Subject: pocket fluff and black holes

From: [email-masked] (Chad Wilson)
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1993 12:55:57 -0700

The world according to me...

Disk-based LMS
--------------
I think the whole object should be used at the basis for swapping, but add
a server prop to each object, no_swap, that will tell the server it isn't
allowed to swap that object for any reason. Am I thinking too
simplisticly, here?  correct me of my errors if so.

Language Extensions
--------------------
someone had mentioned some LISP-like functions that i liked...
 last()
  any()

these would be far too handy to leave out...

Until i decide to type 'elm' again...
- wilson
  @scrabblemoo, @lambdamoo, @opalmoo, @mediamoo, @etc...

/* Zero doesn't exist, it's just a thoery still.  the fact you don't
measure  anything does not mean there isn't something there */

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1993 11:35:07 -0800

On Nov 16,  6:22am, Chad Wilson wrote:
>  I don't see how people can just use MOO's to socialise when there are so
>many things opened up with programming.
}-- End of excerpt from Chad Wilson

I said the same thing on TinyMUD when people would socialize instead of
creative exits named 'l;lo;loo;look;look l;look li;look lig;look ligh;look
light; l l;l;l li;l lig;l ligh;l light;lo l;lo li...you get the point'

And then fail the exit so no one could go through it, and link it to the
room, then make ofail messages on the light that would let other people in
the room see that someone had looked at the light, and fail messages for
the guy who actually looked at the light.

-- void *(*(*schlake())[])(void *);

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1993 11:42:48 -0800

On Nov 16,  6:57am, John William Chambless wrote:

>This raises a question: what are the ethics/restrictions of porting code from
>one MOO to another. I like to have the original programmer's permission, but
>it's not always clear who the programmer IS.

I generally feel that if someone makes a CUSP, and installs it, and leaves
it readable, *AND* does not put a limit on redistribution, or an ownership,
or any such thing, then it is public domain.

I've run into trouble on this, because I found code installed on my mud,
owned by the wizard, with no ownership info, and no redistribution, so I
happily copied it over to another mud, only to find someone down the line
who recognized it and was upset.  I've also seen people put things into the
public domain, then threaten to sue someone they didn't like because that
person was using the PD software without permission.

I tried to have a discussion with RMS about this kinda thing, but we were
never able to get anywhere on it.

>I'd be curious to see what the general consensus on this is.
>I realize that code used on a MOO and set fertile, is probably _legally_
>in the public domain; I'd just like to have the opinions of programers as to
>what the ethical implications are.

A MOO admin could state that the MOO is run in the spirit of research, and
that everything is for the good of knowledge, and there is no place for
selfish people on that MOO.

I'm a firm believer that if someone provides you with free access to
something, you should go ahead and use it.