Imaginary Realities Imaginary Realities About Search Glossary
What's new? Index :)
Select issue:
Join a discussion Resources
     

History of Online Games
- Jessica Mulligan
Roleplayability in Muds
- Tommi Leino
If You Don't Like it, Leave!
- Selina Kelley
Know Thyself
- Carolyn Ebenstein
Taking Muds to the Next Level
- Nolan Darilek
Mud-Area Style Guide
- Marshall Buhl
Harvesting Ideas?
- Lord Ashon

Letters to the editor

Enter your email to be informed when this site is updated.


Comment on articles

Letter 1
Contact editors

   

If You Don't Like it, Leave!

by Selina Kelley

I've always considered myself a fair administrator. I try to think calmly, act rationally, and treat others with care. That being said, I am somewhat ashamed to admit that in some rare cases my calm, rational, careful thinking goes out the window and I end up saying to a problem player "If you don't like it, leave!".

I've seen this said many times since I've started mudding, and I've always tended to disagree with it. Blanket sayings, no matter how difficult the player, tend to make you look close-minded and arrogant. At the same time, doesn't an administrator have the right to say who plays the mud and who doesn't? Where do you draw the line?
Australian Federal Parliment House (at night)

Where democracy happens (sometimes).

I'm currently on a mud that can be considered fairly "easy-going" when it comes to rules, reception to complaints, and general patience. A player is given the right to voice their opinions about the game whether it be positive or negative, regardless of their maturity in voicing it. Sometimes this leads to players becoming unruly and argumentative, but while we guarantee that we'll listen to them, we have never guaranteed we'd do anything about it. So what do you do when a player just "won't let go"? It's difficult to just idly sit by and say nothing when a player becomes abusive, but what really is the "best" way to handle them?

The general consensus of the mud community is that a player has no rights on a mud anyway, and that if they disagree with the administrator, they'd best leave without causing a fuss. I disagree to a point. I believe that a player should have the right to give their view and opinion on the game, but they do not have the right to abuse others while doing it. I've chosen to run my mud as I would wish, if I were a player, a mud that I am on be run; somewhat democratic, fair, and most of all, fun. This means that I am receptive to any and all views of how the mud plays, is run, etc. At the same time, I do not normally tolerate an abusive player. But while a run of the mill administrator would generally "solve" a problem player by banning them, with the statement "you don't like it here, so go play elsewhere", I don't believe that the problems of a mud can ever be found or addressed by just removing people who disagree with how you run things.

Granted, the line between giving your opinion and abusing an administrator has always been thin and blurry, but if you look at every negative criticism from a player as constructive, rather than taking it personally, no matter how much a player hates aspect of your game, it is difficult for them to get to the stage of abusiveness when you spend the time to listen and talk to them.

It's possible that I have just been blessed with "good" players, but I don't really believe so. With the general population of muds tending toward younger players these days, you are always going to run into immaturity, and while it would be nicer to receive an intelligent, cohesive, constructive email from a player regarding your mud, you have to understand that the younger player cannot always place their true feelings in words that will not upset you. They normally don't mean it personally, but sometimes it is difficult to wade through the email and realize that. "This sucks" is not normally constructive criticism, but most of the time you can get them to explain what they mean just by talking to them and asking "why?". Most of the time, players only want their opinion heard, and if you have a legitimate reason for disagreeing with them, I have yet to find a time when that has not been acceptable.

I think what it boils down to is respect for the fellow player and administration alike. It also boils down to the maturity of the administration. Not everyone is out to get you. Not everyone is out to destroy your game. If you look at negative emails, posts, discussions, etc as an aim in making your mud "less yours", then it's possible you need to rethink having a mud in the first place.

I know it's not fun to be told that something you've worked on for possibly the last two years or more of your life might have flaws, but remember that nothing is perfect. Neither you, your mud, or the players on your mud will ever be 100% correct, the trick is to try to determine what is best for the mud and the players on it, without losing your temper.

If you don't like how my mud is run, tell me so. I can never make it better unless you do.