See if this makes sense then I'll repost it:

# What do you think defines a good computer-based multiplayer, on-line, role-playig game? Please name one hallmark property.

Immersion, immersion and immersion. You need to feel you're there. And of course the there must be interesting. If MMORPG is of the "you're walking, you're walking, you're walking..." variety you'd lose interest faster than you can say blueberry paj. Immersion to me means interaction with the world. I want to lift a rock and hurl it at something and get an effect. Which in turn will make me want to explore more and you know, never want to leave that world. You know, gameplay.

# Which aspects of "mundane life" should be retained in such a game, and why? e.g., farming, cooking, weaponsmithing, technology development, writing, everyday diplomacy...

Weaponsmithing and technology development in any case. You must work your way up and not start as some über character. Then I'd have learning of xyz skillz in it as well. If you want to learn how to bake paj-ers you should be able to.

# Which aspects of "mundane life" do you feel are quotidian enough to omit from games, and why? e.g., any of the above, or something even more boring

Doing toilet? I dunno, anything you can think of that one should do more than 10 times during a session while not affected by gameplay you should leave out.

# Would you use terrain generation software if it were fully automatic, subject to some built-in and some gameplay-driven constraints?

Definitely. Lazi-Boi Terrain Gen 1.0 :)

# If you had chance to import "cameo" characters from an SF fandom (print or film and TV) into a massively multiplayer world, would you take it? Why?

None. Be original.

--
Danger is my middle name

I will not accept any RPG as decent if it won't have an option of becoming an inn-keeper or shop-keeper, or an estate agent, when you're bored with all the hack&slashing.

Ah, but there's more to that than just baking paj-ers. In old-style RPGs, you could've easily learned skills of the sort, and then still have to hack&slash through life, while making cookies as a side job. I'm talking full-time job of, say, keeping a weapons and armors shop, with a side job of going on small quests (to find a better sword supplier, for example) from time to time...

What if everyone wanted to be a shopkeeper, or sell paj-ers? I'd be pretty boring world.

Person 1: Hello, shopkeeper!
Person 2: Well, hello, shopkeeper!
Person 1: How's business?
Person 2: Paj-ers are selling well. How's yours?
Person 1: Yes. Paj-ers are indeed selling well.
Person 2: Errrr...you think it's gonna rain today?
Person 1: Could be, could very well be. So how about them badgers?

I mean, you can be a shopkeeper and bake paj-ers IRL too. I figured an alternate on-line world should a bit more...eh...alternate. Who's gonna help save the damsel in distress if everyone is sitting around baking paj-ers? Better yet, is there are damsel in distress?

Imagine if you played Diablo and suddenly decided you're not gonna destroy evil but settle in one of them towns and sell potions.

Diablo 3: Potion Tycoon

--
Danger is my middle name

September 22 is the day Bilbo Baggins has his birthday and I do believe that Frodo adopted
it for his own birthday too. Now hobbits do
give the presents out on their birthdays.
They do not receive gifts on their special day!

I'll throw my hat into this ring as an avid RPG and even MMORPG player.

What do you think defines a good computer-based multiplayer, on-line, role-playig game? Please name one hallmark property.

Fun springs to mind. Fun is really important with these types of games. Things to make your life easier so you can get to the fun are good things.

Immersion is fun.

Seeing consequences for your actions are fun.

Rewards are fun.

Plot is fun.

Gameplay elements that are fun/challenging to execute are fun.

Which aspects of "mundane life" should be retained in such a game, and why? e.g., farming, cooking, weaponsmithing, technology development, writing, everyday diplomacy...

All of the above. I enjoy tradeskilling in these games. I enjoy making weapons or tools that people can use, or piecing together spells. The real question is what do people enjoy doing. If more than a few people enjoy doing something in real life having it as an option in the game is generally not a bad thing.

The caveat is of course it must be useful. People might enjoy gardening in real life, but if the end result of your gardening in a game is a digital flower with absolutely no usefulness then you've missed the point of trade skills.

Which aspects of "mundane life" do you feel are quotidian enough to omit from games, and why? e.g., any of the above, or something even more boring

Something that everyone does that is going to be forced onto someone. Everquest made you carry food around. It didn't do anything for you, but you had to carry it or after a certain amount of time you would get hungry and thus weaker. Lame.

A game that would make my character stop and hit the head. Lame.

Being forced to rest for no reason other than I've been standing around doing nothing for three days in game. (thats right you guessed it) lame.

The common denominator among all of those is of course they are a mundane activity that is forced upon a player. Forcing them into a certain course of action that doesn't benefit them, but will hinder them if they don't do it.

This is one of the key points I hoped I got across above in the "mundane life actions" question. Forcing a player to partake in mundane life activities is counter to fun. Allowing them to if they want to is good.

An example:

Everquest made you carry around food otherwise you were penalized. This is lame.

Final Fantasy XI allows you to eat food which will give you a stat boost or other positive effects if you want. This is good. (in reality once you get to a certain level you are still forced to carry around food but that is peer pressure and not game mechanics, this is fine).

Would you use terrain generation software if it were fully automatic, subject to some built-in and some gameplay-driven constraints?

I might. I would prefer to see it not included however. See the GIFT. There was one game where if you traveled a certain trail a bunch of times it would eventually alter the grass to make a path (horizons maybe... it was pulled before release I think). Before the game even went beta people were planning bots to run characters along a set path so they could spell our curse words or other objectionables.

I can only imagine the sheer number of sexual genetalia based formations that would pop up (cringe worthy pun sadly) across the world.

If you had chance to import "cameo" characters from an SF fandom (print or film and TV) into a massively multiplayer world, would you take it? Why?

I wouldn't. I'm not against the idea but my preference is for an original character. Basically it boils down to how the character would act. Would the writers for the game do something slightly off my conception of the character based on the canonical works? If they did this would throw me off. My preference is to have characters I have no preconcieved notions about.