Forums » General
The good ,
Some nice new missions , did the XX mining one, worked fine , thanks devs...
The bad ,
I was sitting in H2 and a helmans overseer wandered past and jumped to Azek . Off for a serious lunch in Dau I suspect . Its not really bad , just , erm odd....
The Ugly ,
All that /vote mute stuff. Grow up .
Cheers
Ecka
Some nice new missions , did the XX mining one, worked fine , thanks devs...
The bad ,
I was sitting in H2 and a helmans overseer wandered past and jumped to Azek . Off for a serious lunch in Dau I suspect . Its not really bad , just , erm odd....
The Ugly ,
All that /vote mute stuff. Grow up .
Cheers
Ecka
What vote mute stuff? You mean the general babbling about getting so-and-so nuted?
/vote mute now only supports paid user accounts, so people cannot make trials and mute people they dislike. So, let's move on. If people are being abusive and nasty, you can mute them and they will stay muted. We only reverse mutes when there's evidence of exploitation, like the trial thing used by various people recently.
Some people need to lighten up a little. We didn't put the /vote mute command in just to turn around and prevent the userbase from making use of it. But we also didn't put it in to be exploited. The latter case should now be fixed, so, let's move on.
(this is not addressed to davejohn, but rather in general given some responses I had in-game just now).
Some people need to lighten up a little. We didn't put the /vote mute command in just to turn around and prevent the userbase from making use of it. But we also didn't put it in to be exploited. The latter case should now be fixed, so, let's move on.
(this is not addressed to davejohn, but rather in general given some responses I had in-game just now).
inc:, umm, so how about fixing the vote mute requirements so that it is remoely feasible to mute someone who is consistently annoying? like 80% of those online could do the trick...
So /ignore him
As has been stated and beaten to death before, /ignore is the most useless command a player has in his or her arsenal in this situation because the command only affects the player's chat logs on per-character basis for the other end, rather than blocking an entire account.
I can understand if this is done for privacy protection reasons, but still, I think the stink raised over the issue would be a lot less problematic if we didn't HAVE to use /vote mute to deal with particularly nasty players. The reason people use /vote mute (or should, in my opinion) is because a player is being problematic, not a character in particular--and when /ignore only works on a per-character basis, all it takes it to create a new character to get around it. That is why I use vote mute on people who are just annoying. Normally, I use it only on people who are abusive to other players in and out of the game. If someone is habitually abusive to people on the forums, I'll give them a /vote if I ever see them on. If they're just a jackass ingame, I'll /ignore them for a while, as long as they behave within the context of the command. If they dodge the /ignore, I give them a /vote.
To sum up: I will /vote mute someone if:
- I have tried /ignoring them and they repeatedly dodge it by creating new character names
- They are abusive to players constantly in and out of the game (forums, IRC, etc.)
- If the player in question has shown a tendency to give me the previous reason to /vote mute them habitually, I will give them a vote when I see them ingame, no questions asked, without provocation for that gaming session.
I will not /vote mute someone if:
- They do not dodge /ignores by creating new characters
- They are not offensive or abusive to other players.
- They are not doing things that would irritate the community in general.
I can understand if this is done for privacy protection reasons, but still, I think the stink raised over the issue would be a lot less problematic if we didn't HAVE to use /vote mute to deal with particularly nasty players. The reason people use /vote mute (or should, in my opinion) is because a player is being problematic, not a character in particular--and when /ignore only works on a per-character basis, all it takes it to create a new character to get around it. That is why I use vote mute on people who are just annoying. Normally, I use it only on people who are abusive to other players in and out of the game. If someone is habitually abusive to people on the forums, I'll give them a /vote if I ever see them on. If they're just a jackass ingame, I'll /ignore them for a while, as long as they behave within the context of the command. If they dodge the /ignore, I give them a /vote.
To sum up: I will /vote mute someone if:
- I have tried /ignoring them and they repeatedly dodge it by creating new character names
- They are abusive to players constantly in and out of the game (forums, IRC, etc.)
- If the player in question has shown a tendency to give me the previous reason to /vote mute them habitually, I will give them a vote when I see them ingame, no questions asked, without provocation for that gaming session.
I will not /vote mute someone if:
- They do not dodge /ignores by creating new characters
- They are not offensive or abusive to other players.
- They are not doing things that would irritate the community in general.
Miharu, reason 3 is vindicative and a BS reason IMNSHO. (it's what started the whole /vote mute fiasco, though I bet that's why you included it)
PS: Vindicative isn't a word according to the Oxford English Dictionary? But... I've been using, and hearing it used, all my life? Whatever, it's in my personal dictionary. ;P
EDIT: Thanks Demonen, I did in fact mean vindictive (though by the 2nd obsolete definition vindicative is good too)... But vindicative is still NOT in the O.E.D. Where'd you get that definition from?
PS: Vindicative isn't a word according to the Oxford English Dictionary? But... I've been using, and hearing it used, all my life? Whatever, it's in my personal dictionary. ;P
EDIT: Thanks Demonen, I did in fact mean vindictive (though by the 2nd obsolete definition vindicative is good too)... But vindicative is still NOT in the O.E.D. Where'd you get that definition from?
Wait, Miha did I understand you correctly? Even if a player isnt being problematic at that moment, just because they have in the past you do basically an auto-vote mute when you see them ingame? If thats the case I think thats wrong, for a couple of reasons, one because it isnt supposed to be used -just in case- player B annoyed me before, plus...umm how would you feel to know that every time you logged on someone was starting a mute against you, JUST because you logged on? I really hope I totally misunderstood there and if I did I do apologize.
I think the only reason /ignore is useless is because people use it as a threat. If I had no idea you ignored me, I wouldn't be trying to get around it, would I? It's only when people say things such as "I may not need to listen to it, having you /ignored now" or "you're being ignored now, so you can continue to waste your breath" that a person will be motivated to try to get around it through spite. If enough community members have the player /ignored so that it becomes obvious, then that should be enough for a vote mute. Admittedly, I don't know what change there was to /voting, but whatever.
Also, if all else fails, you can just do what I do and mentally /ignore, which works on all characters. Plus it always brings me a laugh when I see "HALLO AM I IGNROED?!!?"
Also, if all else fails, you can just do what I do and mentally /ignore, which works on all characters. Plus it always brings me a laugh when I see "HALLO AM I IGNROED?!!?"
What I think Miha means here, is that if a person has been an abusive spammer that dodges /ignore for several days straight, it's likely to happen again in a moment.
While I agree with that, I think it's bad to /vote on someone who's been out of the game for a week, or has behaved OK for the last few days.
About the overseers jumping into Azek... OH NO, IT'S SPREADING!
@chillum baba:
Maybe you mean Vindictive?
vin‧dic‧tive /vɪnˈdɪktɪv/
Pronunciation[vin-dik-tiv]
–adjective
1. disposed or inclined to revenge; vengeful: a vindictive person.
2. proceeding from or showing a revengeful spirit: vindictive rumors.
There's also Vindicative:
\Vin"di*ca*tive\ (?; 277), a. [Cf. F. vindicatif. Cf. Vindictive.]
1. Tending to vindicate; vindicating; as, a vindicative policy.
2. Revengeful; vindictive. [Obs.]
Vindicative persons live the life of witches, who, as they are mischievous, so end they infortunate.
While I agree with that, I think it's bad to /vote on someone who's been out of the game for a week, or has behaved OK for the last few days.
About the overseers jumping into Azek... OH NO, IT'S SPREADING!
@chillum baba:
Maybe you mean Vindictive?
vin‧dic‧tive /vɪnˈdɪktɪv/
Pronunciation[vin-dik-tiv]
–adjective
1. disposed or inclined to revenge; vengeful: a vindictive person.
2. proceeding from or showing a revengeful spirit: vindictive rumors.
There's also Vindicative:
\Vin"di*ca*tive\ (?; 277), a. [Cf. F. vindicatif. Cf. Vindictive.]
1. Tending to vindicate; vindicating; as, a vindicative policy.
2. Revengeful; vindictive. [Obs.]
Vindicative persons live the life of witches, who, as they are mischievous, so end they infortunate.
No, Mystic.
Keep in mind that I idle in #vrelay 24/7. I don't have to see the abuse the second I log in to merit a vote from me, especially if it's visible through the IRC relay. If the abuse is in full swing when I start up the client, the abusive player gets a vote because of that.
I do not play favorites with /vote mute, either. I have voted to mute people who I am friends with because they were being abusive to other players and breaking rules. If the player has shown themselves to be abusive to other players even after being told not to be (ie, they persist in the behavior after being asked not to by guides/devs), I have fair grounds (and a responsibility to the community) to vote to prevent that behavior.
In this particular case, the (first) person who was muted... I only /vote mute them when I see abusive language from them. If I don't see any, I don't vote. Period. End of story. The problem with that is that the person in question is abusive frequently enough that it doesn't matter--if I'm logged in while they are, I end up seeing something abusive coming out of their mouths almost 90% of the time.
In general I use /ignore. Genka is the only person who I always do a /vote mute on, because he does exactly what I said--dodges the /ignore, is abusive in and out of the game, etc.--but that's moot at the moment as he is muted.
The fiasco this weekend was only an overreaction on the part of the person (yes, PERSON, not PERSONS) who exploited the now-defunct trial account loophole. He'd accumulated valid votes through the week, and was at 19 the night before. He logged out before anyone could cast the final vote. When he logged in the next day he was at 17 (because votes that are several days old DO time out), and when he subsequently pissed some people (or someone) off, they made a hasty and inappropriate decision and voted. Three people later, he was muted.
However, he saw the muting as a malicious attack by only one person (who, I might add, he had pissed off just a short while before), and set out to use trial accounts to /vote mute people he held grudges against, who had cast their votes several days previous.
It should be noted that the first person that he muted using the exploit wasn't even involved in the event that actually got him muted. Nor were the second or third or fourth. Only the fifth person was directly involved. Another person was muted as well by the person in question, also not involved. Keep in mind that one of the six people he muted was the IRC relay, a public utility. Lots of people use the relay. Muting the relay itself just to silence ONE person is not only overkill, but a completely selfish act. It was also unnecessary--the relay has its own set of commands for policing its users.
Part of this whole problem is that people let their egos get in the way of everything else. They're so wrapped up in themselves that they just can't see that they're pissing off people or doing bad things. Or worse, they can see it but choose not to stop. When people voice their opinions (and in this case get something done about it, like muting the person) they don't do the right thing--stop, slow down, and think about WHY what happened happened--and instead jump to conclusions and retaliate.
The other part of the problem is that we can't just /ignoreaccount "character in account". If we could do that, /vote mute would be unecessary.
Regarding the second point of starting a mute against someone just because they logged on... my response is that people hold grudges. If they can't fight back in PvP, they fight back in the ways that they can that are effective. This game is called Vendetta for a reason. If someone builds up a reputation (like, again, genka) for being a jackass and an abusive prick, is it really fair to expect that people will forgive and forget so quickly, that things will always be hunky-dory the mext morning?
And one for the record: I do not use trial accounts to /vote mute someone. I have one account I pay for, and I use ONLY that account.
Keep in mind that I idle in #vrelay 24/7. I don't have to see the abuse the second I log in to merit a vote from me, especially if it's visible through the IRC relay. If the abuse is in full swing when I start up the client, the abusive player gets a vote because of that.
I do not play favorites with /vote mute, either. I have voted to mute people who I am friends with because they were being abusive to other players and breaking rules. If the player has shown themselves to be abusive to other players even after being told not to be (ie, they persist in the behavior after being asked not to by guides/devs), I have fair grounds (and a responsibility to the community) to vote to prevent that behavior.
In this particular case, the (first) person who was muted... I only /vote mute them when I see abusive language from them. If I don't see any, I don't vote. Period. End of story. The problem with that is that the person in question is abusive frequently enough that it doesn't matter--if I'm logged in while they are, I end up seeing something abusive coming out of their mouths almost 90% of the time.
In general I use /ignore. Genka is the only person who I always do a /vote mute on, because he does exactly what I said--dodges the /ignore, is abusive in and out of the game, etc.--but that's moot at the moment as he is muted.
The fiasco this weekend was only an overreaction on the part of the person (yes, PERSON, not PERSONS) who exploited the now-defunct trial account loophole. He'd accumulated valid votes through the week, and was at 19 the night before. He logged out before anyone could cast the final vote. When he logged in the next day he was at 17 (because votes that are several days old DO time out), and when he subsequently pissed some people (or someone) off, they made a hasty and inappropriate decision and voted. Three people later, he was muted.
However, he saw the muting as a malicious attack by only one person (who, I might add, he had pissed off just a short while before), and set out to use trial accounts to /vote mute people he held grudges against, who had cast their votes several days previous.
It should be noted that the first person that he muted using the exploit wasn't even involved in the event that actually got him muted. Nor were the second or third or fourth. Only the fifth person was directly involved. Another person was muted as well by the person in question, also not involved. Keep in mind that one of the six people he muted was the IRC relay, a public utility. Lots of people use the relay. Muting the relay itself just to silence ONE person is not only overkill, but a completely selfish act. It was also unnecessary--the relay has its own set of commands for policing its users.
Part of this whole problem is that people let their egos get in the way of everything else. They're so wrapped up in themselves that they just can't see that they're pissing off people or doing bad things. Or worse, they can see it but choose not to stop. When people voice their opinions (and in this case get something done about it, like muting the person) they don't do the right thing--stop, slow down, and think about WHY what happened happened--and instead jump to conclusions and retaliate.
The other part of the problem is that we can't just /ignoreaccount "character in account". If we could do that, /vote mute would be unecessary.
Regarding the second point of starting a mute against someone just because they logged on... my response is that people hold grudges. If they can't fight back in PvP, they fight back in the ways that they can that are effective. This game is called Vendetta for a reason. If someone builds up a reputation (like, again, genka) for being a jackass and an abusive prick, is it really fair to expect that people will forgive and forget so quickly, that things will always be hunky-dory the mext morning?
And one for the record: I do not use trial accounts to /vote mute someone. I have one account I pay for, and I use ONLY that account.
I don't vute mute anybody... its useless and enforces the behaviour of this person even more.
I will do on occasion an /ignore but i will try to not enlighten the person i /ignore seeing as again it will become a sport to go around it.
On top of that, I wouldn't consider it fair nor seriour from my part to do /auto mutes just because some person annoyed me before. Just ignore the person and grow some form of a skin. Although I have to say that in most cases, if you get annoyed by some people contineously, you should search for the reason for it in your own bossom as well. Since to be honest, i have never had problems like some people state in here... and some people that are blowing their horn in here now, can be quite annoying at times as well... (and yes, i'm one from them)
I will do on occasion an /ignore but i will try to not enlighten the person i /ignore seeing as again it will become a sport to go around it.
On top of that, I wouldn't consider it fair nor seriour from my part to do /auto mutes just because some person annoyed me before. Just ignore the person and grow some form of a skin. Although I have to say that in most cases, if you get annoyed by some people contineously, you should search for the reason for it in your own bossom as well. Since to be honest, i have never had problems like some people state in here... and some people that are blowing their horn in here now, can be quite annoying at times as well... (and yes, i'm one from them)
[/quote] The fiasco this weekend was only an overreaction on the part of the person (yes, PERSON, not PERSONS) who exploited the now-defunct trial account loophole. He'd accumulated valid votes through the week, and was at 19 the night before. He logged out before anyone could cast the final vote. When he logged in the next day he was at 17 (because votes that are several days old DO time out), and when he subsequently pissed some people (or someone) off, they made a hasty and inappropriate decision and voted. Three people later, he was muted. [/endQuote]
You lie (Miharu). Tumblemonster had said NOTHING... I was involved in this from the start. I COULD go through the whole sequence of events again, but what's the point. You, Erik, and Jex will just continue to distort and even outright lie about the situation.
PS: Anyone want to point me towards a reference on embedding formatting commands in these posts? I'd have used the proper quoting if I could remember the command.
EDIT:
[/quote] I have one account I pay for, and I use ONLY that account. [/endQuote]
Umm... you post to the forums from 2 different accounts... so... another lie? (Though this one is so obvious and easy to refute, that I must simply be misunderstanding the definition of a true statement? Or... perhaps you are.)
EDIT:
[/quote] Regarding the second point of starting a mute against someone just because they logged on... my response is that people hold grudges. If they can't fight back in PvP, they fight back in the ways that they can that are effective. This game is called Vendetta for a reason. If someone builds up a reputation (like, again, genka) for being a jackass and an abusive prick, is it really fair to expect that people will forgive and forget so quickly, that things will always be hunky-dory the mext morning? [/endQuote]
So then you admit that you are using /vote mute for revenge. I (and seemingly many others) think that this is abusive usage of the command. But, have fun with your spiteful little life eh.
EDIT: Also (as you well know) the name Vendetta refers to the Itani/Serco conflict, not players holding grudges. And if you DO wish to engage in personal vendetta, may I suggest you learn to fight?
You lie (Miharu). Tumblemonster had said NOTHING... I was involved in this from the start. I COULD go through the whole sequence of events again, but what's the point. You, Erik, and Jex will just continue to distort and even outright lie about the situation.
PS: Anyone want to point me towards a reference on embedding formatting commands in these posts? I'd have used the proper quoting if I could remember the command.
EDIT:
[/quote] I have one account I pay for, and I use ONLY that account. [/endQuote]
Umm... you post to the forums from 2 different accounts... so... another lie? (Though this one is so obvious and easy to refute, that I must simply be misunderstanding the definition of a true statement? Or... perhaps you are.)
EDIT:
[/quote] Regarding the second point of starting a mute against someone just because they logged on... my response is that people hold grudges. If they can't fight back in PvP, they fight back in the ways that they can that are effective. This game is called Vendetta for a reason. If someone builds up a reputation (like, again, genka) for being a jackass and an abusive prick, is it really fair to expect that people will forgive and forget so quickly, that things will always be hunky-dory the mext morning? [/endQuote]
So then you admit that you are using /vote mute for revenge. I (and seemingly many others) think that this is abusive usage of the command. But, have fun with your spiteful little life eh.
EDIT: Also (as you well know) the name Vendetta refers to the Itani/Serco conflict, not players holding grudges. And if you DO wish to engage in personal vendetta, may I suggest you learn to fight?
The fiasco this weekend was only an overreaction on the part of the person (yes, PERSON, not PERSONS) who exploited the now-defunct trial account loophole. He'd accumulated valid votes through the week, and was at 19 the night before. He logged out before anyone could cast the final vote. When he logged in the next day he was at 17 (because votes that are several days old DO time out), and when he subsequently pissed some people (or someone) off, they made a hasty and inappropriate decision and voted. Three people later, he was muted.
However, he saw the muting as a malicious attack by only one person (who, I might add, he had pissed off just a short while before), and set out to use trial accounts to /vote mute people he held grudges against, who had cast their votes several days previous.
Liar.
The votes from the previous night were a direct result of your friends campaigning for them. Second, when I logged in and had 17 votes, I wasn't chatting on 100 and HADN'T SAID A WORD on 100. NOT A SINGLE WORD. I was online close to 30 minutes when Amaranth just brought it up, seemingly at random but more likely because of one of you, and bam, everyone's voting again.
The "Fiasco" was a direct result of abuse by you and yours. Bitch about it all you want, you brought it on yourselves. Had you left me well enough alone none of this would have happened.
However, he saw the muting as a malicious attack by only one person (who, I might add, he had pissed off just a short while before), and set out to use trial accounts to /vote mute people he held grudges against, who had cast their votes several days previous.
Liar.
The votes from the previous night were a direct result of your friends campaigning for them. Second, when I logged in and had 17 votes, I wasn't chatting on 100 and HADN'T SAID A WORD on 100. NOT A SINGLE WORD. I was online close to 30 minutes when Amaranth just brought it up, seemingly at random but more likely because of one of you, and bam, everyone's voting again.
The "Fiasco" was a direct result of abuse by you and yours. Bitch about it all you want, you brought it on yourselves. Had you left me well enough alone none of this would have happened.
Hahaha, I miss all the fun, want me to set you all up a *come here to bitch at each other forum*? I'll even let you all say bad bad words, like ninny, and tit!
You acted as an ass.
Your mouth went off the handle (again).
I voted and became vote number 18 (16 the next day when 2 old votes disappeared).
Deal with it.
And you should've hunted down all 20 people and left out the relay if you truly cared who muted you, instead of the people you just have a grudge against.
Anyway, I love how the abusers preach the users about abuse.
Your mouth went off the handle (again).
I voted and became vote number 18 (16 the next day when 2 old votes disappeared).
Deal with it.
And you should've hunted down all 20 people and left out the relay if you truly cared who muted you, instead of the people you just have a grudge against.
Anyway, I love how the abusers preach the users about abuse.
heh wasn't even talking when some people started a mute person x session moldy... so therefore he didn't deserve it. And yes, i was online at the time.
might even still have my log... /me runs off to check
might even still have my log... /me runs off to check
I really ought to have just kept quiet ........
Ecka
Ecka
"/leave 100" <- best command in game imo ;)
Ecka/davejohn, it seems you've opened pandoras box :(