Forums » Suggestions
Hi Inc,
1. Thank you for the post. I know there's a million things going on, and you don't really like taking away from those to write on the forums, but we do really really appreciate the communications, every time. The dev interaction has always been one of VO's strongest 'features'
2. Can you please address the other main suggestion in this thread, that would be a lot easier to implement? Specifically, designating 100 as a place for "on topic"/"no shitty" chat (other channels remain as hands off as they are now, + optionally designate some other channel like 42 as an official Off-topic channel)
There's a lot of detail in the posts here and in the last thread about the logistics of it. I know you're tired of "get rid of global chat" or "everyone is toxic" threads, but this is actually a fresh suggestion to my knowledge
3. Riot's research does sound extremely promising and would solve this... but it sounds like that won't be ingame any time soon. And given that mortal enemies SIEGER + DIRTY ORE + SMITTENS are all in agreement that 100 is currently a gross unpleasant place for new players, could you perhaps reconsider how urgent it is getting this from an 80% success to at least like a 90% or so?
I fully understand that 100% is not a realistic goal in most coding endeavors... but the global chatroom that is the primary method of communication between players is a pretty important feature to get, maybe not perfect, but ideally into a place where it's a positive thing for the community instead of one that most players either leave or use only to sht talk
[EDIT] Well crap, I should've started in the General forum... or logged in hah. Glad to see the tinkering with /vote mute, seems like a good first step that may just solve everything on its own. I'm sorry for suggesting that you didn't care about chat, I think I mostly just misread that part of your post
I'd still like a comment about making 100 a more on topic place though, when you have a few minutes :)
1. Thank you for the post. I know there's a million things going on, and you don't really like taking away from those to write on the forums, but we do really really appreciate the communications, every time. The dev interaction has always been one of VO's strongest 'features'
2. Can you please address the other main suggestion in this thread, that would be a lot easier to implement? Specifically, designating 100 as a place for "on topic"/"no shitty" chat (other channels remain as hands off as they are now, + optionally designate some other channel like 42 as an official Off-topic channel)
There's a lot of detail in the posts here and in the last thread about the logistics of it. I know you're tired of "get rid of global chat" or "everyone is toxic" threads, but this is actually a fresh suggestion to my knowledge
3. Riot's research does sound extremely promising and would solve this... but it sounds like that won't be ingame any time soon. And given that mortal enemies SIEGER + DIRTY ORE + SMITTENS are all in agreement that 100 is currently a gross unpleasant place for new players, could you perhaps reconsider how urgent it is getting this from an 80% success to at least like a 90% or so?
I fully understand that 100% is not a realistic goal in most coding endeavors... but the global chatroom that is the primary method of communication between players is a pretty important feature to get, maybe not perfect, but ideally into a place where it's a positive thing for the community instead of one that most players either leave or use only to sht talk
[EDIT] Well crap, I should've started in the General forum... or logged in hah. Glad to see the tinkering with /vote mute, seems like a good first step that may just solve everything on its own. I'm sorry for suggesting that you didn't care about chat, I think I mostly just misread that part of your post
I'd still like a comment about making 100 a more on topic place though, when you have a few minutes :)
If 100 were made on-topic only, it would be handy to also have /ot and /gen commands to route messages to off-topic and general, similar to the /help command we already have.
For those who are not familiar, prefixing a message with /help sends it directly to channel 1 without changing your current channel. That way you don't have to remember to /100 afterward like you'd have to do if you used /1 instead of /help.
For those who are not familiar, prefixing a message with /help sends it directly to channel 1 without changing your current channel. That way you don't have to remember to /100 afterward like you'd have to do if you used /1 instead of /help.
How do you keep 100 on topic?
Interesting Pizzas, I had no idea
Ore; the same way you keep it free of hatespeech/harassment...policy + modding. It's just a matter of where you draw the line. Obviously there's a ton of personal judgement involved, as it's almost entirely in the mods' hands. I know not everyone loves our mods, but personally I think they've done a fine enough job that I would trust them with a bit more power
Of course, not saying it would work for sure in this community, but as mentioned in here, others have done it & I think we could stand to try it. Worst case scenario, revert back to as-is
Ore; the same way you keep it free of hatespeech/harassment...policy + modding. It's just a matter of where you draw the line. Obviously there's a ton of personal judgement involved, as it's almost entirely in the mods' hands. I know not everyone loves our mods, but personally I think they've done a fine enough job that I would trust them with a bit more power
Of course, not saying it would work for sure in this community, but as mentioned in here, others have done it & I think we could stand to try it. Worst case scenario, revert back to as-is
I don't have any problem with the suggestion of making channel-42 "off topic" or some such. We can certainly advise new players accordingly.
But, fundamentally, that policy-change won't "stick" without significant fundamental alterations that reinforce behaviours, like the recent tinkering with /vote mute, and my various other plans mentioned earlier.
So, while moving off-topic concepts is fine by me, I don't consider it addressing the fundamental problem, which is dealing with enforcement as an issue at scale.
I think you (Smittens) mis-understood by 80% comment as some kind of priority thing. It was just kind of a vague reference to the Pareto principle, coupled with the fundamental engineering notion that aiming for perfection is stupid, but constantly aiming for substantial-improvement is both useful and (in practice) ends up working out to be basically ideal. There are a lot of criticisms on here of how things "won't work" for one reason or another, in some idealistic sense, but the reality is they only have to work well enough to mitigate the problems 80% of the time.
As for Priority.. I keep saying that I'm aware of the importance of this issue, and I've been working on it for months. I'm not sure what else I can say there. I don't have any more coders, and there are other priorities that are fundamentally more critical to everyone (players, developers, etc).
But, fundamentally, that policy-change won't "stick" without significant fundamental alterations that reinforce behaviours, like the recent tinkering with /vote mute, and my various other plans mentioned earlier.
So, while moving off-topic concepts is fine by me, I don't consider it addressing the fundamental problem, which is dealing with enforcement as an issue at scale.
I think you (Smittens) mis-understood by 80% comment as some kind of priority thing. It was just kind of a vague reference to the Pareto principle, coupled with the fundamental engineering notion that aiming for perfection is stupid, but constantly aiming for substantial-improvement is both useful and (in practice) ends up working out to be basically ideal. There are a lot of criticisms on here of how things "won't work" for one reason or another, in some idealistic sense, but the reality is they only have to work well enough to mitigate the problems 80% of the time.
As for Priority.. I keep saying that I'm aware of the importance of this issue, and I've been working on it for months. I'm not sure what else I can say there. I don't have any more coders, and there are other priorities that are fundamentally more critical to everyone (players, developers, etc).
"- I'm not getting rid of 100. We've been down that road before, it's a bad idea."
Just for the record, the suggestion made was about limiting 100 not getting rid of it.
" but the reality is they only have to work well enough to mitigate the problems 80% of the time"
Mitigation was exactly what I suggested. Why does the entire verse need to talk to each other?
Just for the record, the suggestion made was about limiting 100 not getting rid of it.
" but the reality is they only have to work well enough to mitigate the problems 80% of the time"
Mitigation was exactly what I suggested. Why does the entire verse need to talk to each other?
Rather than trying to "keep 100 on topic" would it mot be simpler the leave it as yhe General Chat and make a seperate RP channel?
I often spout off topic and unrelated stuff in 100. I thought thats what "General Chat" meant...
I often spout off topic and unrelated stuff in 100. I thought thats what "General Chat" meant...
So, simply add a new default channel (whatever number) in addition to 1/11/100 and have /rp <text> link to it? I'd like that. With the new /vote mechanics in play I think that would work out nicely.
Can we still remove the timer-limit on system messages?
Can we still remove the timer-limit on system messages?
The sort of people who are likely to refuse to follow the rules are also unlikely to have worthwhile on-topic contributions to chat, so /ignoring those people is easy enough. The purpose in an off-topic channel is for the people who do have worthwhile contributions to on-topic chat, since /ignoring them is more costly; conveniently, those people are a lot more likely to follow the rules. (This could also be done voluntarily, in theory, but in practice I don't see it working without some official-ness behind it. Do you think we'd have a useful help channel if 1 wasn't officially a help channel? I don't.)
Regarding leaving 100 as-is and adding an RP channel, first of all, that already exists (including the /rp command, IIRC). Channel 300, I believe. But I think this is a bad solution. RP is not the same thing as on-topic; it is a much smaller subset. I don't think that separating chat into RP and OOC will be successful with this playerbase.
EDIT: That said, I do think I'd personally enjoy dividing by RP and OCC rather than on-topic and off-topic. The problem is, the majority of people would either do a terrible job of it, or they'd just not even bother and would continue using 100 for both game stuff and non-game stuff.
Regarding leaving 100 as-is and adding an RP channel, first of all, that already exists (including the /rp command, IIRC). Channel 300, I believe. But I think this is a bad solution. RP is not the same thing as on-topic; it is a much smaller subset. I don't think that separating chat into RP and OOC will be successful with this playerbase.
EDIT: That said, I do think I'd personally enjoy dividing by RP and OCC rather than on-topic and off-topic. The problem is, the majority of people would either do a terrible job of it, or they'd just not even bother and would continue using 100 for both game stuff and non-game stuff.
Inc;
I admit it would take some overtime by the mods for the first few weeks, dispensing many many warnings, but then it's the kind of thing that policies itself. Especially with the new /vote mute change. I'd assume we want to cultivate the kind of players that want a mature/adult (...nonsexually) global chatroom? But yeah I agree that just adding an off topic channel without adding a few mod-enforced rules wouldn't really fix anything
And also keep in mind my suggestion was based on the other thread, where we were assured that the mods do monitor and handle all cases of harassment/hatespeech etc in the chat, even if we don't always see it happen. If that's the case then (logistically) they'd just have to widen their filter, but it could be done. But admittedly that will slow them down a lot, especially at first, so it may not be feasible. That's the sort of feedback I've been looking for, so thank you :)
Re; 80% and priority generally... there were a couple phrases in your first response that made it sound like you didn't really consider it important enough to work on some of those last-20% of diminishing return improvements. But again, clearly now that was a misunderstanding on my part, as your clarifications + past history + putting an attempted fix in the very next update have shown. So again I'm sorry about that
Rest;
As Pizzas said it shouldn't be strictly RP. Just no off-VO-topic stuff. Basically anything that would be on any of these forums...except the Off Topic forum
I admit it would take some overtime by the mods for the first few weeks, dispensing many many warnings, but then it's the kind of thing that policies itself. Especially with the new /vote mute change. I'd assume we want to cultivate the kind of players that want a mature/adult (...nonsexually) global chatroom? But yeah I agree that just adding an off topic channel without adding a few mod-enforced rules wouldn't really fix anything
And also keep in mind my suggestion was based on the other thread, where we were assured that the mods do monitor and handle all cases of harassment/hatespeech etc in the chat, even if we don't always see it happen. If that's the case then (logistically) they'd just have to widen their filter, but it could be done. But admittedly that will slow them down a lot, especially at first, so it may not be feasible. That's the sort of feedback I've been looking for, so thank you :)
Re; 80% and priority generally... there were a couple phrases in your first response that made it sound like you didn't really consider it important enough to work on some of those last-20% of diminishing return improvements. But again, clearly now that was a misunderstanding on my part, as your clarifications + past history + putting an attempted fix in the very next update have shown. So again I'm sorry about that
Rest;
As Pizzas said it shouldn't be strictly RP. Just no off-VO-topic stuff. Basically anything that would be on any of these forums...except the Off Topic forum
or if people used the channels in this thread appropriatly, instead of everything being on 1 or 100?
Also, tonight was really bad for politic spammers...
Also, tonight was really bad for politic spammers...
Trump idiot spent 3 hours and 15+ alts last night. I saw a few players ragequit.
usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa
We muted every one of his alts. Which probably take a lot longer to make than it does for us to mute. After a half hour they came back of course.
usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa usausa
We muted every one of his alts. Which probably take a lot longer to make than it does for us to mute. After a half hour they came back of course.
Perhaps the trump spammer is smittens, to gather more attention to his own thread and to force Inc's hand to start doing something about 100?
More moderation is the obvious solution, the spammers will just circumvent any mute with a new char/account. The sexually explicit, politically annoying and attention seeking trolls will simply go to whatever channel is most populated.
There's already an RP channel. "/rp <msg>" sends to channel 300. But of course this channel isn't joined by default.
If you're going to go down this path of trying to shape communications by suggested styles of chat, I really think the channel numbers need to be augmented by official names.
[1. Help] <draugath> type "/join 100" to switch to general chat.
[11. Nation] <draugath> watch out for serco at edras i2
[100. General] <draugath> sure talk about whatever except the forbidden topics
[300. Roleplay] <draugath> yt-1300? He's the pirate that made the Kessel run in 12 parsecs
[444. Trade] <draugath> selling 10k SSS 10kcr ea
If you're going to go down this path of trying to shape communications by suggested styles of chat, I really think the channel numbers need to be augmented by official names.
[1. Help] <draugath> type "/join 100" to switch to general chat.
[11. Nation] <draugath> watch out for serco at edras i2
[100. General] <draugath> sure talk about whatever except the forbidden topics
[300. Roleplay] <draugath> yt-1300? He's the pirate that made the Kessel run in 12 parsecs
[444. Trade] <draugath> selling 10k SSS 10kcr ea
Lol draugth. 444 isn't a "trade" channel. It is TGFT's sanctioned channel.
I'm very much aware, that was the joke.
444 is ONE's chan. Ask Ecka.
Luxen; Geez I didn't even know about half those, and I was the one who registered the "Official IA channel" like 10 years ago haha!
draugath; Lots of different channels means a lot more info that needs to be conveyed to players, and also means a lot more spreading of the small-but-not-as-small-as-we-think playerbase. But if we were to use different channels more strictly I like that idea of putting their subject in the brackets. Hmm although UI-size-wise "Roleplay" and "General" take up a lot, and would be doing so in literally every chat, so I'd suggest "RP" and "Gen" respectively, and probably "Nat" for 11
jj; haha I wish I were that clever :) Though I sure do appreciate that asshat for making this thread so relevant every time I'm ready to give up on it. It's obviously a contentious debate as-is, so I'm lucky that everyone already accepts that there are some troublemakers out there!
draugath; Lots of different channels means a lot more info that needs to be conveyed to players, and also means a lot more spreading of the small-but-not-as-small-as-we-think playerbase. But if we were to use different channels more strictly I like that idea of putting their subject in the brackets. Hmm although UI-size-wise "Roleplay" and "General" take up a lot, and would be doing so in literally every chat, so I'd suggest "RP" and "Gen" respectively, and probably "Nat" for 11
jj; haha I wish I were that clever :) Though I sure do appreciate that asshat for making this thread so relevant every time I'm ready to give up on it. It's obviously a contentious debate as-is, so I'm lucky that everyone already accepts that there are some troublemakers out there!
Perhaps if the topic-specific channels were joined by default, and draugath's idea were implemented (yes, shorthanded, that also sounded good), this would be good. Even better if we could pick and choose channel colors, instead of active/inactive. use bright colors for the channels, and dim out the local/group/etc set. tabbed channels in the pda would prevent clutter, and /leave is always an option. For preventing clutter in the in-flight hud, perhaps have last-active-pda-chat-tab would be helpful? And, of course, disableing the in-flight chat is always possible via interface options.