Unknown2010-03-01 17:18:13
No, because the achievement is, in and of itself, incentive to vote.
Edit:
Straight from TMS.
Come to think of it, several of IRE's games are in violation of this with their nagging systems.
Edit:
QUOTE
Can I offer rewards for voting?
You CANNOT offer incentives or rewards to players for voting. That means you cannot give players items, experience, or anything else in return for votes. You cannot display different messages based on whether someone voted or not, or reward a player for voting by not showing messages. You cannot have a system that ‘nags’ a player about voting in response to whether they’ve voted or not unless participation in the system is totally voluntary with no tangible positive or negative effects for a player choosing to use or not use such a system. Such a system must also allow a player to easily opt out of it at any time, also with no positive or negative effect, and it must be off by default.
You CANNOT offer incentives or rewards to players for voting. That means you cannot give players items, experience, or anything else in return for votes. You cannot display different messages based on whether someone voted or not, or reward a player for voting by not showing messages. You cannot have a system that ‘nags’ a player about voting in response to whether they’ve voted or not unless participation in the system is totally voluntary with no tangible positive or negative effects for a player choosing to use or not use such a system. Such a system must also allow a player to easily opt out of it at any time, also with no positive or negative effect, and it must be off by default.
Straight from TMS.
Come to think of it, several of IRE's games are in violation of this with their nagging systems.
Zallafar2010-03-01 21:24:15
QUOTE (Sharduk @ Mar 1 2010, 09:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Come to think of it, several of IRE's games are in violation of this with their nagging systems.
But Lusternia's isn't, doggone it. It always annoys me to get nagged after I've voted.
Ilyarin2010-03-01 21:28:59
Yeah, that get around that particular one by having it show up regardless of whether or not you've voted.
Unknown2010-03-01 21:30:00
At least one of the systems isn't voluntary, that I know of.
Atellus2010-03-01 22:15:39
You could add an achievement to read the help file on why voting matters (HELP VOTING?).
Xenthos2010-03-01 22:45:38
QUOTE
Such a system must also allow a player to easily opt out of it at any time, also with no positive or negative effect, and it must be off by default.
Uh... Lusternia doesn't comply on this count. With the login nag, at least.
Unknown2010-03-01 22:49:29
QUOTE (Xenthos @ Mar 1 2010, 05:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Uh... Lusternia doesn't comply on this count. With the login nag, at least.
It does, but only because it doesn't differentiate between if you've voted or not. Either you can nag everyone whether they've voted or not, -or- you can nag someone only until they vote within X amount of time, but only if they opt-in for the nagging.
Xenthos2010-03-01 22:54:06
QUOTE (demonnic @ Mar 1 2010, 05:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
It does, but only because it doesn't differentiate between if you've voted or not. Either you can nag everyone whether they've voted or not, -or- you can nag someone only until they vote within X amount of time, but only if they opt-in for the nagging.
Wrong.
"You cannot have a system that ‘nags’ a player about voting in response to whether they’ve voted or not unless participation in the system is totally voluntary with no tangible positive or negative effects for a player choosing to use or not use such a system. Such a system must also allow a player to easily opt out of it at any time, also with no positive or negative effect, and it must be off by default."
It specifically states that it cannot nag a player about voting unless participation is completely mandatory and defaults to off. And there is no way to opt out of the login messages.
Edit: Hm, unless I'm just misinterpreting how it's spelled out.
Unknown2010-03-01 22:56:30
QUOTE (Xenthos @ Mar 1 2010, 05:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Wrong.
"You cannot have a system that ‘nags’ a player about voting in response to whether they’ve voted or not unless participation in the system is totally voluntary with no tangible positive or negative effects for a player choosing to use or not use such a system. Such a system must also allow a player to easily opt out of it at any time, also with no positive or negative effect, and it must be off by default."
It specifically states that it cannot nag a player about voting unless participation is completely mandatory and defaults to off. And there is no way to opt out of the login messages.
Edit: Hm, unless I'm just misinterpreting how it's spelled out.
"You cannot have a system that ‘nags’ a player about voting in response to whether they’ve voted or not unless participation in the system is totally voluntary with no tangible positive or negative effects for a player choosing to use or not use such a system. Such a system must also allow a player to easily opt out of it at any time, also with no positive or negative effect, and it must be off by default."
It specifically states that it cannot nag a player about voting unless participation is completely mandatory and defaults to off. And there is no way to opt out of the login messages.
Edit: Hm, unless I'm just misinterpreting how it's spelled out.
You're breaking it up wrong, I believe.
You cannot have a system that 'nags' a player about voting -in response to whether they've voted or not- unless participation.
You have to take the whole sentence.
Edit: yeah, it really I think comes down to what TMS decided would be ok or not, obviously, but the way it reads to me is they can either nag everyone regardless, or only nag you if you haven't voted because you ask them to.
Zallafar2010-03-02 01:12:30
CODE
Controlling special reminders to vote for Lusternia (on TopMudSites.com).
  CONFIG VOTING OFF    disables these special reminders;
  CONFIG VOTING ON      reminds twice hourly when you can vote again;
  CONFIG VOTING PROMPT  reminds twice hourly as above; places 'Vote' in your prompt.
Syntax:
    CONFIG VOTING ON|OFF|PROMPT
Your current setting is: VOTING OFF.
  CONFIG VOTING OFF    disables these special reminders;
  CONFIG VOTING ON      reminds twice hourly when you can vote again;
  CONFIG VOTING PROMPT  reminds twice hourly as above; places 'Vote' in your prompt.
Syntax:
    CONFIG VOTING ON|OFF|PROMPT
Your current setting is: VOTING OFF.
I read this as being in compliance with TMS's regs. And the login reminder is OK because it's not dependent on whether you have voted.
Kiradawea2010-03-02 02:36:45
Actually, it's a violation because it isn't off by default.
And this is a huuge tangent.
And this is a huuge tangent.
Ssaliss2010-03-02 03:17:53
I still want my non-wordwrapped editor 
Would make it easier to keep an actual IC repository of logs.
Would make it easier to keep an actual IC repository of logs.Sylphas2010-03-02 03:26:08
QUOTE (Ssaliss @ Mar 1 2010, 10:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I still want my non-wordwrapped editor Would make it easier to keep an actual IC repository of logs.
Would make it easier to keep an actual IC repository of logs.Keeping more things IC is a goal of mine, but it's such a pain sometimes.
Placeus2010-03-02 03:37:17
Yeah, what Sylphas said; just remove the lesson bonus. All the muds I play seem to interpret the TMS rules pretty loosely. Even if there's no lesson bonus, newbies will see it on the list and probably try to do it. Every little bit helps!
(add another achievement for voting in < 0.5 seconds of the message to get people to trigger the vote message!)
(add another achievement for voting in < 0.5 seconds of the message to get people to trigger the vote message!)
Lorina2010-03-02 03:54:31
So here is Faragan's idea(I is the medium!):
You know how leather armor can be batted by tailors? Well, I thought of doing the same to chain armor but with leather and have forgers do it and give it the same affects. Able to be proofed like robes. would take 100 leather like batting.
You know how leather armor can be batted by tailors? Well, I thought of doing the same to chain armor but with leather and have forgers do it and give it the same affects. Able to be proofed like robes. would take 100 leather like batting.
Eldanien2010-03-02 05:01:19
I like the chainmail change as written. Just be sure the batting is lost when it's repaired/re-made.
Razenth2010-03-03 05:43:19
Would it be abusable to allow multiple enchanters / forgers to work on an enchanted piece/forge item
Riluna2010-03-03 09:29:24
If I'm standing in front of Albion, and I also have my Albion doll out of my pack, when I GREET ALBION, it automatically goes to the doll. Why, in the name of all that is holy, is this so? Is there any reason besides being a lunatic that somebody would want to speak to their items? Seems like that could be fixed.
Unknown2010-03-03 09:43:30
QUOTE (Riluna @ Mar 3 2010, 04:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If I'm standing in front of Albion, and I also have my Albion doll out of my pack, when I GREET ALBION, it automatically goes to the doll. Why, in the name of all that is holy, is this so? Is there any reason besides being a lunatic that somebody would want to speak to their items? Seems like that could be fixed.
It goes for your inventory before anything else is the only reason.
Ssaliss2010-03-03 10:18:08
QUOTE (Riluna @ Mar 3 2010, 10:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If I'm standing in front of Albion, and I also have my Albion doll out of my pack, when I GREET ALBION, it automatically goes to the doll. Why, in the name of all that is holy, is this so? Is there any reason besides being a lunatic that somebody would want to speak to their items? Seems like that could be fixed.
If it checked the room first, you could come into the situation where "put gold in pack" would put it in a pack in the room.
There might be a similar reason why it doesn't check players first as well.
