Re: [MUD-Dev] Wild west (was Guilds & Politics)

[Matt Chatterley <root#mpc,dyn.ml.org>]

On Thu, 11 Dec 1997, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> Derrick Jones <gunther#online1,magnus1.com> wrote:
> 
> >Most jerks don't see OOC verbal attacks (constant OOC insults, threats,
> >etc) as harassment because there is no damage one _to_the_jerk_.
> >Unfortunately, our ability to punish jerks is severly limited in that any
> >punishment must remain within the gameworld(?), which most jerks haven't
> >taken the effort of appriciating in the first place.
> 
> Good points, but I can't really say all "jerks" fall into this class.
> Maybe some differentiation would make the discussion somewhat easier
> to follow.  Right now, everyone on the list seems to stereotype
> "jerks" into one homogenous class of people.  I can't really say that
> this holds in my experience.

From experience: This 'dumping together' of 'jerks' into one
category/stereotype does *not* work. Players who might be called 'jerks'
(listen on the wizard line of a tiny-derivative for cries of 'twink') are
as wide and varied in type as normal players (if there is such an animal).
 
> Let me try to describe the two typical classes of troublemakers as I
> see them:
> 
> 1. Players that have become bored with the system and know how to
>    build a character in short time (or how to break the system).  Logs
>    onto the system (and other similar systems) every once in a while
>    to show off their power and get an adrenaline kick, then log off.

This seems reasonable as one type, although I'd say players who behave
like jerks from this category are relatively few in comparison.

> 2. Players that are bored with the system right from the start and does not
>    invest a lot of time in their character because there is a boring part
>    in there that they are not willing to attack.  However, they don't
>    really know about a better system so they insist on staying, try to get
>    others interested verbally, but annoy instead, and get caught up in a
>    personal war (or defence) in which annoying others is the weapon.

Yes, but same as above.
 
> However, I don't think the majority of "jerks" included in this
> discussions falls in these two cathegories. 

Agreed. I would add "Players who do not wish to learn the way the game
says they should play, but rather feel and believe that the game should
adapt to their style of play.", which seems to be a considerable portion
to me.

And then there are the 'mis-diagnosed' jerks - the players who are totally
confused about what they are doing, and who grow frustrated (and even rude
and offensive), and whom fall into the 'clueless newbie' category. Often
those who are bored with R-ing TFM.

Regards,
	-Matt Chatterley
	ICQ: 5580107
"I shall never believe that God plays dice with the world." -Einstein