Forums » Suggestions
So, I fundamentally disagree with this. I don't think espionage or theft, within the context of the game, is necessarily wrong. One might as well outlaw in-game piracy.
I'm going to fundamentally disagree with this poor parallel.
Piracy is utilizes in-game mechanics to create a situation where one player can pay another player not to die, or where one player kills another player because that is the game we are playing.
Guild bank theft is the violation of a written or verbal between two or more people where one person intentionally deprives the other person(s) of an item of perceived value within the game. That's called fraud and we aren't playing Enron Online.
You would correctly argue that piracy is theft and both are illegal, but the alt system in VO that allows people to have endless rotations of alts with no long-term consequences is the reason that this is not a true parallel to piracy. Piracy requires skill and practice, and working up to license and faction levels. Committing fraud only requires a betrayal of trust.
You would argue that there are mechanisms in game to safeguard against this and we would devolve into a discussion about broken guild mechanics and how one cookie cutter mold is applied to all guilds.
No other MMO I am aware of allows within its rules of conduct for a player to advertise the sale of an item or service with the purpose of depriving another player of their in-game items through deception.
But it all traces back to the toxic narcissistic personalities that have to constantly be in the spotlight making other players miserable. That could be through racism, fraud, harassment, religious talk, etc.
I applaud you for finally addressing this problem publicly. This thread brought back a lot of memories of behavior that was a contributing factor to my decision to stop playing. But I do entertain the thought of one day rejoining the game. Improvements in this area make that more likely.
To that end, I have the following suggestions:
1) Vote mute should continue to be a thing, and should be tied to reporting as you mentioned, but should not prevent a player from chatting in guild or group chat. If memory serves, a significant abuses of vote mute were targeted at cutting off player communications and were used during group skirmishes around station conflicts. Allowing chat to continue in group and guild chat would go a long way to prevent mute abuses.
2) There is a fairly clear distinction between role-playing bad behavior and being a genuinely toxic player. I know this can be subjective depending on who is observing, but regular and consistent disruptive/abusive behavior should be easy to track with reporting and there should be lasting consequences for continually engaging in such behavior.
3) There should be increased controls around alt-anonymity. The ability to delete and create alts should have limitations that either restrict how often character slots can be recycled. Other MMOs have the benefit of realms that group players into separate environments, and alts of opposing factions can be spread across these realms. VO doesn't have this luxury because of the limited player population so it's not practical to enforce one faction per account, but the ability to spin up divisive alts of whatever faction is beneficial at whatever the current guild-political environment is doesn't help the situation.
I'm going to fundamentally disagree with this poor parallel.
Piracy is utilizes in-game mechanics to create a situation where one player can pay another player not to die, or where one player kills another player because that is the game we are playing.
Guild bank theft is the violation of a written or verbal between two or more people where one person intentionally deprives the other person(s) of an item of perceived value within the game. That's called fraud and we aren't playing Enron Online.
You would correctly argue that piracy is theft and both are illegal, but the alt system in VO that allows people to have endless rotations of alts with no long-term consequences is the reason that this is not a true parallel to piracy. Piracy requires skill and practice, and working up to license and faction levels. Committing fraud only requires a betrayal of trust.
You would argue that there are mechanisms in game to safeguard against this and we would devolve into a discussion about broken guild mechanics and how one cookie cutter mold is applied to all guilds.
No other MMO I am aware of allows within its rules of conduct for a player to advertise the sale of an item or service with the purpose of depriving another player of their in-game items through deception.
But it all traces back to the toxic narcissistic personalities that have to constantly be in the spotlight making other players miserable. That could be through racism, fraud, harassment, religious talk, etc.
I applaud you for finally addressing this problem publicly. This thread brought back a lot of memories of behavior that was a contributing factor to my decision to stop playing. But I do entertain the thought of one day rejoining the game. Improvements in this area make that more likely.
To that end, I have the following suggestions:
1) Vote mute should continue to be a thing, and should be tied to reporting as you mentioned, but should not prevent a player from chatting in guild or group chat. If memory serves, a significant abuses of vote mute were targeted at cutting off player communications and were used during group skirmishes around station conflicts. Allowing chat to continue in group and guild chat would go a long way to prevent mute abuses.
2) There is a fairly clear distinction between role-playing bad behavior and being a genuinely toxic player. I know this can be subjective depending on who is observing, but regular and consistent disruptive/abusive behavior should be easy to track with reporting and there should be lasting consequences for continually engaging in such behavior.
3) There should be increased controls around alt-anonymity. The ability to delete and create alts should have limitations that either restrict how often character slots can be recycled. Other MMOs have the benefit of realms that group players into separate environments, and alts of opposing factions can be spread across these realms. VO doesn't have this luxury because of the limited player population so it's not practical to enforce one faction per account, but the ability to spin up divisive alts of whatever faction is beneficial at whatever the current guild-political environment is doesn't help the situation.
Okay. How about a few different situations:
A) Two players agree to exchange items. However, when it comes down the final exchange, one player murders the other, and takes both items. (Deception during in-game item trade).
B) Two players agree to go hunt for item drops together. However, when a sufficiently rare or uncommon item is dropped, one player murders the other and takes it.
C) Player A is off mining, and is wanted dead by Group B. They then pay Player C, the guild-mate or friend of Player A, for information on his whereabouts, which leads to his destruction, and perhaps loss of something critical.
They're all betrayals of trust, but there's a huge "gradient" of what that can mean in the game.
Ask yourself: Exactly how far do you want us to enforce idealism onto the game universe? At what point does your subjective concept of righteousness and trust interfere with the notion of a futuristic science-fiction universe filled with pirates, smugglers and other ruffians?
The link that I made to EVE in my prior post is a really good example. "Alts" DO exist in reality. I am a student of the history of counterintelligence, and I have been since I was a pre-teen. The Kim Philby's of the world created incredibly interesting situations, and changed history in dramatic ways. I find these situations, and the potential for them to exist, to have great value to the universe. They helped inspire this game, and was part of my thinking way back at the beginning, as early as "twitch combat".
Similarly, building an "alt" for a really long con, with a background legend, and taking a year or more to infiltrate a group and extract some value, is a noteworthy accomplishment. It's a hell of a lot more than "fraud".
Now, this is all pretty far afield from the actual topic of this thread, so I'd rather if we can all drop this at this point..
But I will say that I'm always open to improving Guild mechanics and security measures thereof. But I am not here to create a "perfectly safe space" for you, that is not what the world of Vendetta Online promises, or has ever promised. Nor do I have the resources, or inclination, to give items back to every person who reports that they have been wronged by someone, across the full "gradient" of possible mis-trust, from trivial disagreements up to guild-bank-robberies.
Yes, there are lots of things that lead to toxicity. But, for now, let's focus on purely giving feedback on the chat mechanics aspect.
A) Two players agree to exchange items. However, when it comes down the final exchange, one player murders the other, and takes both items. (Deception during in-game item trade).
B) Two players agree to go hunt for item drops together. However, when a sufficiently rare or uncommon item is dropped, one player murders the other and takes it.
C) Player A is off mining, and is wanted dead by Group B. They then pay Player C, the guild-mate or friend of Player A, for information on his whereabouts, which leads to his destruction, and perhaps loss of something critical.
They're all betrayals of trust, but there's a huge "gradient" of what that can mean in the game.
Ask yourself: Exactly how far do you want us to enforce idealism onto the game universe? At what point does your subjective concept of righteousness and trust interfere with the notion of a futuristic science-fiction universe filled with pirates, smugglers and other ruffians?
The link that I made to EVE in my prior post is a really good example. "Alts" DO exist in reality. I am a student of the history of counterintelligence, and I have been since I was a pre-teen. The Kim Philby's of the world created incredibly interesting situations, and changed history in dramatic ways. I find these situations, and the potential for them to exist, to have great value to the universe. They helped inspire this game, and was part of my thinking way back at the beginning, as early as "twitch combat".
Similarly, building an "alt" for a really long con, with a background legend, and taking a year or more to infiltrate a group and extract some value, is a noteworthy accomplishment. It's a hell of a lot more than "fraud".
Now, this is all pretty far afield from the actual topic of this thread, so I'd rather if we can all drop this at this point..
But I will say that I'm always open to improving Guild mechanics and security measures thereof. But I am not here to create a "perfectly safe space" for you, that is not what the world of Vendetta Online promises, or has ever promised. Nor do I have the resources, or inclination, to give items back to every person who reports that they have been wronged by someone, across the full "gradient" of possible mis-trust, from trivial disagreements up to guild-bank-robberies.
Yes, there are lots of things that lead to toxicity. But, for now, let's focus on purely giving feedback on the chat mechanics aspect.
well, I will own my part for contributing to the toxic nature of 100 at times, all though I would like to think I have matured a bit in the 10 years that i have been around.
I would like to add a point to this discussion that I think a lot of people have missed. I want to be clear that I am not directly accusing you of doing this Inc but there is often times an appearance of favoritism towards players who spend extra money on multiple accounts which leads to resentment amongst some players.
Secondly the advantage that people can get from writing some pretty advanced plug-ins has never left a good taste in my and i assume other players mouth, you guys have been pretty on top of closing off the ability to create ones that take the player input out of dog fighting. I recently reported one I thought conferred way to much of an advantage and the response was "well we intend to give everyone the ability to do what that plug-in does in game someday" which I think all long term players know by now, some day could mean a really long time from now. I don't want to get too far off topic but logic like that could be applied to it being ok for players to somehow be able to fly terradons before they ever get released to us.
I like the /report idea, as someone who was on the receiving end of several /vote mute campaigns I think keeping the player base from being able to limit anyones ability to chat is a good thing. if you /report someone it should auto ignore that person.
I also agree with genka, banning all forms of political discussion is lumping in "hey did you see the 0.5 percent tax increase on candy" and "we should kill minority group x make our country pure" in the same category, one already breaks the no racism rules. I think if you going to make 100 game related only and an "off-topic" channel the "off-topic" channel should allow mild political discussion
I would like to add a point to this discussion that I think a lot of people have missed. I want to be clear that I am not directly accusing you of doing this Inc but there is often times an appearance of favoritism towards players who spend extra money on multiple accounts which leads to resentment amongst some players.
Secondly the advantage that people can get from writing some pretty advanced plug-ins has never left a good taste in my and i assume other players mouth, you guys have been pretty on top of closing off the ability to create ones that take the player input out of dog fighting. I recently reported one I thought conferred way to much of an advantage and the response was "well we intend to give everyone the ability to do what that plug-in does in game someday" which I think all long term players know by now, some day could mean a really long time from now. I don't want to get too far off topic but logic like that could be applied to it being ok for players to somehow be able to fly terradons before they ever get released to us.
I like the /report idea, as someone who was on the receiving end of several /vote mute campaigns I think keeping the player base from being able to limit anyones ability to chat is a good thing. if you /report someone it should auto ignore that person.
I also agree with genka, banning all forms of political discussion is lumping in "hey did you see the 0.5 percent tax increase on candy" and "we should kill minority group x make our country pure" in the same category, one already breaks the no racism rules. I think if you going to make 100 game related only and an "off-topic" channel the "off-topic" channel should allow mild political discussion
I feel that half these problems wouldn't even exist if players like you know who [ :) ] left the game, or if the game had some form of moderation other than abuse tickets and "Okay we'll look into it". The older player base is toxic, but the player base is not the only one at fault here.
Peytros, I just wrote, above your message: let's focus on purely giving feedback on the chat mechanics aspect.
And you want to talk about.. how many accounts people have, and perceived plugin drama? Does that sound like chat mechanics? It really doesn't seem like it's related at all, does it?
Okay, I'll respond to your "points" that you want:
1) I am not aware of, nor do I give a rat-ass how many subscribed accounts individual people have. I don't know how "often times" there is the "appearance of favoritism"; but I can absolutely guarantee the certainty of dumbass conspiracy-theories among angsty, embittered veteran players.
2) As for your plugin "point", I actually gave you a very candid and solid response in the ticket. I wrote:
What I am saying is that I pursue things that I can fix, rather than things that I cannot.
- I cannot guarantee with certainty that players cannot "fake" or "script" other faux-players as turrets, in ways that I cannot detect. If you think "real people" should be able to man turrets and fire at you, then you have to accept the possibility of bots, because they are infeasible to prevent.
- I also cannot handle the administrative load of trying to cite or ban anyone who is suspected of doing that kind of activity. Especially when it may become difficult to prove, at some point.
Sooo.. YES, in fact, I took the path of trying to fix that issue through gameplay changes, something that was beaten to death in another thread. I did this, because it would have value as a fix (whether people had scripted turret-bots or not), rather than acceding to your infeasible and naive request of somehow "preventing" people from running turret-bots, while still allowing real people to play turrets.
Good thing you're still cranky about this, and decide to bring it back up again on a totally-unrelated public thread, close to two months later. Is this the sort of angsty, self-involved agenda that reflects your "maturity"?
if the game had some form of moderation other than abuse tickets and "Okay we'll look into it"
Yes, that's why you're supposed to Suggest ideas on the Suggestions forum. Not just bitch about things, and point fingers at individual players. Did you even read the post that started the thread? I specifically spoke about the moderation issue. I don't have like a "wand of moderation", or the ability to clone myself.
At this point, I'm just thread-muting people who are contributing badly, because I feel this is an important discussion, and I don't want it to be derailed into a locked topic by a few bad actors, who mostly want to have a free-for-all about "everything that makes me cranky" (what an ironic microcosm for the chat issue in general).
This is specifically a discussion of whether the suggested chat mechanic changes will be an improvement, or not, and/or how they should be adjusted.
Do not blame things on individuals, that isn't helpful, and in the long run we're trying to build a system that will likely outlast those individuals anyway. So, really, who the specific trolls are right now, or have been recently, is irrelevant in the face of building better chat-management constructs for a robust community.
STAY ON TOPIC. Thanks.
And you want to talk about.. how many accounts people have, and perceived plugin drama? Does that sound like chat mechanics? It really doesn't seem like it's related at all, does it?
Okay, I'll respond to your "points" that you want:
1) I am not aware of, nor do I give a rat-ass how many subscribed accounts individual people have. I don't know how "often times" there is the "appearance of favoritism"; but I can absolutely guarantee the certainty of dumbass conspiracy-theories among angsty, embittered veteran players.
2) As for your plugin "point", I actually gave you a very candid and solid response in the ticket. I wrote:
What I am saying is that I pursue things that I can fix, rather than things that I cannot.
- I cannot guarantee with certainty that players cannot "fake" or "script" other faux-players as turrets, in ways that I cannot detect. If you think "real people" should be able to man turrets and fire at you, then you have to accept the possibility of bots, because they are infeasible to prevent.
- I also cannot handle the administrative load of trying to cite or ban anyone who is suspected of doing that kind of activity. Especially when it may become difficult to prove, at some point.
Sooo.. YES, in fact, I took the path of trying to fix that issue through gameplay changes, something that was beaten to death in another thread. I did this, because it would have value as a fix (whether people had scripted turret-bots or not), rather than acceding to your infeasible and naive request of somehow "preventing" people from running turret-bots, while still allowing real people to play turrets.
Good thing you're still cranky about this, and decide to bring it back up again on a totally-unrelated public thread, close to two months later. Is this the sort of angsty, self-involved agenda that reflects your "maturity"?
if the game had some form of moderation other than abuse tickets and "Okay we'll look into it"
Yes, that's why you're supposed to Suggest ideas on the Suggestions forum. Not just bitch about things, and point fingers at individual players. Did you even read the post that started the thread? I specifically spoke about the moderation issue. I don't have like a "wand of moderation", or the ability to clone myself.
At this point, I'm just thread-muting people who are contributing badly, because I feel this is an important discussion, and I don't want it to be derailed into a locked topic by a few bad actors, who mostly want to have a free-for-all about "everything that makes me cranky" (what an ironic microcosm for the chat issue in general).
This is specifically a discussion of whether the suggested chat mechanic changes will be an improvement, or not, and/or how they should be adjusted.
Do not blame things on individuals, that isn't helpful, and in the long run we're trying to build a system that will likely outlast those individuals anyway. So, really, who the specific trolls are right now, or have been recently, is irrelevant in the face of building better chat-management constructs for a robust community.
STAY ON TOPIC. Thanks.
EDIT: This was typed up before Incarnates post above me, I delayed hitting submit because I am lazy, and easily distracted.
First
I'm glad to see you are taking the time to try and deal with this. I don't know how successful you will be, but I wish you luck. I used to be on rather friendly terms with my victims in game, and this was fun. I would also like to thank you for your possibly excessive patience in this matter. I've seen you in 100 chat taking abuse from a player, that is WAY beyond my tolerance. I'd've brought down the ban-hammer within a couple minutes in your position.
Second
"This issue has been growing for some years, and I've admittedly been unsure how to handle it. To be perfectly honest, it's gotten worse everywhere online, and no one in my entire industry is quite sure what to do; this includes places like Blizzard and Riot, the latter of which is also pouring epic amounts of cash into trying to solve things with machine learning."
It's not just online, but IRL it's gotten worse too. Maybe not by as much, but MANY people I've known for years are losing the ability to 'be nice'. I know my patience with people I find stupid, or irritating has mostly dissipated. I hardly ever chat on 100 somewhat for that reason. I think some of this is likely due to current events, as things are changing rapidly in the world, and people tend to be more content with the familiar. I hope like hell it's not a large scale, long term cultural shift, as that can get VERY nasty. The level of hostility between factions in this game is higher then I've ever seen it, often crossing the line into outright personal hatred.
Third
" The whole "report" system, administrative tools, and log-cropping mechanics, database interaction and contact system are more involved, but I think are necessary, as I suspect the rest of this won't be "effective" without it. Our current administrative situation is really terrible, and greatly weakens our ability to respond in the limited time we have available. "
This sounds like something you NEED to have working properly before a major release. Without it I think the administrative workload will vastly outstrip your resources IF you get a big influx of player. What would happen if in a month 500 new players join up and become active members of the community?
Now a couple suggestions toward your goal. I had actually meant to suggest some of these to you privately, several months ago to avoid it becoming yet another flame-war on the suggestions forum. However you started the thread, so I have to assume that it's okay to post them here.
Please do understand that these suggestions are made in good faith, I do not mean to put down your efforts to date. I also do not intend to point out any particular bad behavior by any specific player.
ONE
Try to be very active in the suggestions forum, even if it's a one line reply.
This might help reduce the actual saltiness of the players. I can understand people getting bitter when they perceive an issue that they feel is important is being ignored. I've done it myself, though I try and keep it off the forums and general chat. My reasoning is that salty people will likely be saltier in chat, and happier people less so, so de-desalinating the players a little might make them less irritable, negative, and angsty on chat.
TWO
Clearly state, VERY LOUDLY, that this game is supposed (or not supposed) to be a dangerous world, life is cheap. I have no idea for a specific method of this, but the messages of 'increased attack likelihood' doesn't seem to get the point across. Some noobs I kill out in open space seem surprised that somebody would do such a thing. Restricting 0/0/0/0/0 characters to nation space isn't a good solution.
THREE
Strong administrative action for repeat offenders.
The channel 1 and 100 mutes can be effective, I think in some instances some people might behave themselves for a short while afterwards. Some people might need stronger encouragement, week-long, or multi-month long bans.
I do appreciate that people do have bad days, or months, or years even. That however does not justify them abusing others as a way to cope. It's not fair to others, and usually unhelpful to them as well. This is why I am suggesting temporary bans as an intermediate step between muting and outright perma-banning, when they get themselves sorted out, they may well be able to be constructive, or at least non-destructive members of the game community.
FOUR - stolen shamelessly and verbatim from Whistler
I'd like a way to have the rules easily accessible within the game, and clearly numbered/lettered so I can simply tell somebody who has transgressed "Yes, it is a rule. Please see 7a." It might also be useful to get player input into the wording of all of the rules so that they are clear and meaningful. We have some excellent critical thinkers here who are able to instantly identify loopholes.
This is an excellent idea, sad that it's needed, the rules are not that complicated. I've always taken them to be 'don't be a massive asshole'. As for the wording, they do need to be VERY clear, probably with extensive, though not all-inclusive examples listed in a more detailed format on the website.
FIVE
Find another moderator or two. This one is VERY hard, but necessary. Ideally they should be intimately familiar with the game. They also need to be easy going, someone with a hot temper could easily be manipulated into acting inappropriately, which would be worse then useless.
At this time I cannot think of any ACTIVE players who fit that description off hand. It might be necessary to have them remain anonymous, as for instance if you made a notable pirate a guide, any action they took would be suspect in the eyes of traders.
First
I'm glad to see you are taking the time to try and deal with this. I don't know how successful you will be, but I wish you luck. I used to be on rather friendly terms with my victims in game, and this was fun. I would also like to thank you for your possibly excessive patience in this matter. I've seen you in 100 chat taking abuse from a player, that is WAY beyond my tolerance. I'd've brought down the ban-hammer within a couple minutes in your position.
Second
"This issue has been growing for some years, and I've admittedly been unsure how to handle it. To be perfectly honest, it's gotten worse everywhere online, and no one in my entire industry is quite sure what to do; this includes places like Blizzard and Riot, the latter of which is also pouring epic amounts of cash into trying to solve things with machine learning."
It's not just online, but IRL it's gotten worse too. Maybe not by as much, but MANY people I've known for years are losing the ability to 'be nice'. I know my patience with people I find stupid, or irritating has mostly dissipated. I hardly ever chat on 100 somewhat for that reason. I think some of this is likely due to current events, as things are changing rapidly in the world, and people tend to be more content with the familiar. I hope like hell it's not a large scale, long term cultural shift, as that can get VERY nasty. The level of hostility between factions in this game is higher then I've ever seen it, often crossing the line into outright personal hatred.
Third
" The whole "report" system, administrative tools, and log-cropping mechanics, database interaction and contact system are more involved, but I think are necessary, as I suspect the rest of this won't be "effective" without it. Our current administrative situation is really terrible, and greatly weakens our ability to respond in the limited time we have available. "
This sounds like something you NEED to have working properly before a major release. Without it I think the administrative workload will vastly outstrip your resources IF you get a big influx of player. What would happen if in a month 500 new players join up and become active members of the community?
Now a couple suggestions toward your goal. I had actually meant to suggest some of these to you privately, several months ago to avoid it becoming yet another flame-war on the suggestions forum. However you started the thread, so I have to assume that it's okay to post them here.
Please do understand that these suggestions are made in good faith, I do not mean to put down your efforts to date. I also do not intend to point out any particular bad behavior by any specific player.
ONE
Try to be very active in the suggestions forum, even if it's a one line reply.
This might help reduce the actual saltiness of the players. I can understand people getting bitter when they perceive an issue that they feel is important is being ignored. I've done it myself, though I try and keep it off the forums and general chat. My reasoning is that salty people will likely be saltier in chat, and happier people less so, so de-desalinating the players a little might make them less irritable, negative, and angsty on chat.
TWO
Clearly state, VERY LOUDLY, that this game is supposed (or not supposed) to be a dangerous world, life is cheap. I have no idea for a specific method of this, but the messages of 'increased attack likelihood' doesn't seem to get the point across. Some noobs I kill out in open space seem surprised that somebody would do such a thing. Restricting 0/0/0/0/0 characters to nation space isn't a good solution.
THREE
Strong administrative action for repeat offenders.
The channel 1 and 100 mutes can be effective, I think in some instances some people might behave themselves for a short while afterwards. Some people might need stronger encouragement, week-long, or multi-month long bans.
I do appreciate that people do have bad days, or months, or years even. That however does not justify them abusing others as a way to cope. It's not fair to others, and usually unhelpful to them as well. This is why I am suggesting temporary bans as an intermediate step between muting and outright perma-banning, when they get themselves sorted out, they may well be able to be constructive, or at least non-destructive members of the game community.
FOUR - stolen shamelessly and verbatim from Whistler
I'd like a way to have the rules easily accessible within the game, and clearly numbered/lettered so I can simply tell somebody who has transgressed "Yes, it is a rule. Please see 7a." It might also be useful to get player input into the wording of all of the rules so that they are clear and meaningful. We have some excellent critical thinkers here who are able to instantly identify loopholes.
This is an excellent idea, sad that it's needed, the rules are not that complicated. I've always taken them to be 'don't be a massive asshole'. As for the wording, they do need to be VERY clear, probably with extensive, though not all-inclusive examples listed in a more detailed format on the website.
FIVE
Find another moderator or two. This one is VERY hard, but necessary. Ideally they should be intimately familiar with the game. They also need to be easy going, someone with a hot temper could easily be manipulated into acting inappropriately, which would be worse then useless.
At this time I cannot think of any ACTIVE players who fit that description off hand. It might be necessary to have them remain anonymous, as for instance if you made a notable pirate a guide, any action they took would be suspect in the eyes of traders.
Find another moderator or two. This one is VERY hard, but necessary.
That'd be great, but you're right: Not only is it extremely hard to find the right type of person, but it's a tough sell. Basically, if your identity ever gets out, a large number of people hate you, no matter how sensitive you are in your application of force.
People "think" they want to be guides, but the reality is pretty challenging. It sucks being the constant target of people's angst. I have to put up with it, but most people would rather just have fun playing the game..
Try to be very active in the suggestions forum, even if it's a one line reply. This might help reduce the actual saltiness of the players.
Yeah, I have multiple intended goals for giving people greater awareness of what's going on, although that's a bit beyond the scope of our discussion here.
The challenge with Suggestions, specifically, is I have to be extremely careful in what I say. So many people are already angsty over the perceptions of my "lying" about content and timelines (even though, at worst, I didn't "lie", I was just mistaken or foolish in my estimates or goals; I've never had an intent to mislead the player-base). So, as soon as I weigh in, I have to be careful not to say something is happening right away, and not to imply that the solution I choose would be exactly what they're discussing. Basically, I have to find a way to say I think the topic is of value, without saying anything else at all. 80% of the time, I already have my own plan, but I just don't have the time required to explain it (and then defend it, or the relative timeline juggling issues, against the inevitable onslaught of misunderstanding).
Back to the discussion of chat-system management..
That'd be great, but you're right: Not only is it extremely hard to find the right type of person, but it's a tough sell. Basically, if your identity ever gets out, a large number of people hate you, no matter how sensitive you are in your application of force.
People "think" they want to be guides, but the reality is pretty challenging. It sucks being the constant target of people's angst. I have to put up with it, but most people would rather just have fun playing the game..
Try to be very active in the suggestions forum, even if it's a one line reply. This might help reduce the actual saltiness of the players.
Yeah, I have multiple intended goals for giving people greater awareness of what's going on, although that's a bit beyond the scope of our discussion here.
The challenge with Suggestions, specifically, is I have to be extremely careful in what I say. So many people are already angsty over the perceptions of my "lying" about content and timelines (even though, at worst, I didn't "lie", I was just mistaken or foolish in my estimates or goals; I've never had an intent to mislead the player-base). So, as soon as I weigh in, I have to be careful not to say something is happening right away, and not to imply that the solution I choose would be exactly what they're discussing. Basically, I have to find a way to say I think the topic is of value, without saying anything else at all. 80% of the time, I already have my own plan, but I just don't have the time required to explain it (and then defend it, or the relative timeline juggling issues, against the inevitable onslaught of misunderstanding).
Back to the discussion of chat-system management..
Regarding moderators:
It's a bit of a tedious job as it stands today. The devs have prioritized game play over back-end moderation tools, which I think was a reasonable choice up to now.
I would like to see:
-More options for ban times, and rules to govern when to use each tier.
-More options for chatjail duration, and rules.
-Other tools that are less drastic, like the ability to limit the frequency and number of characters for a
limited time.
-An easier way for players to reply to private guide messages. New people are often confounded by this.
-Some sort of cumulative weighting system for repeat warnings or actions against a player, such that the
individual will experience longer bans or will automatically escalated to the devs.
-Easier chat logging and reporting
-An easy warning system "This is a private message: You have violated RoC #7a regarding hate speech.
Please review and follow the Roc" or perhaps there could be a command to helpfully spam their chat
with the RoC.
-Some way to retain moderators that is not potentially game-breaking. Maybe a snazzy livery or some
other cosmetic thing.
-Moderators that can be on at the high-traffic times. I'm in-game daily, but it's usually pretty tame when
I'm on.
-A chat filter, which could be in addition to the existing one, that is not toggleable and filters words that
are never allowed, like slurs. The filter would also be sensitive to alternative spellings. The filter could
simply prevent the message from being sent, or could replace the offending word with a new word or
phrase at random from a large list of benign alternatives which could be amusing or could be in-game
items. "You holodisc!". The idea being that verbally abusing others would be more effort than it's
worth.
It's a bit of a tedious job as it stands today. The devs have prioritized game play over back-end moderation tools, which I think was a reasonable choice up to now.
I would like to see:
-More options for ban times, and rules to govern when to use each tier.
-More options for chatjail duration, and rules.
-Other tools that are less drastic, like the ability to limit the frequency and number of characters for a
limited time.
-An easier way for players to reply to private guide messages. New people are often confounded by this.
-Some sort of cumulative weighting system for repeat warnings or actions against a player, such that the
individual will experience longer bans or will automatically escalated to the devs.
-Easier chat logging and reporting
-An easy warning system "This is a private message: You have violated RoC #7a regarding hate speech.
Please review and follow the Roc" or perhaps there could be a command to helpfully spam their chat
with the RoC.
-Some way to retain moderators that is not potentially game-breaking. Maybe a snazzy livery or some
other cosmetic thing.
-Moderators that can be on at the high-traffic times. I'm in-game daily, but it's usually pretty tame when
I'm on.
-A chat filter, which could be in addition to the existing one, that is not toggleable and filters words that
are never allowed, like slurs. The filter would also be sensitive to alternative spellings. The filter could
simply prevent the message from being sent, or could replace the offending word with a new word or
phrase at random from a large list of benign alternatives which could be amusing or could be in-game
items. "You holodisc!". The idea being that verbally abusing others would be more effort than it's
worth.
I pretty much agree with all the points made in the OP. Not sure if 2 or 3 would have a sizeable impact but 1 and 4 are really needed.
It's not just the toxic chat, but a huge amount of idle chat that people seem to hate. Most of the latter comes from newbies or f2ps.
There was a suggestion made awhile back to rate limit 100 and I think something similar to it should be implemented. A much stricter rate limit should be imposed on the relay. Though I opposed that suggestion, it seems necessary in retrospect.
100 also should be kept read-only for people until they have completed their flight test. Maybe even until they gain a few licenses in all the types. The license requirements should be kept different for subbed and f2ps.
Agreed with yoda on handing out temp bans more freely...
It's not just the toxic chat, but a huge amount of idle chat that people seem to hate. Most of the latter comes from newbies or f2ps.
There was a suggestion made awhile back to rate limit 100 and I think something similar to it should be implemented. A much stricter rate limit should be imposed on the relay. Though I opposed that suggestion, it seems necessary in retrospect.
100 also should be kept read-only for people until they have completed their flight test. Maybe even until they gain a few licenses in all the types. The license requirements should be kept different for subbed and f2ps.
Agreed with yoda on handing out temp bans more freely...
100 also should be kept read-only for people until they have completed their flight test.
The first character on a new PC account is actually limited from talking on any channel except 1 until they leave the training sector. This is also somehow tied to the trial time beginning. I do not think this is the case on mobile accounts, as I rarely make new characters on mobile but it should be, and like noted this should possibly be extended to the flight test mission and for all new characters - makes sense and at least slows down mute-dodgers.
So, I fundamentally disagree with this. I don't think espionage or theft, within the context of the game, is necessarily wrong.
Yeah, I kind of see what you are saying, I guess my point was that no matter what the offence, some stronger punishments should be handed out without discussion, thought or explanation. Nuke the entire site from orbit, it is the only way to be sure! Unless this starts to happen, it will not matter what tools you create - people gunna push the boundaries to find out how far they can push it. Set the bar low, and this alone should remove a lot of the "angsty vets".
The first character on a new PC account is actually limited from talking on any channel except 1 until they leave the training sector. This is also somehow tied to the trial time beginning. I do not think this is the case on mobile accounts, as I rarely make new characters on mobile but it should be, and like noted this should possibly be extended to the flight test mission and for all new characters - makes sense and at least slows down mute-dodgers.
So, I fundamentally disagree with this. I don't think espionage or theft, within the context of the game, is necessarily wrong.
Yeah, I kind of see what you are saying, I guess my point was that no matter what the offence, some stronger punishments should be handed out without discussion, thought or explanation. Nuke the entire site from orbit, it is the only way to be sure! Unless this starts to happen, it will not matter what tools you create - people gunna push the boundaries to find out how far they can push it. Set the bar low, and this alone should remove a lot of the "angsty vets".
Yoda: I think mobile accounts have all the same chat restrictions? I've made like a zillion mobile test accounts, and I thought I was prevented until I flew to the Capitol station. But, I don't try to chat from them very often. It would be kind of weird if mobile accounts were different, this area of code is usually unified across platforms.
Whistler: I was thinking of trying to integrate the new "report" system into the Guide tools, so you could potentially take action through that system, and it would all be coherently wrapped together. We'll see.
I was also considering having terms like racial slurs just automatically warn people about that kind of content, and then mute them for a brief period, or some such. As opposed to replacing the slur with some other word.
Anyway, lots of good feedback on usability improvements that can be made on the moderation side.
Aryko: I'm not really a huge fan of rate-limiting chat. At least, not until such a time as we really need it, due to extreme player counts. We have that capability built-in (since launch), and we did actually run with rate limits for a little while. They were removed, back then, because they didn't add enough value to offset the reduction in communication.
I figure, if people get genuinely spammy, that issue can be sent with "/report"
Whistler: I was thinking of trying to integrate the new "report" system into the Guide tools, so you could potentially take action through that system, and it would all be coherently wrapped together. We'll see.
I was also considering having terms like racial slurs just automatically warn people about that kind of content, and then mute them for a brief period, or some such. As opposed to replacing the slur with some other word.
Anyway, lots of good feedback on usability improvements that can be made on the moderation side.
Aryko: I'm not really a huge fan of rate-limiting chat. At least, not until such a time as we really need it, due to extreme player counts. We have that capability built-in (since launch), and we did actually run with rate limits for a little while. They were removed, back then, because they didn't add enough value to offset the reduction in communication.
I figure, if people get genuinely spammy, that issue can be sent with "/report"
Other games require Google play account or game center account to even start them. I this would be helpful here to keep so many f2p new accounts just for trolling or toxic chat, this has always been a problem. Smply giving us a new vote mute type command is stupid and will be abused just like before.
[Again, autocorrect is to blame...]
Although I thought my first post was Pretty Damn Good, I will try to remain on topic.
I believe the topic to be the following:
1) Make Channel 100 into Game-related Content Only, and Channel 1 to Help-only.
2) Replace "vote mute" functionality, with "/report" functionality.
3) Certain "/report" Categories can still have Mute-like functionality.
3) New permanent muting status for Public Channels.
4) No Real-Life Political Discussions (or thinly disguised "RP" analogues) In The Game, On The Forums, Discord, or any other official VO discussion medium.
I assume these four... Wait the number 3 was used twice, so... These five topics are the ones open for discussion. I shall call them, respectively A, B, C, D. and E.
With respect to the five areas of improvement, the scope of conversation should be around that feature's ability to control:
1) General and constant negativity, about the game and.. everything else.
2) Somewhat subtle trolling and manipulative behaviour designed to "get a rise" out of targeted people and rile them up.
A and E are behavioral. There is very little,in the way of actual programmatic mechanics that you, or anyone else, can do to restrict off topic, inflammatory, or 'negatively' charged converations. Machine learning? Maybe, but humans will find a way to circumvent most code. Idiot proof? Nay, humanity releases better (worse) versions of IdiotOS every day.
To address these better, you will need to build B, C, D, and put these features into the hands of other humans and hope they use the tools wisely. The same humans that eat tide-pods, and win Darwin awards.
So, setting those aside, let me address the actual suggestions that will take your time to develop. Here, hold my beer:
B: Yay! Actually make people point out what made the reporter feel triggered. No problem with this.
I /vote mute Automata all the time, because it always spams when chat is busy, rather than slow. That's only one... No, three lines of text to report on. Easy enough. How hard is it to program "back off" code that looks at chat and only spews advertising if it's been quiet for 10 seconds?
But that's not 1) or 2). So, back on track...
1) This will only serve to control negativity and angsty chat about the game if people immediately /report, and someone is around to react. You can stop the drunk from peeing in the well if you catch him at the moment of unzipping, but if he's already pissed, the well is already poisioned. Smacking him around may be cathartic after the fact, but the townspeople are already drinking yellow water.
2) Meh. People will always find a way to get a rise. An example:
Is it wrong for a certain pirate (he's not really a pirate... Doesn't ask for money, just shoots to kill... What does that make him?) To kill newbies and post:
'it is very rude for itty bitty little pissant germs like you to leave nation space,'
Or, another pirate;
'Shoulda paid, kid'
[names ommitted to keep -w from chastising me, even though it's a quote and semantically correct to quote names in this instance]
You can't honestly tell me this wasn't supposed to get people riled.
I'm going to address the two #3's together (funny How that worked out, huh?)
C: Ok. Cool.
D: Ok. Cool.
Temp bans vs. Perma bans on speaking.
Again, drunk. Peeing in well.
I see these as a way to chastise and punish the drunk after the fact.
This has some merit as a deterrent, as long as people know it has been used. If people speed on a stretch of road and see that police are pulling people over, they will: slow down; take another road; take the risk. Maybe one or two still get ticketed, but the majority? They slow down or avoid the route.
If no one ever sees the police, and no one ever knows punishment was both warranted and meted out, then the marginal people will take the risk more often.
My suggestion toward this is: make the punishment public. A wall of shame.
Heads on pikes, as it were.
Back to being topical: (autocorrect wants me to be tropical, so here, hold my coconut pina colada:)
1) Ain't gonna stop the angst. I've seen certain individuals that get even more angry and move to VODR to lash out.
Speaking of which, how will VODR be addressed?
2) Yeah, this might stop people that are merely trolling or trying to get a rise. But honestly? My opinion, because that's what I've got to give, is that people need to grow up. Both sides.
VO ain't no safe space. Go pew it out and troll back. Me? I just call them all 'immature dumbasses' and move on with my fun.
Huh. Seems to me that you are trying to programmatically address endemic behavioral issues that leak into chat occasionally. The tools you are proposing are fine and dandy. If it makes you feel better, I say, 'go for it.'
That said, I recommend treating the problems and not the symptoms. For my suggestions on that, see my first email.
Lastly, my actual advice is to focus on what you've already identified as your priorities. This is a distraction that is keeping you from putting out really cool stuff for those of us that just wanna have fun. Sounds like the trolls are winning if they have you spinning off to address their dumbassedness.
Although I thought my first post was Pretty Damn Good, I will try to remain on topic.
I believe the topic to be the following:
1) Make Channel 100 into Game-related Content Only, and Channel 1 to Help-only.
2) Replace "vote mute" functionality, with "/report" functionality.
3) Certain "/report" Categories can still have Mute-like functionality.
3) New permanent muting status for Public Channels.
4) No Real-Life Political Discussions (or thinly disguised "RP" analogues) In The Game, On The Forums, Discord, or any other official VO discussion medium.
I assume these four... Wait the number 3 was used twice, so... These five topics are the ones open for discussion. I shall call them, respectively A, B, C, D. and E.
With respect to the five areas of improvement, the scope of conversation should be around that feature's ability to control:
1) General and constant negativity, about the game and.. everything else.
2) Somewhat subtle trolling and manipulative behaviour designed to "get a rise" out of targeted people and rile them up.
A and E are behavioral. There is very little,in the way of actual programmatic mechanics that you, or anyone else, can do to restrict off topic, inflammatory, or 'negatively' charged converations. Machine learning? Maybe, but humans will find a way to circumvent most code. Idiot proof? Nay, humanity releases better (worse) versions of IdiotOS every day.
To address these better, you will need to build B, C, D, and put these features into the hands of other humans and hope they use the tools wisely. The same humans that eat tide-pods, and win Darwin awards.
So, setting those aside, let me address the actual suggestions that will take your time to develop. Here, hold my beer:
B: Yay! Actually make people point out what made the reporter feel triggered. No problem with this.
I /vote mute Automata all the time, because it always spams when chat is busy, rather than slow. That's only one... No, three lines of text to report on. Easy enough. How hard is it to program "back off" code that looks at chat and only spews advertising if it's been quiet for 10 seconds?
But that's not 1) or 2). So, back on track...
1) This will only serve to control negativity and angsty chat about the game if people immediately /report, and someone is around to react. You can stop the drunk from peeing in the well if you catch him at the moment of unzipping, but if he's already pissed, the well is already poisioned. Smacking him around may be cathartic after the fact, but the townspeople are already drinking yellow water.
2) Meh. People will always find a way to get a rise. An example:
Is it wrong for a certain pirate (he's not really a pirate... Doesn't ask for money, just shoots to kill... What does that make him?) To kill newbies and post:
'it is very rude for itty bitty little pissant germs like you to leave nation space,'
Or, another pirate;
'Shoulda paid, kid'
[names ommitted to keep -w from chastising me, even though it's a quote and semantically correct to quote names in this instance]
You can't honestly tell me this wasn't supposed to get people riled.
I'm going to address the two #3's together (funny How that worked out, huh?)
C: Ok. Cool.
D: Ok. Cool.
Temp bans vs. Perma bans on speaking.
Again, drunk. Peeing in well.
I see these as a way to chastise and punish the drunk after the fact.
This has some merit as a deterrent, as long as people know it has been used. If people speed on a stretch of road and see that police are pulling people over, they will: slow down; take another road; take the risk. Maybe one or two still get ticketed, but the majority? They slow down or avoid the route.
If no one ever sees the police, and no one ever knows punishment was both warranted and meted out, then the marginal people will take the risk more often.
My suggestion toward this is: make the punishment public. A wall of shame.
Heads on pikes, as it were.
Back to being topical: (autocorrect wants me to be tropical, so here, hold my coconut pina colada:)
1) Ain't gonna stop the angst. I've seen certain individuals that get even more angry and move to VODR to lash out.
Speaking of which, how will VODR be addressed?
2) Yeah, this might stop people that are merely trolling or trying to get a rise. But honestly? My opinion, because that's what I've got to give, is that people need to grow up. Both sides.
VO ain't no safe space. Go pew it out and troll back. Me? I just call them all 'immature dumbasses' and move on with my fun.
Huh. Seems to me that you are trying to programmatically address endemic behavioral issues that leak into chat occasionally. The tools you are proposing are fine and dandy. If it makes you feel better, I say, 'go for it.'
That said, I recommend treating the problems and not the symptoms. For my suggestions on that, see my first email.
Lastly, my actual advice is to focus on what you've already identified as your priorities. This is a distraction that is keeping you from putting out really cool stuff for those of us that just wanna have fun. Sounds like the trolls are winning if they have you spinning off to address their dumbassedness.
'it is very rude for itty bitty little pissant germs like you to leave nation space,'
Or, another pirate;
'Shoulda paid, kid'
You can't honestly tell me this wasn't supposed to get people riled.
This is not an example of bad behavior. This is proper role play for a pirate. For me, the real toxic individual is the pirated player who then spams chat in ALL CAPS because they're so upset that they got boomed. Pirates are going to pirate, they're going to call you out on 100 if you boomed as a warning/reputation thing. People need to understand that the whole point of being a pirate is to piss people off and get people riled. But, only in an RP appropriate way. It becomes toxic when it devolves into personal insults about each other's mothers, intelligence, etc.
This is where I see the benefit of keeping 100 as game-related content only. When the RP insults start becoming personal insults, we would have a set of policies in place that can be used to enforce the general rule of "keep nice AND keep it on topic."
Or, another pirate;
'Shoulda paid, kid'
You can't honestly tell me this wasn't supposed to get people riled.
This is not an example of bad behavior. This is proper role play for a pirate. For me, the real toxic individual is the pirated player who then spams chat in ALL CAPS because they're so upset that they got boomed. Pirates are going to pirate, they're going to call you out on 100 if you boomed as a warning/reputation thing. People need to understand that the whole point of being a pirate is to piss people off and get people riled. But, only in an RP appropriate way. It becomes toxic when it devolves into personal insults about each other's mothers, intelligence, etc.
This is where I see the benefit of keeping 100 as game-related content only. When the RP insults start becoming personal insults, we would have a set of policies in place that can be used to enforce the general rule of "keep nice AND keep it on topic."
This is where I see the benefit of keeping 100 as game-related content only. When the RP insults start becoming personal insults, we would have a set of policies in place that can be used to enforce the general rule of "keep nice AND keep it on topic."
I agree with this. I frequently see this happening and intervene only when the language violates the RoC. I generally agree with the "victim" that being pirated is annoying or scary, but that it is part of the rules of the game, whereas directing profanity at players is not.
@Incarnate: Moderator tool changes sound good.
I agree with this. I frequently see this happening and intervene only when the language violates the RoC. I generally agree with the "victim" that being pirated is annoying or scary, but that it is part of the rules of the game, whereas directing profanity at players is not.
@Incarnate: Moderator tool changes sound good.
Can we also not forget the irony of this request -- wherein a game called "Vendetta", touted as a "combat" game where people can "take their characters in any direction they desire" has a problem with toxicity and drama?
There is a certain inherent encouragement in the game design itself for people to be asshats to each other, so in some ways I find it very mysterious why you (incarnate) are so perturbed when it boils over in chat.
There is a certain inherent encouragement in the game design itself for people to be asshats to each other, so in some ways I find it very mysterious why you (incarnate) are so perturbed when it boils over in chat.
Pirates RPing on 100? That's exactly why I said:
Meh. People will always find a way to get a rise.
Note that I did not say it was wrong. I was using it to make a point.
The boundary between "ok" and "not ok" is somewhat subjective at times.
Thanks for ignoring the rest of the post. I can only assume that since you didn't *disagree* with anything else, you must agree with me! Awesome!
The current debates about Hate Speech are quite applicable:
Hate speech is speech that attacks a person or a group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, national origin, sex, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity.
Personally, I add to this ageism.
Hate speech can occur within the framework of "on topic" but violates the premise of "be nice."
I like the simpler rule of, "don't be a dick."
Meh. People will always find a way to get a rise.
Note that I did not say it was wrong. I was using it to make a point.
The boundary between "ok" and "not ok" is somewhat subjective at times.
Thanks for ignoring the rest of the post. I can only assume that since you didn't *disagree* with anything else, you must agree with me! Awesome!
The current debates about Hate Speech are quite applicable:
Hate speech is speech that attacks a person or a group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, national origin, sex, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity.
Personally, I add to this ageism.
Hate speech can occur within the framework of "on topic" but violates the premise of "be nice."
I like the simpler rule of, "don't be a dick."
I don't see irony or dissonance. Inc specifically mentioned RL political discussions and trash talk that violates the existing RoC. He also specifically sanctioned RP.
On that note, what do people feel is unacceptable RP verbal conflict?
On that note, what do people feel is unacceptable RP verbal conflict?
I don't see irony or dissonance. Inc specifically mentioned RL political discussions and trash talk that violates the existing RoC. He also specifically sanctioned RP.
Inc specifically identified two areas that are most insidious: generalized angst/bitterness/saltiness and subtle and manipulative trolling.
Anyone who can't see the irony of complaining about toxicity in a game who's namesake summons notions of retaliation, vengeance, and ruthlessness and the like isn't really being honest with themselves.
You simply cannot expect a smooth ride if you give everyone anonymity in a game like this.
Inc specifically identified two areas that are most insidious: generalized angst/bitterness/saltiness and subtle and manipulative trolling.
Anyone who can't see the irony of complaining about toxicity in a game who's namesake summons notions of retaliation, vengeance, and ruthlessness and the like isn't really being honest with themselves.
You simply cannot expect a smooth ride if you give everyone anonymity in a game like this.
This all sounds good in theory but what does this actually solve? It seems to me this would do little more then silence the people who experience negative gameplay or exploitive gameplay and take to 100 to voice complaints since they cant shoot that Itani admired serco f2p spotter bot thats attacking them in nation space. People who feel unheard are just going to become more bitter and angsty if you actively silence them while not responding to weekly tickets concerning single users who extensively exploit and disrupt normal gameplay week after week after week. I have a ton if respect for you, the devs, but I dont understand how you cant see how we take stacks of ignored tickets concerning the same handful of players as bias on your part - especially when we are having a conversation about chat toxicity where we arent allowed to address in game toxic actions. While im sure unintended it comes across as victim blaming tbh. Sorry for disagreeing with everyone and plz dont flame me like you did peytros ty much love -Eb