Talk:MUCK

The List of furry-themed MUCKs strikes me as being something of a haphazard list at the moment, and the homepage links in particular are distracting. I think something more constrained - perhaps a few of the largest MUCKs and a few notable by theme - would be a better thing to have in this article. Such retooling would involve some deletion, although I think the information here is already within our articles on the various MUCKs. Thoughts? -- Sine 05:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I definitely agree with the homepage link removal. It might also be interesting to somehow find out the most popular MU*s and list them in that order, similar to the 'lists of conventions by attendance' page. Spaz Kitty

I think at least two or three articles mention popularity or size (Tapestries, FurryMUCK, and... some science-fiction one, I think?), so that would be one place to start. -- Sine 20:54, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I started the list by adding the two definite toppers, so if you or anyone else wants to help determine the most popular MU*s, feel free to add to the list. Spaz Kitty 05:06, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

This might be of some help: MUstats tracker - but it's a little difficult exactly which are the most populated, as it's real-time tracking, so it fluctuates daily. Spaz Kitty 05:55, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Spaz Kitty's revert, which I just reverted: I was bringing the list back up to four Mucks after moving something that was not a Muck to the MUSH page. This really does represent the dropoff. AFAIK 37 is the next high. (furtoonia at 35, puzzlebox at 20). Unless you know of a Muck that is currently more popular or a functional mustats tracker... keep in mind the current drop off in highs from #1 to #3 is 890 (taps) to 88 (SPR) --WhiteFire^(talk) 20:58, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

SpinDizzy has a max of 37 too, but currently 8 players, vs. Le Jardin's 18 online right now. I really don't remember any other popular mucks to check at this time. --WhiteFire^(talk) 21:06, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of the drop-off, I don't think anything less than an average of 50 connections is worth listing. TLK MUCK, Sunrise MUCK, and Meadows MUCK have all reached at least 50 connections in the past year, but that doesn't mean they're worthy of being listed as 'most popular' MUCKs. Spaz Kitty 21:27, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

If they have higher counts they may make better examples. I don't particularly see why it has to be limited. 50 max connections is big these days for Mu*s. the Mudding population has dropped off a lot. I think people should be given a decent list of examples of what Mucks are these days. Maybe the section should just be called "examples" like it is in the MUSH article. If you have researched those MUCKs as larger than Le Jardin, feel free to insert them. --WhiteFire^(talk) 22:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

List of servers, but not clients?!

I can't be the only one who finds this odd. While few people will be running their own servers, MANY people will be trying to connect to them. I've been considering joining a MU* or two, and I can't very well do that without a client. As someone new to the idea, not knowing who to turn to/trust for a good bit of software to do the job, this really turns me away from it. I know WikiFur isn't exactly the MUCK encyclopedia, but surely if servers get their own mention, a few major clients should too? This article seemed the best to comment on, and is actually the best lead so far due to a single link to a poorly contrasted (eyestrain, hard to read) and outdated (dead/deprecated links) help file.

Information in general for true newbies seems to be pretty scarce. For anyone else looking, there is also a Comparison of MUD clients on Wikipedia, but this does little for someone who doesn't know what a MUD client should be able to do, or what software works best with what servers, or even what's free and what isn't.

Sorry if I went on a little bit of a rant there; it just feels like this is a massively overlooked point, or else it assumes that I'm supposed to magically have the knowledge I need. A link to an up to date FAQ for MU* newbies would go a long way. Until then, I'll be using Telnet... Crysm 03:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

A link to the Wikipedia clients page has been added to the article. A stop gap measure for now, but thanks =) - Spirou 03:42, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Rhal's Furry MU*s Connector

Rhal's Furry MU*s Connector new submission page is no longer functional, and the page has not been updated since 2012. I advise no longer referencing the website due to inactivity and incompleteness of the list. -- Songbird 18:24, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

The page is still functional (data is available and accessible), list is still up and verified. Non-updated doesn't mean dead/offline/deleted, an incomplete listing doesn't mean that is unusable. - Spirou (talk) 19:52, 28 June 2014 (EDT)