Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

Molly · 10-10-2002, 03:39 AM

IF the mudowner coded his mud from scratch and didn't just change the code a bit to conceal the fact that he is violating the Diku Licence, sure he should be able to profit from his own work. But then he could do it in an upfront way, charging everybody to play, which would make it a fair game for all that could afford it. (Most likely that would rule out the poor college student with no life, that you all worry so much about too, because he gets too successful at the game).

Again, I have no problem with P2P as long at it is clearly stated, and as long as it gives everybody equal chances. What I do have a problem with is paying for extra benefits, and for two reasons:
1. It's simply not fair play.
2. It's a trick that some unscrupolous mud owners use to disguise the fact that they are P2P and that way
a) lure more players into their game
b) conceal that they are actually breaking the Diku licence by charging money for their game.

I am talking about ethics and moral and fair play here, is that really so hard to understand? Since some people obviously don't get my point, let me try two very simple examples:

Scenario 1:
Boffo spends 3 years training hard to become a good 100 meters runner.
Biffo does not have the time and inclination to do this, because he has a 'real life'.
But Biffo has a rich father, and the owner of the sports-ground needs money to repair the boys' locker room. So Biffo's father donates 10000 $ to this very worthy cause.

In return the owner of the sportsground gives Biffo a head start of 10 m on Boffo in all 100 m races.

Do you think THAT is fair?

Scenario 2:
The manager of a TV store finds out that some of the employees steal the goods and sell it for a very good price to a fencer. Instead of reporting them to the police, he decides to do the same thing, to put some nice tax-free money into his own pocket, whilst also pocketing the insurance money.

Do you think THAT is fair?

----
As for the players selling top equip to each other, there are some ways of dealing with that problem, but that's another story.

10-10-2002, 03:39 AM	#70
Molly Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Sweden Home MUD: 4 Dimensions Posts: 574	IF the mudowner coded his mud from scratch and didn't just change the code a bit to conceal the fact that he is violating the Diku Licence, sure he should be able to profit from his own work. But then he could do it in an upfront way, charging everybody to play, which would make it a fair game for all that could afford it. (Most likely that would rule out the poor college student with no life, that you all worry so much about too, because he gets too successful at the game). Again, I have no problem with P2P as long at it is clearly stated, and as long as it gives everybody equal chances. What I do have a problem with is paying for extra benefits, and for two reasons: 1. It's simply not fair play. 2. It's a trick that some unscrupolous mud owners use to disguise the fact that they are P2P and that way a) lure more players into their game b) conceal that they are actually breaking the Diku licence by charging money for their game. I am talking about ethics and moral and fair play here, is that really so hard to understand? Since some people obviously don't get my point, let me try two very simple examples: Scenario 1: Boffo spends 3 years training hard to become a good 100 meters runner. Biffo does not have the time and inclination to do this, because he has a 'real life'. But Biffo has a rich father, and the owner of the sports-ground needs money to repair the boys' locker room. So Biffo's father donates 10000 $ to this very worthy cause. In return the owner of the sportsground gives Biffo a head start of 10 m on Boffo in all 100 m races. Do you think THAT is fair? Scenario 2: The manager of a TV store finds out that some of the employees steal the goods and sell it for a very good price to a fencer. Instead of reporting them to the police, he decides to do the same thing, to put some nice tax-free money into his own pocket, whilst also pocketing the insurance money. Do you think THAT is fair? ---- As for the players selling top equip to each other, there are some ways of dealing with that problem, but that's another story.