCC would list MUDs that haven't applied; and the implementor
that is slow in starting should know his MUD doesn't meet the SPCC
guide lines yet, so why would he even apply?
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST