Subject:
|
Re: LUGNet Chat
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:55:25 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
mattdm@mattdm.^AvoidSpam^org
|
Viewed:
|
1060 times
|
| |
|
|
Richard Franks <richard@__no_spam_please_im_veggie__spider.com> wrote:
> The game aspect is entirely optional, and is not needed or relevant for
> a Lego chat. I would suggest that a talker would be sufficent (no
> creatures or objects) as this would also be lighter on system resources.
Although it'd be fun to have a lego-based MOO (MUD/MUSH Object Oriented, or
something like that) where you could build your own virtual lego houses....
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LUGNet Chat
|
| (...) Well yeah :) You could have a Lego-People running about and everyone beats up poor Timmy. But if LUGNET were to host it then a talker might be less work. Is a MUSH more self-regulating where people are allowed to create a certain #objects and (...) (26 years ago, 8-Oct-98, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LUGNet Chat
|
| (...) The game aspect is entirely optional, and is not needed or relevant for a Lego chat. I would suggest that a talker would be sufficent (no creatures or objects) as this would also be lighter on system resources. I guess private IRC is more (...) (26 years ago, 8-Oct-98, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
42 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
