Request for Comments

[Rosuav]

Thought the Threshold community might be interested in this. (Note that the RFC number is not yet allocated)


RFC ????

Request for Comments: ????

F Foobar
Apr 2004

TELNET ROLEPLAY OPTION

1. Command Name and Code

ROLEPLAY 0xCA

2. Command Meanings

IAC DO ROLEPLAY

The sender of this command REQUESTS that the receiver of this command begin roleplaying, or confirms that the receiver of this command is expected to roleplay.

IAC DONT ROLEPLAY

The sender of this command DEMANDS that the receiver of this command stop, or not start, roleplaying.

IAC WILL ROLEPLAY

The sender of this command REQUESTS to begin, or confirms that it will begin, roleplaying.

IAC WONT ROLEPLAY

The sender of this command DEMANDS to stop, or refuses to start, roleplaying.

3. Default

WONT ROLEPLAY
DONT ROLEPLAY

Nobody roleplays on either end of this TELNET connection.

4. Motivation for the Option

Some TELNET connections are between dumb terminals and command servers, but some are between a MUD client and a roleplay-demanding MUD server. In the latter case it is necessary to have a standard protocol for negotiating whether or not roleplay - that is, the complete immersion in an In Character world, without ever disrupting it - should be engaged in.

5. Description of the Option

When the roleplaying option is in effect, both parties should work together to create a world in which characters can live, breathe, and have their being - a world unaffected by the ravages of Out Of Character interferance. OOC communication may be present in a DO ROLEPLAY / WILL ROLEPLAY situation, but must be clearly isolated from IC actions. How exactly this is implemented is up to individual clients and servers, which should negotiate specifics via other means.

If in operation, a state of WILL ROLEPLAY should be enforced by means of OOC teasing, penalties, and ultimately denial of access. Access denial should be considered a last resort, as it is quite harsh; public humiliation will bring most people in line.

6. Suggested implementation

When a MUD or TELNET client receives IAC DO ROLEPLAY, it should interrogate the user (if there is one; in a fully automated system, roleplaying is impossible, and the client should respond IAC WONT ROLEPLAY, thus preventing confusion) and ask if he/she is willing to engage fully in roleplay. If the user responds affirmatively, the client should send IAC WILL ROLEPLAY to the server; if the user responds negatively, the client should send IAC WONT ROLEPLAY. The server then knows the user's intentions, and can act accordingly.

If a client sends IAC DO ROLEPLAY to a roleplay-involved server, it should respond IAC WILL ROLEPLAY, even though there is no user involved, if and only if there is at least one user with the ROLEPLAY option active.

The ROLEPLAY option can be toggled at any time, and can be toggled multiple times in a session.

[Zyth]

I am drawn between two responses:

1: You are the biggest geek I know

2: You have too much free time :-P

[Rosuav]

Originally posted by Zyth
I am drawn between two responses:

1: You are the biggest geek I know

2: You have too much free time :-P

Having too much free time is a good thing. That's how we got all sorts of things that we would not otherwise have.

[Pyrosama]

Originally posted by Rosuav
Having too much free time is a good thing. That's how we got all sorts of things that we would not otherwise have.

I like people who have alot of free time to come up with creative opportunities. The problem areas are when they convince morons in high places to implement these ideas and they are not aware of the impact on vast amounts of systems that are already in place and fully integrated with other affected systems.



It's easy to have great ideas and neato things to come up with, but imagine the folks who have the burden of making it happen...they probably hate you for it.

[Rosuav]

Originally posted by Pyrosama
I like people who have alot of free time to come up with creative opportunities. The problem areas are when they convince morons in high places to implement these ideas and they are not aware of the impact on vast amounts of systems that are already in place and fully integrated with other affected systems.



It's easy to have great ideas and neato things to come up with, but imagine the folks who have the burden of making it happen...they probably hate you for it.

Umm

I think I see what's wrong. You have missed noting the publication date, which I didn't show because it's not yet happened.

If this RFC got published, it would be on the 91st day of next year.

That explain things some?

[Pyrosama]

Originally posted by Rosuav
Umm

I think I see what's wrong. You have missed noting the publication date, which I didn't show because it's not yet happened.

If this RFC got published, it would be on the 91st day of next year.

That explain things some?

No. I wasn't responding to the initial post. I was responding directly to your quote here:

Originally posted by Rosuav
Having too much free time is a good thing. That's how we got all sorts of things that we would not otherwise have.

The initial post I can tell was a funny, but what you posted afterwards is a mentality that is truly real and many folks deal with it day in and day out so it is something to which I would logically respond.

It wasn't against you for your post, but more for pointing out that what you brought up is reality and I was just giving my response to that reality as I see it.