Rich Hutnik wrote on Sun, Nov 16, 2008 04:51 AM UTC:
If proliferation leads to an enriching of the variant playing experience,
by providing variety to a common set of rules, so that the variants act as
scenarios in a larger framework, that is great. If a variant leads to yet
another game joined into a pile of other games, then this isn't helpful
at all. It ends up being yet another voice squawking for attention.
Rather than enrich the play area, it distracts. And this is true, whether
such is seen as 'Proliferation', 'Muliform', 'Ramalamadingdong', or
'George' :-P.
So, in light of this, I had been requesting the variant community come up
with a framework to integrate the essence of variants together, with all
their variety, so people can focus on playing in the framework, rather
than feeling they are jumping from one area to another.
I am NOT saying this framework is meant to replace the flowering of
variations. It is meant, however, for a way for people to sample and
taste the world of variants, without feeling the need to reinvent the
wheel. The framework allows people to have their play seem fresh, rather
than getting stale. And the framework should also allow a place for the untested and untried to get tested and tried by a playing community. The framework could also clear a way for the variant community to have a world champion over its games collectively. Have this happen, and you have increased credibility.
So, my take is proliferation that leads to enriching of a framework is
fine. That which results in fragmenting and noise, is a problem.