test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Has anyone considered that the people claiming wrongful chat bans, may deserve them?

13»

Comments

  • haleakalahaleakala Posts: 449 Arc User
    edited August 2012
    I think im being misunderstood here. I never have been chat banned. But i also have never ignored some one or reported some one for any thing. I don't even know how to do so. I guess you could say that in general, i don't let things ppl say on the internet get to me. In general in RL im a pretty laid back person. So no, its not a big deal to me, but also nothing that goes on with CO can ever be a big deal to me. That's just who i am.

    Just because i react to online events differently than you does not mean that im trivializing those that take these things seriously.

    I acknowledged that this is a problem but i just feel that the emotional response to this issue is over blown.

    I feel that the emotional intensity of the reaction to this issue can distract from and drowned out any validity of your points.

    That's my opinion. I'm not obligated to join your rage and my choice not to do so does not make me a villain or justify me being flamed.

    The OP didn't understand that the Chat ban function was only intended for real money related spamming and not flaming or being rude. Actually, before reading this thread i made the same assumption.

    At any rate, i cant speak for the OP but i interpreted it as saying that some of the people who are getting chat banned may be making them selves targets by flaming or having a bad attitude, and it wasn't like they were minding they're own business and got chat banned out of no where.

    My interpretation of the op is that those who flame people for no reason invite trouble (justified or not) and that's the part of the story that doesn't get told on the forums.

    A lot of the outrage comes because:

    a) Cryptic made an asinine system in the first place; asinine because: (1) giving the anonymous internet user the power to affect others' in-game experience was never going to end well; anyone with any sense should have been able to predict that it would be abused; and (2) linking the "regular" ignore to the chat-banning "report gold seller' was lazy and stupid.

    b) It recently surfaced that Cryptic coded this "feature" into their game engine, meaning we're stuck with it. This after months-ago promises to look into the problem followed by months of silence. It took someone posting the abuse of the feature as a bug in a PTS bug report thread to actually get a response.

    Intimating that people banned deserved the ban detracts from the real issue, that the system stinks like a dead mackerel left in the sun a week and that Cryptic is demonstrating callous disregard for their customers. I don't complain much about game features, but the mere existence of this one frosts my gizzard, not because a ban is necessarily a big deal but because I have never seen such stupidity from a business.
    _________________________________________________

    I been a long time leaving but I'm going to be a long time gone.

    Willie Nelson


    T.U.F.K.A.S. (the user formerly known as Scarlyng)
    Wrong on the CO forums since November, 2008
  • agentnx5agentnx5 Posts: 1,999 Arc User
    edited August 2012
    haleakala wrote: »
    A lot of the outrage comes because:

    a) Cryptic made an asinine system in the first place; asinine because: (1) giving the anonymous internet user the power to affect others' in-game experience was never going to end well; anyone with any sense should have been able to predict that it would be abused; and (2) linking the "regular" ignore to the chat-banning "report gold seller' was lazy and stupid.

    b) It recently surfaced that Cryptic coded this "feature" into their game engine, meaning we're stuck with it. This after months-ago promises to look into the problem followed by months of silence. It took someone posting the abuse of the feature as a bug in a PTS bug report thread to actually get a response.

    Intimating that people banned deserved the ban detracts from the real issue, that the system stinks like a dead mackerel left in the sun a week and that Cryptic is demonstrating callous disregard for their customers. I don't complain much about game features, but the mere existence of this one frosts my gizzard, not because a ban is necessarily a big deal but because I have never seen such stupidity from a business.

    QFT, I think you nailed it perfectly here. This how I feel about it as well, it's simply illogical and kind of bad for business the longer it sticks around. If I didn't care about the game or the community I wouldn't care about this issue, but I do care.
  • nextnametakennextnametaken Posts: 2,212 Arc User
    edited August 2012
    None of my friends who have played for the last year have been chat banned ever.
    I've been banned three times, maybe four.
    After the first time being angry for a day, I just circumvented the bans through user power.
  • secksegaisecksegai Posts: 1,354 Arc User
    edited August 2012

    I feel that the emotional intensity of the reaction to this issue can distract from and drowned out any validity of your points.

    The only reason people would give what you may consider an "emotional" response as far as this case goes as its been an on-going issue since before I started and that was almost 10 months ago.

    When people bring up a problem that can only be addressed by the authorities, and the authorities provide no solution and ignore the problem completely whereas other major changes take place, and not all of said changes are desired... it shouldn't be a surprise that people may seem a bit "heated".
  • sigmaseven0sigmaseven0 Posts: 714 Arc User
    edited August 2012
    haleakala wrote: »
    A lot of the outrage comes because:

    a) Cryptic made an asinine system in the first place; asinine because: (1) giving the anonymous internet user the power to affect others' in-game experience was never going to end well; anyone with any sense should have been able to predict that it would be abused; and (2) linking the "regular" ignore to the chat-banning "report gold seller' was lazy and stupid.

    b) It recently surfaced that Cryptic coded this "feature" into their game engine, meaning we're stuck with it. This after months-ago promises to look into the problem followed by months of silence. It took someone posting the abuse of the feature as a bug in a PTS bug report thread to actually get a response.
    I totaly get this. Speaking of PTS, I also think Cryptic has dropped the ball by not getting the character transfer tool fixed. That said, I think the reality of the situation is that Cryptic is a small development studio that caters to a niche market on a shoestring budget. With that in mind, I kinda expect things like this to happen and take a long time to get fixed. Cryptic can only do what the budget allows and some times they make an "expensive mistake" so expensive that they may not be able to pay for it. Im sure that the reason that they haven't fixed this (or a host of other things) is because they cant, not because they want to watch players squirm or that they dont care.
    haleakala wrote: »
    Intimating [insinuating?] that people banned deserved the ban detracts from the real issue,
    And this is where a lot of the misunderstanding lies. I'm not saying that they deserve to be banned. I'm simply suggesting that some people (fiery ppl like jenny) can bring the ban on them selves by making them selves a target.(ie flaming for no reason).

    If you walk into a bad neighborhood and flash lots of money you don't deserve to be robbed, but you do bring it on your self.

    If you make bad health choices you don't deserve to get diabetes, but you did invite it by ignoring your doctors suggestions.

    If your in game chat being being inflammatory you don't deserve to be banned but you made it more likely to happen by making your self a target.

    These situations are unfortunate, but also are largely avoidable with a bit of "discretion".

    People are all on the forums saying OMG DEVS FIX NAO and im sure that the devs will fix it as soon as they can. But for some of these cases, the short term solution is in the players hands in the form of being more cordial towards other human beings so that ppl don't feel the need to exploit a system to seek retribution against you.

    PVP is starving without rewards

    1. Please give us Daily PVP missions that reward Questionite.
    2. Please give us an exchange rate between Acclaim and Recognition so that PVP has access to all "On Alert" PVE rewards.
  • biffsmackwellbiffsmackwell Posts: 4,739 Arc User
    edited August 2012
    (Intimating is the correct word.)
    biffsig.jpg
  • sigmaseven0sigmaseven0 Posts: 714 Arc User
    edited August 2012
    (Intimating is the correct word.)

    your right, my dyslexia made me see this: intimidating:tongue:

    PVP is starving without rewards

    1. Please give us Daily PVP missions that reward Questionite.
    2. Please give us an exchange rate between Acclaim and Recognition so that PVP has access to all "On Alert" PVE rewards.
  • visionstorm01visionstorm01 Posts: 564 Arc User
    edited August 2012
    And this is where a lot of the misunderstanding lies. I'm not saying that they deserve to be banned. I'm simply suggesting that some people (fiery ppl like jenny) can bring the ban on them selves by making them selves a target.(ie flaming for no reason).

    If you walk into a bad neighborhood and flash lots of money you don't deserve to be robbed, but you do bring it on your self.

    If you make bad health choices you don't deserve to get diabetes, but you did invite it by ignoring your doctors suggestions.

    If your in game chat being being inflammatory you don't deserve to be banned but you made it more likely to happen by making your self a target.

    These situations are unfortunate, but also are largely avoidable with a bit of "discretion".

    People are all on the forums saying OMG DEVS FIX NAO and im sure that the devs will fix it as soon as they can. But for some of these cases, the short term solution is in the players hands in the form of being more cordial towards other human beings so that ppl don't feel the need to exploit a system to seek retribution against you.

    Except this is still a blame the victim argument and people can get targetted for doing things other than just not being cordial. Players can get targetted for RPing, for pointing out that making clones is against the rules, they can even get targetted for saying that "Wolverine sucks". You see someone bullying someone else and step in... BAM! ...you get targetted for trying to be a hero. Even RPers have been know to target other RPers (at least I've heard this claim) because they didn't like their RP somehow.

    Also, this issue has been cropping up in the forums for years now, the oldest thread I managed to find on the topic is from March 2010 (link below). And the closest reply that we've gotten from the devs in that time is "working as intended", or in other words "deal with it", along with StormShades assurances that (supposedly) "action will be taken against" those that "abuse" this system, like that means anything when people have already been chat-banned and no GM even has the power to revert a ban (that's how poorly conceived this system is--it doesn't even has a fail-safe).

    We've been waiting more than two years for the devs to DEVS FIX NAO.

    Oldest Thread I found:
    http://co-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=102532&highlight=chat-ban

    StormShade's Post:
    http://co-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=1947777&postcount=9
    ____________________________
  • sigmaseven0sigmaseven0 Posts: 714 Arc User
    edited August 2012
    Except this is still a blame the victim argument and people can get targetted for doing things other than just not being cordial. Players can get targetted for RPing,
    Your not reading my statements. I know that not all "victims" are being inflamitory but im speaking about the ones that are and then come on the forums and pretend that they are not.

    Ill requote for emphasis:
    I'm simply suggesting that some people (fiery ppl like jenny) can bring the ban on them selves by making them selves a target.(ie flaming for no reason).
    But for some of these cases, the short term solution is in the players hands in the form of being more cordial towards other human beings so that ppl don't feel the need to exploit a system to seek retribution against you.

    Don't try to twist my words like im saying talking about all cases, Im not "blaming the victim". Im simply pointing out that in some cases people are provoking unnecessary banns (and thus knowingly bringing misfortune on them selves) and then coming on the forums and acting like boy-scouts.

    PVP is starving without rewards

    1. Please give us Daily PVP missions that reward Questionite.
    2. Please give us an exchange rate between Acclaim and Recognition so that PVP has access to all "On Alert" PVE rewards.
  • biffsmackwellbiffsmackwell Posts: 4,739 Arc User
    edited August 2012
    Space aliens stole this thread.
    biffsig.jpg
This discussion has been closed.