Should Armageddon Mud be Open Sourced?

[Malken]

Finally, if we did want to look at the lesson that  God Wars II teaches. Couldn't we argue that the lesson taught here is that sometime after God Wars II's code was stolen, disseminated to other users and eventually released to the community at large that the creator of the codebase lost all motivation to actively develop it and instead abandoned the project? Could not the same thing happen if Armageddon's code was released to the wider community? If we're going to act as if the two situations are comparable (I don't think they are).

My understanding of God Wars II is that it's the original God Wars' code that was leaked and then made public (in 1996), because the creator had already given up on it. God Wars' II codebase is certainly not public domain.

When are you planning to release the God Wars II code?

God Wars II, like God Wars before it, is designed to be a MUD rather than a public codebase. As such, we have no plans to release the source code.

Can I have a copy just to look at? I won't run it, honest! I just want to see how it works.
Sorry, but no. We're not falling for that one again.

Is God Wars II based on the original God Wars code?
God Wars II is effectively written from scratch, and uses none of the code from the original God Wars - only ideas and concepts. The only existing code we've used comes from work we've previously written ourselves, from scratch, such as some of the code from Glad2.0.

[Armaddict]

Yeah.

I fail to see any benefit whatsoever to this.

[Maziel]

TLDR: The comparable lesson is that the war on drugs doesn't work, and legalizing it grants government control instead of dealing with organized crime. Legal alcohol = bored mafia.  There's another comparable situation John.

Again, not seeing them as comparable situations. 2 or 3 instances of Armageddon getting posted online over the span of 17 years isn't comparable to someone on staff continually leaking the code to several clones being hosted with active staff and active playerbases. Your obviously looking at God Wars II and Armageddon at a very high level whereas I'm drilling down to a much more detailed viewpoint. At a high level view of "These are MUDs" and "these muds had one or more clones posted online" then yes the situations are comparable. But I don't think that level of analysis isn't really helpful.

Finally, if we did want to look at the lesson that  God Wars II teaches. Couldn't we argue that the lesson taught here is that sometime after God Wars II's code was stolen, disseminated to other users and eventually released to the community at large that the creator of the codebase lost all motivation to actively develop it and instead abandoned the project? Could not the same thing happen if Armageddon's code was released to the wider community? If we're going to act as if the two situations are comparable (I don't think they are).

Finally: Who wants to do something with the codebase and what do they want to do? We're talking hypotheticals here. Is anyone actually interested in starting a new MUD using the Armageddon code base? If yes, why?

God Wars II is still being actively worked on by KaViR. We're talking about past project(s). He released stuff in the past for control, I'm now unsure if it once was or multiple times, and then proceeded to do something greater with the security risk removed.

I'm sorry that the analysis wasn't helpful for you.

Again, the comparableness between them is control. There's at least one copy of the Arm codebase out there. Arm staff could make that obsolete if they wanted to, and append their own license requirements as well. A lot of folks are saying that it would be difficult to take legal action against Arm given that so much of the world is derived from Dark Sun - not exactly legal high ground. I don't want to get into whether that's valid or not because I have no idea. If they released an updated core engine (meaning not the world), they could add whatever licenses they want to it. As only the core engine - nothing dark sun related - is being released/licensed, there's no worry of legal high ground or whatever. The hacked version would become obsolete and it's unlikely anyone would bother trying to get the Arm database files when they can access the engine legally.  Regardless of the 'comparableness' or even accuracy, I think the general lesson is relevant.

Let me ask you a question.

Would it offend you if someone made a MUD using the Armageddon codebase in a different setting? Why or why not?

To answer yours, it would depend on whether or not the codebase is in good shape. I actually suspect that it's changed hands so many times that it's a mess that's hard to modify. If that is the case, I would not be interested in using it to start my own MUD, but I would be interested in contributing some features to enrich Armageddon. If it is in good shape, I would start a Sci-Fi themed MUD because there is not a RPI ready codebase in good shape out there. Any beneficial engine changes would be made available upstream (Arm engine).

[jalden]

[Removed by User]

[Chettaman]

I'm opposed to this idea because of the "criminal" element that may of either forced a post like this or planned a post like this.
But... I do like positive change and reaching out to people who want to do things with the code will increase the amount of possible positive change as well as how fast those changes are put up. "breaking up" the player base is a bad idea all around. I can agree having more than one group of people making reasonable changes for a common goal is beautiful, because we grow when we work together and not around each other.

While seperating meta-gamers from roleplayers seems like a good idea, I was once a meta-gamer. But only because I was like 15 and had just gotten done experiencing Halo with gunnerblaster for the first time. After hearing more bad ass stuff Gunner did and I had realized, by then, that Arm wasn't just another game. It was a roleplaying game to the truest sense. So I decided I would play a role. A merchant. A woman merchant. Just to get a feel for being someone I wasn't. ... and it worked out. I had done some really merchanty things and I had done some clueless noob things, but I learned that it wasn't about killing all the creatures! I had fun talking and making up these scenes with other people. I learned just how quickly it could all end when they introduced the animals hunt code and tarantulas.
My next favorite character was another merchant. An elf this time. An old elf. Things were different this time. He wasn't accepted by anyone but other elves or breeds, but people dealt with him regularly because I'm a badass salesman. And I had a blast not doing any combat-like stuff again. Which is surprising because I love combat.
Then I went down a row of warriors that mostly died to falls and ugh... but I had most of my fun chatting and interacting! Not skilling up, because I didn't know how it worked.
But, I understand. Some people really get their jollies off of killing lots of the NPC and PCs, and I'll agree, because that shit is exciting. Whatever the reason may be, the way you play is your own.
I /really/ don't like the idea of more than one server, but other than splitting up the playerbase I can't think of why not... We grow together, ya know...? We have more fun together. That's my only argument. against different servers.

Just like Lenux, though, when he put his operating system out there for anyone to use. People were able to make it better. Sheesh... we got regular robin hoods on the scene...

Down with the rebel scum!

I can't believe I understand how knights feel for their king now.

***
comparing linux to arm code:
It's a code and being a code it can be changed and modified to adapt any situation.
the difference in these situations is Linux wanted people to use his code for the betterment of anyone/anything able to do so.
The people who made the arm code did not want people using the code unless they were given permission to.
Respect! I'm definitely opposed to disrespecting people's ideals.

[Maziel]

But... I do like positive change and reaching out to people who want to do things with the code will increase the amount of possible positive change as well as how fast those changes are put up.

Personally, I wouldn't be willing to volunteer my time working on it without it being something reusable. I just wouldn't want my work to go to waste like that.

They probably wouldn't have me anyways though.

[Chettaman]

The idea of sharing the code is to come together as people who love this game to make it better.
Not to have your ideas put into motion.

We all throw out ideas, we all give input, we all give our arguments and together we make an agreement.
The best part is, it's a game. No one's actual life is at stake so we can just make changes if we notice things aren't working out.
And yes, we have leaders that do this communing already and they give us the ability to speak about them in the forums. We have /some/ power in what happens in the game. I think it would be neat if we could see all of the "things to come" (there probably is and I just never knew) and help out with them or whatever, but our leaders already have this set up and it is happening. Much faster these days. Progress is already being made so I can't complain about how much faster it would be if there was more than one person involved.

and I understand you said "personally". But what's the point of a ''test'' server to see how code works out if you don't make code to be tested for rejection or acceptance? Mostly Rhetorical. I apologize for the rhetoric.

[Iiyola]

No. No no no.

A big game like this needs structure. A backbone. And a brain. If you just allow everyone to tweak it it'll be the downfall of the game.

By the way, Jalden (and Maziel). Why do you suddenly pop up? Or is this a shadow account? If so, why not use your own account?

[jalden]

[Removed by User]

[Maziel]

The idea of sharing the code is to come together as people who love this game to make it better.
Not to have your ideas put into motion.

...

and I understand you said "personally". But what's the point of a ''test'' server to see how code works out if you don't make code to be tested for rejection or acceptance? Mostly Rhetorical. I apologize for the rhetoric.

Aww rhetoric haha

I think there may be something of a misunderstanding here.

1) I wouldn't have plans of putting my ideas into motion if working on the engine for Arm. They could be anybody's as long as I want to do them and there's a need.
Edit: If the engine was in good enough condition for me to make my own MUD, then changes could be added upstream if deemed valuable - or not. I would have them available to pull/merge if they want 'em while simultaneously getting updates upstream that I like (some of which would first be pulled from other branches downstream of the source).
2) Reusability didn't mean that every bit has to be used. I program with the expectation that it's going to be wrong (or not as good as it could be) and that it'll need to be changed - so I try and make it as readable and reusable as possible (making each part of the process a distinct chunk that can be referenced and still used if other bits are no longer relevant/good). What I meant is that I would rather work on something immortal. Open Source projects, or anything approximating the definition, have an immortality to them. The engine may be in bad shape at first, and nobody may end up using it anyways, but the potential would be there. The story is known and available. Putting my heart into it only to lose it is too tragic. I couldn't handle that.

I hope that makes some amount of sense.

[John]

My understanding of God Wars II is that it's the original God Wars' code that was leaked and then made public (in 1996), because the creator had already given up on it. God Wars' II codebase is certainly not public domain.

So God Wars was leaked online before or after Kavir had decided to start work on God Wars II? If after, then this is even less comparable to Armageddon.

Again, the comparableness between them is control. There's at least one copy of the Arm codebase out there. Arm staff could make that obsolete if they wanted to, and append their own license requirements as well.

Unlike in the God Wars situation where the codebase was leaked to staff of other MUDs who were actively building up a new MUD, there is no indication that anyone is trying to use the stolen Armageddon codebase to develop a new MUD. All we have had is people boot up a clone of an outdated version of Armageddon and have people create walking dildos to explore said environment. Therefore I would argue there is no actual evidence that anyone has any interest in creating a brand new MUD, unconnected to Armageddon but using the Armageddon codebase.

A lot of folks are saying that it would be difficult to take legal action against Arm

I would hardly constitute however many regular posters jcarter has managed to amass as "a lot of folks" but, this has no bearing on the conversation at hand really. The fact Kavir built his own codebase (AFAIK, anyone want to correct me on this?) did not stop Kavir from failing to take legal action in the courts. I don't know very many people in the MUD community who have the ability to take someone on the internet to court and then actually get the judgement awarded to them.

If they released an updated core engine (meaning not the world), they could add whatever licenses they want to it.

If the staff want to take the time and effort to do this then I would support them in that endeavour. However I am of the opinion this would do nothing to dissaude the people who feel it's acceptable to load up an outdated Arm clone for people to go play in as I do not think it is Armageddon's code that draws those people's interest.

Would it offend you if someone made a MUD using the Armageddon codebase in a different setting? Why or why not?

No. Armageddon staff are free to allow people to do whatever they want with the code (within the confines of the original DIKU license).

To answer yours, it would depend on whether or not the codebase is in good shape. I actually suspect that it's changed hands so many times that it's a mess that's hard to modify.

Exactly (although I think the code is likely in a much better state then it was a few months ago. Looks like Arm staff are really taking the time to go through the code and give it a really good house cleaning which seems to be accelerating the deployment of new features which is great to see). I'm sure it would take much more effort from the Arm staff to get it into a state where others would be able to easily use it.

I would be interested in contributing some features to enrich Armageddon.

THen you should definitely get in touch with the Armageddon staff. I believe they've discussed before the issues with bringing on new coders isn't as simple as someone saying "I want to help" and then having them throw new coede into the MUD. However I can't find the exact posts I'm thinking of. So if you are interested in contributing to the code, I'd definitely recommend asking staff about it. And once you do start working with the code you could then potentially approach staff at some point in the future about using it for your own MUD ideas.

[Maziel]

I feel like the god wars thing is becoming something of a syntax argument. Not literally, but...

I'm out man 

There was only one flying dildo that I'm aware of 

Good points.

[John]

I feel like the god wars thing is becoming something of a syntax argument.

Sorry I either kept missing what you were saying or not articulating my point better.

[Chettaman]

to maziel: Yes that makes sense to me.

I'm opposed to this idea because of the "criminal" element that may of either forced a post like this or planned a post like this.

Do you mean my post? If so rude .

comparing linux to arm code:
It's a code and being a code it can be changed and modified to adapt any situation.
the difference in these situations is Linux wanted people to use his code for the betterment of anyone/anything able to do so.
The people who made the arm code did not want people using the code unless they were given permission to.
Respect! I'm definitely opposed to disrespecting people's ideals.

Yep if the people who created the game don't want it to be shared that should be their call.

Yes rude, but reasonable. This is the kind of attitude I have in a discussion like this. Because in a sense this is very serious. And in another sense, this is just a game. As an uncle, I choke my nephew when he starts being ungrateful and pouty for no reason. Excessive? I think so. But my skills involve breaking things and being cool-headed enough to see and learn truth. Not talking. But I have to do something, because in those moments I'm the one responsible for how he'll grow up. So I use what I'm good at constructively - anyway.
Believe me when I say that I'm not comparing you to an ungrateful, pouty thirteen year old. I'm only stating that there are certain ways to make people see reason and I'm very blunt. If my nephew wants to listen to music and he feels like he's exhausted all of his options without consulting someone he didn't think to involve then I can gladly say he was wrong in his pouting and hopelessness. After putting him in a headlock, I taught him some more fighting stuff and then let him use the god damn lap top that was sitting beside him to listen to music. I don't want anyone that I can be responsible for to get upset over something like not being able to listen to music. - and if it is reasonable to get upset I showed him how to alleviate his suffering by telling him he could of just asked for help. He was listening after I put him in the one-eyed chicken wing.
In the sense of this discussion, I'm not responsible for you or anyone here... but I'm big headed enough to say that I /could/ try to be. Because that's how we grow as a society. Together. You help me see your point and I help you see my point and we produce the best thing together.

I'm not being rude for no reason. I'm not going to sugar coat anything. I'm going to be direct. And I'm going to tell you the truth if I know it, and I think that I do, because I like to believe I'm incredibly impartial.
It is reasonable for me to believe it may of been you. It is reasonable for me to believe it could of been Maziel. It is reasonable for me to understand that it doesn't matter who it was.
It's happened. I'm getting over it. Let me adapt. This whole issue is a big deal. But me not thinking passed how to discipline this possible criminal element is only going to hurt me and since my posts will be read by others it will affect them. The one thing that hasn't changed is the fact that I love Armageddon and even from this we can grow. Maybe not directly, or around or with or against, in no way specific, but we can. We can grow.

I would like a staffer to come in and say something like this:
"Everything's fine. We're still rolling on despite the leak. Just keep having fun.
This is what's happening. This is how we're handling it. We're still a steam roller, baby. Just rollin' down the line."
- Only for this situation at least, until everything has calmed down. Because this is a situation involving everyone who loves Armageddon and its community - even after/during or possibly before bad experiences.

In my college class last week: My teacher never showed up, but we all still had to do the work. So... we decided that we would find all the answers on a web page. Someone would type them all out and print them. Me, being me warned everyone about the possibilities of such a terrible plan, but if you knew me you'd know I didn't really care either way. So... that's what we did and we turned them into the guy in charge. The new dean or whatever, the whole time he was asking us if we had plagiarized and /everyone/ else was pretending like every packet turned in didn't look exactly the same. They were pretending that we didn't just get all the answers off of the internet. And all I could do was smirk.
so...
last night my teacher is back and he tells us exactly what happened. He's a pretty cool guy and he doesn't care that we did it either, BUT he is concerned if we actually learned anything. - at any rate, he tells us that he brought the papers to the dean after noticing they were all exactly the same. And the dean (we shall call him the man from now on) said, "Well what're you gonna do about it?"
BAM - the man has set us up. Us being the teacher and the class. He has set up the teacher against us.
So... when the teacher confronts us and tells us this and warns us very subtly (it was even funny to him) about what may happen and how we as a group will mediate the situation, the people in the class don't seem to follow and they even get angry. At first, I thought they were just playing along, but it was clear after a few minutes that they were actually angry. BAM - the man has set us against the teacher. ... and then the man comes into the class room to review his peer.
Oh... there's hostility. Our teacher understands that we don't understand, though... so he has considered the words of his next speech and his actions as well very carefully. I can tell. He tells us again how things are going to be mediated and this time he ends the discussion without any niceties. The man, after some watching and listening to the silence criticizes one unruly student about something that has nothing to do with the situation or even the class we're in currently - they have some passive aggressive words and the man leaves.

throughout the rest of the night, my class criticized and made passive aggressive statements about how the teacher handled this situation. Even if we/they were the reason the situation even existed. Even if our teacher's job may have been at stake because of something we shouldn't have done. So after only a few passive aggressive statements from them, I stood out and apologized to our teacher. The other students cut the passive aggressive BS, but they were still upset. People left early and the people who stayed were being moody. The teacher too, was being moody, but reasonably so. He had given us a chance to work with him against the man and beat him at his own game - but no. We ate right out of the man's hand and created a hostile situation.

I'm wise enough to understand the consequences of my actions. I'm brave/humble enough to admit when I'm wrong. I'm brave/humble/wise enough to admit when I'm right!
This isn't about winning to me. It isn't about losing to me. I want the best of the best.
So I'll say it in my kind, blunt way. Don't respond to the people of the GDB who have opposing ideas about the GDB and armageddon as if you're better than us. If you want to make us better, I appreciate it and welcome it. Please attempt to stop your passive aggressiveness and make your points with the knowledge that this community is, for the most part, angry about what happened and that have to grow from it anyway. Positive growth is preferred.
And that goes for the GDB too. No passive aggressiveness, please. Make your points with the knowledge that we have to grow anyway. Positive growth is preferred.

also I've come to a decision. I don't think Arm should be open sourced.
I would like to encourage staff to reach out to trustworthy people to grow, however. (they're growing like crazy - so I really have no argument)
I would suggest people who aren't involved with the game, but having people who know nothing about the thing they're working on could affect the outcome...
Shit, I don't know /how/ you choose trust worthy people. Keep doing it, though. You're doing a great job these days. I'm proud of you for one.

[jalden]

[Removed by User]

[evilcabbage]

i drew from his whole thing that we've all been set up (or some of us) and are being laughed at.

but yes. choking your nephew is definitely abuse. you need to not do that, please, for your own sake.


this is literally the worst time to ask about open-sourcing the mud. let's be fair, we don't know if some jaded dick handed over a password that worked, or if there was an sql injection.

what we do know is stuff was posted and, whether certain people want to interpret it that way or not, for 30 or so minutes doxxing occurred.

in light of this, asking about open-sourcing a mud where the life of a lot of people has been sunk into it, to craft their baby into a lovely thing that's full of anger and rage and blood and death and tears and joy, probably is a bit presumptuous.


what they did was wrong. we all get it. it was wrong on a few levels. we get it.


at this point, we need to just stop talking about it. it's over with. it happened, it won't (hopefully) happen again, and now we need to just move on and stop rabble-rousing about this.


again, no, the mud should not be open sourced.

thank you for your time.

[Eurynomos]

Locked. Advertising for another MUD on the GDB is against the rules of the GDB.

[Adhira]

I have unlocked this thread.

I would like to remind everyone of our rules of no flaming or trolling. This includes people that are not here on these boards or posting on this thread. Please keep it civil or this thread will be locked again.

[jalden]

[Removed by User]

[BadSkeelz]

The Arm codebase may look really nice up front on the player side, but it's my understanding that it's something of a nightmare to work with and update on the back end. That alone is a huge blocker to the idea that releasing it would be a good idea.

If you want to have other muds with the same content and themes of Armageddon, you'd probably be better off building them with more modern, flexible code bases.

[Case]

Thank you Adhira. It probably should have been worded differently, and this may not have been the right time. But the poll question was genuine. It looks like the playerbase overwhelmingly does not think that the game should be shared. I disagree and think that we would see a boost in popularity, more innovation, and a less divisive community if the game were treated as an open source community project. But there would be downsides as well.

Yeah ok cool

I mean I totally disagree on any of those pros but it sure sounds nice

[Dan]

This should not even be a discussion. How incredibly selfish to want to open the source and pull people away from the game. Respect the boundaries and play by the rules, my fun and everyone else who agrees on the foundational principles of the game depends upon that. Absolutely not.

[Maziel]

This should not even be a discussion. How incredibly selfish to want to open the source and pull people away from the game. Respect the boundaries and play by the rules, my fun and everyone else who agrees on the foundational principles of the game depends upon that. Absolutely not.

You're projecting here. I do not think wanting to volunteer your time to something you love is selfish. This is, after all, a community driven game (edit: and scene in general). That includes both players and staff.

[Maziel]

Thank you Adhira. It probably should have been worded differently, and this may not have been the right time. But the poll question was genuine. It looks like the playerbase overwhelmingly does not think that the game should be shared. I disagree and think that we would see a boost in popularity, more innovation, and a less divisive community if the game were treated as an open source community project. But there would be downsides as well.

Yeah ok cool

I mean I totally disagree on any of those pros but it sure sounds nice

If you elaborate, I'll do my best to respond constructively

[Chettaman]

it would boost popularity, but possibly splitting the playerbase would be counter productive to the game becoming more popular. *unless it were like an incredible increase. Alright. I'll give you that. I see where you're coming from. But I don't think the result of sharing the code will be as "profitable" as you believe.
More innovation definitely true. - but this can already be done without exposing the code. It's already being done if you ask me. It's not super-incredible fast, but it's happening and I love it.
addressing less diverse... um. I don't think of diversity when I'm playing my video games, but more diversity would be my goal if I aimed for it.
I guess less diversity in terms of role player to people who play to ''win''? I'm not sure really what you meant by less diversity.