It is currently Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:08 am

All times are UTC




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 165 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 11  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 4:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 10:37 am
Posts: 383
I am perfectly satisfied with the current KI functions, though I would much appreciate an additional /shun or mute-how-do-you-call-it.

But seriously? Disappearing avvies? What will we ask next for, a magic button that will make the "annoying" explorer's computer explode?! Or a Death Note to clean up the place for good!
This is supposed to be a community open to all, not a place to form our private litlle cults excluding the people we don't like. The Hoods have been created for that purpose, I believe. Or the private shards. These should be enough for us, there's no need to play the D'ni greedy kings here. Let's take a breath and move on with our exploration. IMHO. :D


On a more cheerful note, let's say we get the disappearing avvie finction. Think of a person you have on ignore that is standing on the map. Then think of yourself wanting to get on the map to join the happy crowd and oh noez, you end up standing right on that person. Someone else then has to warn you to move, now isn't that stupid, or awkward, or both?! :roll:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:24 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:52 pm
Posts: 1159
Location: US
There's legitimate reason to have this as a separate KI command. /fullignore maybe? Lunnane is correct, have their name display in chat, but not under Age Players, under a separate column called "Ignored." And adi is also right in the sense that maybe the person you're wanting to ignore is just annoying and you don't want to see their chat. Their aren't going to bother either way after a chat block.

I might add, maybe we're looking at this all wrong. Maybe you should be invisible to the trouble maker as well? Whatever ends up becoming a feature, I'm 100% behind this idea.

_________________
Image
TOC#60089 DI#132103 MOULa is Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:48 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 10:02 pm
Posts: 2266
Location: Tigard, OR
Rhee wrote:
And what other uses could [/ignore] possibly have?


Two scenarios immediately jump to my mind.

Sometimes there is a person (or two) who has me on his or her BUDDIES list, and they're broadcasting to their BUDDIES while I'm talking to other people and don't want to be bothered. I'd like to silence the person for a while, and later, un-silence. It's better for me to handle it this way than to have to ask the other person to take me off of their BUDDIES list for a while and then re-add me.

I have given presentations during Guild & Groups meetings where there has been a person in the audience who is listening, but who is also disruptive, PMing me questions and not recognizing that I am not presenting solely for his or her benefit. On one hand, one could argue "just desserts" if, through my choice to ignore this person, we became mute and invisible to each other. However, I would prefer to just mute the person and continue on; just because the person has poor manners, or is very young, or is autistic, that doesn't mean I want to block them out of the presentation entirely. I just don't want PM-spam until I'm ready to take questions.

True stories, each of these has happened to me.

I think it is unhelpful to design around a narrow, specific and extreme use scenario (e.g., Alien's Youtube-posting stalker). I've practiced requirements gathering and software implementation for 15 years, and I've learned to accept that other people are creative and will apply tools in ways I can't predict. If a tool like /ignore does too much or is designed to be perfect for just one specific situation, it's actually less useful.

I'd also like to caution against proliferating too many ignore options. ("This guy is bugging me ... do I ignore, shun, silence, or hush him?") Maybe /ignore and /fullignore as suggested would be OK... but be thoughtful about the names. It's difficult to summarize complex behaviors in a short, meaningful name. Does the name /fullignore clearly indicate that whoever you've /fullignored will also not be able to see or hear you?

_________________
MOULa KI: 26838 | Prologue Videos | Visit rel.to to explore Myst, Uru, and D'ni communities!
Click here for social/game profiles


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:10 pm 
Offline
Creative Kingdoms

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 8:06 pm
Posts: 6235
Location: Everywhere, all at once
Marten mentions the Buddy (and Neighbor) chat problem. In many cases positive development far outshines defensive development. For example, I've always been impressed by what Second Life's chat system can do, especially with separate windows. Another example is tabs on an IRC client to contain different chats. SL's chat system is far more useful than Uru's. Uru's chat system could be vastly improved to resolve Marten's example rather than incorporate it into an ignore feature. With enough consideration and design, there may also be analogs in the griefer and visual realm.

_________________
OpenUru.org: An Uru Project Resource Site : Twitter : Make a commitment.
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 10:37 am
Posts: 383
(In spoiler tag because it's slightly off-topic ^^)

[spoiler]
lunanne wrote:
adi wrote:
Then think of yourself wanting to get on the map to join the happy crowd and oh noez, you end up standing right on that person. Someone else then has to warn you to move, now isn't that stupid, or awkward, or both?! :roll:


I don't think griefers know how to happily chat with people somewhere. They usually only grief.


We both know I'm not only talking about griefers. ^^
In the end it gets very subjective how to define an "annoying explorer" and it may cause more conflicts between us...

I'm only trying to point out that there are people who don't want to act as a "MOULa Police". And they haven't had any problems with those griefers because they simply make some fun at them or /ignore them and move away or link out.

All this talk and frustration in public lately hasn't offered us anything else but a daily and constant presence of those people, it just didn't do us any good!!


Marten wrote:
Sometimes there is a person (or two) who has me on his or her BUDDIES list, and they're broadcasting to their BUDDIES while I'm talking to other people and don't want to be bothered.


This is another issue we need to address at some point, imho again.[/spoiler]


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 7:07 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 10:02 pm
Posts: 2266
Location: Tigard, OR
JW makes a good point, and it highlights why such a seemingly small change (improving the ignore feature) can tie into other elements of the system.

All I'll ask is that, until other improvements are made so that /ignore isn't needed or better solutions exist in the examples I gave, don't diminish its usefulness for those cases.

_________________
MOULa KI: 26838 | Prologue Videos | Visit rel.to to explore Myst, Uru, and D'ni communities!
Click here for social/game profiles


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 7:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 5:22 pm
Posts: 1814
Location: California
In these ‘what to do about griefers’ threads we repeatedly follow the same path. Find a way to make it difficult for griefers to grief by programming something into the game. In general such ant-griefer fixes may or may not help, have unintended consequences, and move the problems to a different level.

Other games have their solutions to abusive behavior. Of all the things they have programmed into games there is only one solution that works reasonably well and some people go around it too. Basically any solution that reduces problems involves a paid account with the ability to track back to a real life identity and enforcement by the game operator, i.e., banning and suspensions.

Costs of money, effort, anything of value, or risk of prosecution are the basic deterrents that work. The result is the current US administration is working to get Net Neutrality passed and move on to remove anonymity from the Internet. The UN is helping and pushing the Net Neutrality and no-anonymity ideas. Think about what that would do to those opposing government oppression. Remember. Freedom House reports only 87 of the 193 countries (45%) voting in the UN are considered ‘fully free’. Removal of anonymity from the Internet would however supposedly remove those pesky griefers. Of course the UN would never see any one opposing a dictator as a pesky griefer… so there is no relationship between griefers and political dissidents in the UN’s eyes.

One has to consider the unintended consequences of anything built in or added to a system. One needs to decide if they are treating a symptom or cause. If one is treating a symptom, the cause will manifest in other symptoms. The griefer just finds a new way to pester people and abuse the system. If you can make a griefer invisible to others, what keeps the griefer from making you invisible to others?

Ignore, mute, or otherwise stop interaction with a player is a good control to have. But, like the Occupy demonstrations, when the controlling authorities are not present things spin out of control. Legitimate protestors are being overrun by criminals and anarchists with the result the whole movement appears to be harming the ones they proclaimed to want to help. A game with no enforcement of rules is going to be overrun with griefers and worse. This is basic human behavior.

MOULa is at the point where the PG game kids could once play alone is now one we recommend they play only with a parent. Adults are now having problems. Because complaints go to moderators and Cyan we have no idea of the scope of the problem. Because specific problems and people cannot be discussed in the forum (which is a good thing) we can’t know the number of griefers. So, we don’t know how to assign priority for making a change.

What we do know is the percent of griefers in a game is typically small. In Second Life (SL) with somewhere around 50k concurrent users per day the peak number of ToS violations peaks around 2%. Normally it is much lower: 0.8% roughly. There are no stats for the number of those that are using a paid account but empirical evidence suggests it is a very small number. Throw-away accounts are believed to be the majority of the problem source. SL has an active enforcement effort.

Since we cannot use the only know effective solution, an improved Ignore Feature may be a good idea. Presumably those writing code for open source are prioritizing their efforts via some rational process based on actual data. Or they may just work on the features they like or see as important. As JWP points out some positive development to improve chat may be a better solution.

Do we have an official* Feature Requests list? Do we know what the priorities are? Who is working on what? Which features are ahead of an Improved Ignore?

*official in this case meaning a list that programmers actually look at and use.

_________________
Nalates - GoC - 418 - MOULa I: Nal KI#00 083 543, MOULa II: KI#00 583 875Nalates 111451 - Second Life: Nalates Urriah
Guild of Cartographers Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 7:24 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 7:52 pm
Posts: 1671
Location: Seattle, WA
Alien wrote:
To all those who think mutual invisibility (thank you Gahlen for the phrase) is a bad idea and want just the greifer to be invisible to the victim, I'll just say this:

Ignorance is bliss ... until 3rd person tells you what so-n-so is doing and you can't see it or an avatar you can't see makes slanderous lying youtube videos about you.


On the other hand, if they can't see your avatar, or know you are there, then they are perfectly capable of badmouthing you to others while you're standing right there, and you'd not know it unless someone else mentioned it to you. Them not being able to see your avatar isn't going to make them stop being mean person/people.

It sounds like you had a really nasty personal experience, coming from one very determined and...umm...unprincipled person. That makes feelings run high and hot, so you (in a generic sense) have to be extra careful to look at the whole picture.

Me, I actually am going against the flow here, and saying I would NOT like a way to make an offender's avatar invisible. Make it impossible for that person to interact with me, yes- but invisible no. Why? Well, because for one, what's the image of their avvie really going to do to me? /taunt for hours? All I have to do is change what I'm looking at. Stand on my avvie? Annoying, but all it does is make them look like a dork.

And because the idea that there's someone out there who's been causing me trouble, and I can't see them if they're around, gives me the creeps. Way too much potential for stalkerishness. And yes, that would be addressed by the mutual invisibility- but like I said, that doesn't keep someone from smack talking about me to others when they can't see me- whether I'm there or not. People badmouthing you to others, misinformation, propaganda- that has to be dealt with on a whole different level than a KI command.

_________________
Storyteller, Creatrix, and maker of general mayhem
Unwritten RPG: http://www.unwrittenrpg.com/
KI#00001498
Officially bonked R.E.B.E.L.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 7:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 5:41 pm
Posts: 810
Location: A Galaxy Far Far Away
I have to be honest here and say that adi's and Eleri's comments have convinced me to change my mind.

No need to improve the ignore function because no matter what improvement you come up with, it'll never be perfect. All I really want is Cyan (or Cyan approved person) to just block really bad greifers (for example a certain youtube uploader) and make sure they don't come back.

That's all I think is really needed.

_________________
Equal among others in the Guild Of Sleepers


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 7:47 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:52 pm
Posts: 1159
Location: US
Natales, let's not talk about net-neutrality. I call it net-nuteration myself. Sometimes when the government steps in to fix a problem it causes dire consequences for the trade off of free-speech; China style.

For now, a /fullignore solution is the answer. That said, JW is right: the problem will not be fully solved until a full chat system revamp occurs.

_________________
Image
TOC#60089 DI#132103 MOULa is Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 8:39 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 3:44 am
Posts: 166
Location: Wisconsin
Edited

What would happen if a griever was invisible to other players?

He could still change things in our environment.

The balls, pumpkin, fire marbles and cones could appear to be moving around by themselves

Doors could appear to be opening and closing by themselves
.
Levers could be pulled or moved preventing a player from finishing an age. Examples of this would be kicking the stones off the pressure plates in Teledehn or pushing the cloths out of sequence as players try to finish Eder Delin and Tsogal.

By standing in front of doors and linking books grievers could block access to them

Relto-spamming and Ghosting in a persons Relto or privet ages.


Suggested fixes

An “Ignore list” once a person is placed on this list they become mutually invisible and their name is added to an on screen list when you are in public areas. More on the public areas at the end

A revocable kick function that would block anyone in your “Ignore list” from your private ages. Anyone on your “Ignore list” who touches your linking books would go to their own privet instance. This would also prevent Relto-spamming.

A revocable kick function for privet Hoods that is controlled by the selected administrators of that hood. This should include a member kick function that is controlled by the person who made the Hood.

All kicks and People on “Ignore list” should be reversible in case of a mistake

There are two places that the greatest amount of trouble from grievers happen. That is the city (D’ni A’e gura) and the Hoods. I think the problems caused in Hoods can be solved very easy with a kick to Relto function. The city and public areas are a little harder to solve, and they are also the places that most of the trouble is caused.

A griever with two avatars for instance could watch with one avatar that is not causing trouble and is not on the “Ignore list” while directing the other invisible “Ignore list” avatar to block others from using linking books or opening doors. However I don’t see this as being a major problem and if we have an in age on screen grievers list in the public instances we can work around them fairly easy.

The mane thing that drives grievers is “recognition”, the reason ignoring them works to a degree is the lack of recognition they receive. An invisible and silent griever gets no recognition rendering him insignificant and a nonentity.

PS: Those of you who don't want this option don't have to use it. I'm quit sure you are wrong and this simple ability to ignore grievers would work in Live. Nothing in life is perfect but we all have the choice to either do something about a problem or complain about it and give into it. I prefer to do something about it.

rocketdog

_________________
img src="http://i1165.photobucket.com/albums/q598/rocketdog100/rocketdogTS3.jpg" alt"image"


Last edited by rocketdog on Tue Nov 15, 2011 11:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 9:42 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 10:02 pm
Posts: 2266
Location: Tigard, OR
I think rocketdog had a well thought out analysis of actual user needs.

One comment on this:
rocketdog wrote:
revocable permanent

Just say revocable. If it's revocable, it isn't permanent. :)

The 'hood needs are a great point for further discussion though. Currently, there's no such thing as a 'hood administrator. A whole system needs to be thought out and implemented to control, delegate, and revoke admin abilities, roughly analogous to guild management in other MMOs.

_________________
MOULa KI: 26838 | Prologue Videos | Visit rel.to to explore Myst, Uru, and D'ni communities!
Click here for social/game profiles


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 11:07 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:06 pm
Posts: 280
Location: Saskatchewan, Canada
Marten wrote:
Rhee wrote:
And what other uses could [/ignore] possibly have?


Two scenarios immediately jump to my mind.

Sometimes there is a person (or two) who has me on his or her BUDDIES list, and they're broadcasting to their BUDDIES while I'm talking to other people and don't want to be bothered. I'd like to silence the person for a while, and later, un-silence. It's better for me to handle it this way than to have to ask the other person to take me off of their BUDDIES list for a while and then re-add me.

I have given presentations during Guild & Groups meetings where there has been a person in the audience who is listening, but who is also disruptive, PMing me questions and not recognizing that I am not presenting solely for his or her benefit. On one hand, one could argue "just desserts" if, through my choice to ignore this person, we became mute and invisible to each other. However, I would prefer to just mute the person and continue on; just because the person has poor manners, or is very young, or is autistic, that doesn't mean I want to block them out of the presentation entirely. I just don't want PM-spam until I'm ready to take questions.

True stories, each of these has happened to me.


And these are good points, and situations that I would not have thought of, as they have never occured to me in my experience. I completely agree to the usage you have indicated in these scenarios.

But if this more aggressive version(by that i mean mutual invisibility) of /ignore is someday implemented, whatever that may look like exactly, both of these situations can, to my mind, still be overcome without(or with) using this souped-up /ignore... though perhaps it would require a few more words typed.

Scenario 1: if the buddies causing you trouble are in another age or area, and you are not currently engaging in a public chat with them as well as overhearing the private, then the upgraded /ignore would still work fine, as you would then remove them from the ignore folder when you are ready to hear from them again. If this is not the case, then it is a question of you typing /ignore person1, /ignore person2, and /ignore person3, or sending a quick PM to the three of them (using a BUDDIES chat) "could person1, person2, and person three please type /removebuddy Marten? You can add me again after you have finished your private chat." This is what I would do in that situation, anyway.

Scenario 2: During presentations, rather than /ignoring pm's... just.... ignore them. As in, let them scroll on by. If at the beginning of the presentation it has been clearly stipulated that you will not respond to any PM's, no matter what they say, until a designated time. Also stipulating that you will not be keeping track of advance PM questions will cover those instances where a player is upset because you didn't answer their advance question before those posted at the correct time. They may not be happy about it, but it doesn't matter who a player is, age, race, disability, lack-of-manners, if there are regulations laid out and they cannot abide by them, that should not be your problem.

I say again, I understand and support your current usage of the /ignore function as it now stands. But if it does become upgraded, these are the ways that I, personally, would work around them.

Great discussion everyone!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 11:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 4:33 pm
Posts: 316
Location: Stadskanaal (Netherlands)
Marten wrote:
I think rocketdog had a well thought out analysis of actual user needs.


I wonder :?:

One thing in the KI I am missing is that i can't approve a buddy. You can add whoever yoy want to the buddylist without someone knowing. Even with ignore someone can follow you in the game. So to me i think for that should be the first priority to have control over your buddylist and who puts you on his buddylist.

Just a thought :wink:

_________________
still wondering where thr dutch myst fans went ...........


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 165 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 11  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: