<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Peter A. H. Peterson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pedro@tastytronic.net">pedro@tastytronic.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Yeah. I agree that adding nki is one of the great things about rfk,<br>
but one problem is the "editorial control" aspect. Like, a middle<br>
earth (or nethack) version of rfk is funny, but it's not funny if the<br>
official version is half middle earth and nethack references. The best<br>
way I can describe it is that nki shouldn't (in general) be obvious<br>
pop culture references, and above all, they shouldn't be predictable,<br>
because that ruins the zen nature of rfk. </blockquote><div><br>I agree that the references should never be obvious, but thats the trick with references everywhere - if theyre too obvious or too many it all becomes bland... I guess the best idea would be to start with the official nki list and build new lists as submissions come along, while allowing players to choose which theyd like to use for their trip. <br>
<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">and we also run the risk of people stuffing the<br>
ballot box full of ALL YOUR BASE and whatever today's meme is.</blockquote><div><br>True, but again if you make an intelligent reference to a meme it can make a huge difference <br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
The main issue for me with control is that if it would be something<br>
integrated into the site, we'd want it to be a faithful representation<br>
of robotfindskitten. There are a lot of subtle details that people<br>
often miss for example, that it's robotfindskitten and not Robot<br>
Finds Kitten, etc. I tend to think that implementations of rfk should<br>
emulate the POSIX version as much as possible, unless constrained </blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">(...) <br></blockquote>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">This may seem like nitpicking, but to us, the charm of rfk<br>
is about the whole package.<br>
<br>
While the "editorial control" issues I described above are not<br>
strictly speaking part of the implementation, they do reflect on the<br>
quality and experience of the simulation. </blockquote><div><br>I certainly would like to maintain that feel, without it rfk looses much of its appeal. <br><br>On the issue of quality control - well, thats going to be hardest part to do. Its easy to miss that thin line between being too restrictive and too open. If anyone will be interested i might do a sort of 'approval panel' with access for people who'd like to have a say in what goes in. However ill start with something simple first. <br>
<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Another issue, now that I'm thinking about it, is that an "official"<br>
rfk web version would need to be done in javascript or something like<br>
that, rather than proprietary Flash (or even Java). There are several<br>
reasons for this; we don't want to require plugins in order to play,<br>
we don't want to require proprietary software to play, and we don't<br>
want it hard to maintain. We also don't want to be distributing<br>
dangerous code to users through the website, and (speaking for myself)<br>
I would feel more comfortable managing in-browser code (javascript,<br>
DHTML, etc.) rather than third-party code blobs (flash, java, etc.).</blockquote><div> </div><div>This goes without saying, nowadays one can do much with just javascript/css and these tools are certainly more than enough to make a good web implementation of rfk. Im all against flash and similar bonuses for this project. <br>
<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
This means that it wouldn't really be about adding lots of new<br>
features to rfk. (e.g., if one day you wanted to add a mode where the<br>
nki start roaming around the field, we wouldn't want that to be part<br></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
of the site, or possibly it would have to be some kind of experimental<br>
mode... but the point of the official web implementation shouldn't be<br>
(from our perspective) about having tons of "alternate modes".)</blockquote><div> </div><div>The only alternative mode, so to speak, ive given thought was to replace ascii items with eggs on easter and maybe have robotfindseasterkitten, but i really doubt ill finish in time anyway :) <br>
</div><div> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Again, I invite you to join the rfk-dev list if you haven't and we can<br>
discuss these issues there; I'm sure others will have thoughts.</blockquote><div>Ive already signed up, thanks for the reminder tho :) <br><br>Thanks for everyone's input, cheers,<br>Michal.<br></div></div><br>