Forums » Suggestions
I write this suggestion inspired by an idea that Xeha had amid of a discussion in-game on channel 100.
We were discussing how /vote mute simply fails a lot of times because not enough full subscribers are online to /vote mute the offender while the vocal majority in the chat loudly demands it.
That has to do with the amount of free to play-users who engage actively in chatter on 100. Many of them follow the rules and argue in favor of the rules, but as you know: They cannot cast a vote as f2pers.
The idea Xeha had was as follows: Instead of needing 10 /votes by full subscribed users, set the requirement to a certain percentage of online full subscribers. That idea could be tweaked into different directions: You could for example require that 50% of the online full subscriber /vote. Or that 70% of the full subscriber who have been writing on channel 100 in the past 15 minutes /voted. The possibilities go far here. In the end I'd like to leave that decision to the developers.
If we choose that approach, it would possibly get easier to /vote mute offenders that clearly are unwanted by the users of 100 without having to depend on 10 full subscribers being at their keyboard, being on channel 100 and actually watching the chat.
To show the situation has gotten out of hand, I would like to name some prominent examples. I do believe these guys are not actually players: They're free to play users who log in for the only purpose to troll, personally attack and insult other players. They have never appeared here on the forums or contributed to the game in any positive way. That is why I believe it is good to name these examples of given scenarios in order bring the message across:
[Nope. -Whistler]
This user has actively engaged in attacking other players, often using racist slurs and awful words. He has threatened to rape a known female player of this game.
A few days ago, he flew ECs through Initros O12 and attacked another user verbally, calling him a N-word and discriminating him for the apparent color of his skin. It was awful and everyone on 100 agreed to /vote mute. Atleast 6 full subscribers casted their vote along with another 5 f2pers exclaiming they sadly could not vote.[Nope. -Whistler] remained un-muted and kept making fun of it and laughed about the "creators not caring".
[Nope. -Whistler]
This user is often online at American evenings and is generally focused on creating an extreme toxic atmosphere. He attacks multiple people, recently told some user to shove a cactus up his you-know-what and claimed certain people have HIV from doing whatever inappropriate activites.
Countless other incidents had happened and one evening when it got worse, a couple of full subscribed users decided to /vote mute this user. Basically all of active channel 100 told The Blackened Soul to shut the hell up and behave. Nothing happened, as not enough people with muting ability where there.[Nope. -Whistler] was amused by this and said he does not give a "shit" about the Be-Nice policies.
These are only 2 of many known examples and sad stories. With the increase of the VO playerbase, we will get hundreds more of these kind of people. I do believe the chat needs to moderate itself. GS probably does not have the money to pay moderators. And what could the devs do if we flood them with ROC violation tickets? We'd never see content.
That's why I believe that this change needs to be made. All RP grudges aside, I think all veterans and full subscribers who pay to play this game will agree with me that we don't want a toxic atmosphere. Especially when it is caused by people who don't even pay to cause it.
Constructive criticism appreciated.
We were discussing how /vote mute simply fails a lot of times because not enough full subscribers are online to /vote mute the offender while the vocal majority in the chat loudly demands it.
That has to do with the amount of free to play-users who engage actively in chatter on 100. Many of them follow the rules and argue in favor of the rules, but as you know: They cannot cast a vote as f2pers.
The idea Xeha had was as follows: Instead of needing 10 /votes by full subscribed users, set the requirement to a certain percentage of online full subscribers. That idea could be tweaked into different directions: You could for example require that 50% of the online full subscriber /vote. Or that 70% of the full subscriber who have been writing on channel 100 in the past 15 minutes /voted. The possibilities go far here. In the end I'd like to leave that decision to the developers.
If we choose that approach, it would possibly get easier to /vote mute offenders that clearly are unwanted by the users of 100 without having to depend on 10 full subscribers being at their keyboard, being on channel 100 and actually watching the chat.
To show the situation has gotten out of hand, I would like to name some prominent examples. I do believe these guys are not actually players: They're free to play users who log in for the only purpose to troll, personally attack and insult other players. They have never appeared here on the forums or contributed to the game in any positive way. That is why I believe it is good to name these examples of given scenarios in order bring the message across:
[Nope. -Whistler]
This user has actively engaged in attacking other players, often using racist slurs and awful words. He has threatened to rape a known female player of this game.
A few days ago, he flew ECs through Initros O12 and attacked another user verbally, calling him a N-word and discriminating him for the apparent color of his skin. It was awful and everyone on 100 agreed to /vote mute. Atleast 6 full subscribers casted their vote along with another 5 f2pers exclaiming they sadly could not vote.[Nope. -Whistler] remained un-muted and kept making fun of it and laughed about the "creators not caring".
[Nope. -Whistler]
This user is often online at American evenings and is generally focused on creating an extreme toxic atmosphere. He attacks multiple people, recently told some user to shove a cactus up his you-know-what and claimed certain people have HIV from doing whatever inappropriate activites.
Countless other incidents had happened and one evening when it got worse, a couple of full subscribed users decided to /vote mute this user. Basically all of active channel 100 told The Blackened Soul to shut the hell up and behave. Nothing happened, as not enough people with muting ability where there.[Nope. -Whistler] was amused by this and said he does not give a "shit" about the Be-Nice policies.
These are only 2 of many known examples and sad stories. With the increase of the VO playerbase, we will get hundreds more of these kind of people. I do believe the chat needs to moderate itself. GS probably does not have the money to pay moderators. And what could the devs do if we flood them with ROC violation tickets? We'd never see content.
That's why I believe that this change needs to be made. All RP grudges aside, I think all veterans and full subscribers who pay to play this game will agree with me that we don't want a toxic atmosphere. Especially when it is caused by people who don't even pay to cause it.
Constructive criticism appreciated.
+1: make 100 great again.
The problem with making it easier to /vote mute is that it makes it easier to abuse.
Further, the problem with tying the quota for muting to a percentage of players rather than a fixed amount is that it might actually make it more difficult to mute someone during busier times than it currently is now.
I don't agree with only allowing people who have been chatting to vote either because it penalizes people for not chatting (i.e. if you don't chat you don't get to vote).
Sadly, I think it's better we plug our ears with /ignore or put in support tickets for harassers and offenders than further tweaking the /vote mute system.
Further, the problem with tying the quota for muting to a percentage of players rather than a fixed amount is that it might actually make it more difficult to mute someone during busier times than it currently is now.
I don't agree with only allowing people who have been chatting to vote either because it penalizes people for not chatting (i.e. if you don't chat you don't get to vote).
Sadly, I think it's better we plug our ears with /ignore or put in support tickets for harassers and offenders than further tweaking the /vote mute system.
Hey guys. /ignore "playername"
+1 so much
Maybe these people aren't as annoying as you think they are Sieger?
Yes. Yes they are.
According to Incarnate....this would make the problem worse since there are about a thousand people online at any given time.
Certainly not a thousand fully subbed people.
I have to agree with greenwall here. I do get that /vote mute is preferred by some, simply because it seems more punitive but a simple /ignore can solve 9 out of 10 situations. The other ones can be dealt with via a support ticket.
Sure, the devs cannot always be online to respond or even there to take action; but as soon as they are, if they deem the situation worthy, perma mutes and bans can and will be handed out. Sure, it's easy enough to create new accounts, but then it becomes more than chat abuse and I am sure the devs have the means to deal with this too.
On a side note: I know I was a victim of one of the vote mute campaigns that targeted a certain guild, but I honestly preferred when the mute was 24 hours.
Sure, the devs cannot always be online to respond or even there to take action; but as soon as they are, if they deem the situation worthy, perma mutes and bans can and will be handed out. Sure, it's easy enough to create new accounts, but then it becomes more than chat abuse and I am sure the devs have the means to deal with this too.
On a side note: I know I was a victim of one of the vote mute campaigns that targeted a certain guild, but I honestly preferred when the mute was 24 hours.
Yeah, I saw Xeha talking about this last night,+1
-1 cause this time gw is right:
"The problem with making it easier to /vote mute is that it makes it easier to abuse."
"The problem with making it easier to /vote mute is that it makes it easier to abuse."
The democratic muting process predates the lite and free users as a class, so it would make sense for it to change at some point to bring some suffrage to what the OP claims is the majority of users. Not sure I agree with the particulars though. Why not give them 3/5s of a vote and call it good?
@genka
sure, but wait a moment! i can vote with my 33 f2p accounts! -> this wont work therefore
@greenwall
the precentage idea is good but needs additional parameters. when there are (just for example here) 50 subbed player on, its no longer a precentage, but the fixed 10 again like before. This way you have a solution for both situations (few and a lot of player).
This idea is because when less people play VO (check the graphs), theres extreme racism, insults and spam and no way to moderaten it. Its not just something that happens rarely. This just gets even worse when the f2p trolls understand they cant be stopped... They are very annoying from time to time.
There have been multiple situations where people spammed 100 with a plugin making it impossible to read nor tell the most players how to use ignore. /ignore here is ONLY a solution if the other person knows about it.
sure, but wait a moment! i can vote with my 33 f2p accounts! -> this wont work therefore
@greenwall
the precentage idea is good but needs additional parameters. when there are (just for example here) 50 subbed player on, its no longer a precentage, but the fixed 10 again like before. This way you have a solution for both situations (few and a lot of player).
This idea is because when less people play VO (check the graphs), theres extreme racism, insults and spam and no way to moderaten it. Its not just something that happens rarely. This just gets even worse when the f2p trolls understand they cant be stopped... They are very annoying from time to time.
There have been multiple situations where people spammed 100 with a plugin making it impossible to read nor tell the most players how to use ignore. /ignore here is ONLY a solution if the other person knows about it.
"/ignore here is ONLY a solution if the other person knows about it."
Same goes for /vote mute
Same goes for /vote mute
No greenwall. for /ignore, every player has to know the command. for /vote mute just a few to solve the issue.
Xeha, in order to even be on 100 everyone had to learn how to join (and leave, presumably) chat channels. So, at the very least, anyone on 100 should be aware of how to leave that channel if it become too much for them.
I would be more in support of improving the user experience so that chat management is better explained rather than make it easier to abuse /vote mute.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not at all defending those [profanity omitted] who perpetrate this offensive behavior.
I would be more in support of improving the user experience so that chat management is better explained rather than make it easier to abuse /vote mute.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not at all defending those [profanity omitted] who perpetrate this offensive behavior.
When you create a new char, your on 100 already so they dont have to know how to join any channel.
The channel number dosnt really matter. We have had f2p idiots spamming the help channel (1) too.
I agree on better explanation of the moderation system.
The channel number dosnt really matter. We have had f2p idiots spamming the help channel (1) too.
I agree on better explanation of the moderation system.
Oh I thought you were on channel 1 by default? that should also be the case if it isn't already.
To be honest I would prefer we had a few more Guides around who could deal with these issues in a fast and decisive manner. While ignore works it doesn't remove all the drama and BS responses the trolls seek to create. Vote mute does work but there should also be far more serious punishments meted out for some of the conversations that have gone on lately. I gave up and "/leave 100 " .