Re: [MUD-Dev] Community Relations

[SkeptAck#antisocial,com (Dundee)]

Ola Fosheim Grøstad <olag#ifi,uio.no> wrote:

> And I don't think there is much use in getting into the specifics
> without getting the other parties viewpoint either. 

Right, sorry.  I don't mean to get into the specifics so much at all.  I'm
just not sure what questions to ask.  As far as I can tell, the things I need
to be doing are on the "Well, duh" level.

> Most admins will justify anything they do (I had no choice, it is my system, 
> he asked for it, it would have happened anyway...), and that's rather typical of
> people that acquire positions where they can exercise.

I should explain, maybe.  We've been up for ~6 months.  I have ~6 months
experience as an admin - and all of that's been on the game design and
development front, nothing to do with player-relations apart from listening
to them gripe about how various things work, or don't work, or should work,
etc., explaining what changes I'm making and why, and so on.  The dialog I've
had with players up to this point has purely revolved around game mechanics.

Four of us setup the mud.  No posted policies beyond "How to join" and "Don't
be a jerk".  No mud hierarchy.  No Arch-Wizard or Grand Poobah or whatever
you want to call it.  The host pulled the plug a few days ago, I found a new
host and put it back online.  And now I have a few days experience being the
Arch-Wizard or Grand Poobah or whatever you want to call it.

And the first thing I had to do, was to deal with this incident - which,
yeah, never would have happened in the first place if we'd done anything
right.  I still don't think that I *did* deal with it.  I think I tried,
couldn't do it, and finally banned the player just to shut him up.  I punted.

But I'm not happy with that solution, and I don't like the aura of fear I
sense now on the game message boards and such.  People are afraid to complain
now - even about legitimate problems with game mechanics (and they were never
shy about reporting these problems before).

> I am personally in favour of the empathic/autonomous/peerage with no visible 
> admin, but that assumes a design without serious flaws...

I think we're stuck with the fascist model.  heh.

> Yes, but the real question is not how to deal with him, but what skills
> do you require from your admins and what systems are in place to avoid
> the admin-player conflict?

That's a good question.  Currently there aren't any systems in place to
prevent it.  We still don't even have a code of conduct posted, for either
players or admins.

I wish there was a check-list somewhere.  Setting up a mud: a) Post this, b)
Post that, c) Decide this or that, d) etc.

-- 
http://dundee.uong.com/



_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev maillist  -  MUD-Dev#kanga,nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev