Jump to content
3DXChat Community
Laina

Host Kickings, Reportings, Bans, and Trolls

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

As my earlier post here covered:

 

As a wedding  or party organizer, a builder, a club owner, or just another player...  Maybe you have an party coming up and you want everyone to enjoy themselves.  Maybe you've completed your latest handiwork and want to show it off.  Maybe you're getting married and you want it to be a celebration for everyone to attend and a day you'll remember.  Maybe you're just hosting a club with specific rules and wish to see people abide by them.  Whatever the reason, opening your room to the public is an option that brings communities and people together.

Some come for the content, others come to create and share.

Some come to enjoy themselves, and others want to help others enjoy themselves.

Whatever reasons we're here, we all deserve to have a little more control over over who can come into and stay in our rooms.

As mentioned in my post in the other topic... you can of course ignore someone - which prevents them from joining your room, and from interacting with you at all.  But it doesn't remove them from your room, leaving them free to continue to do as they please.  Imagine trying to host a wedding, and someone just runs up to the bride and groom and starts trying to ruin the ceremony.  Imagine trying to create a peaceful environment for people to come and relax, and someone comes in spewing racist, sexist, and homophobic slurs.  Sure, you can report these people and ignore them, the latter of which may fix the problem for you, yourself, locally, and the former taking time and multiple people complaining about it.  Then, after you ignore them you can restart your room, which kicks everyone out and you have to wait for everyone to return, sans the troublemaker.

Not that the issue isn't that people don't get ignored or banned - they do.

The issue is when that one type of person gets it into their mind that they will do whatever they can to crash any event someone hosts, and spread nonstop toxicity at every turn, despite the innumerable ignores and bans... the kinds of people that proudly proclaim that they will continue to do it regardless, and start purchasing new accounts, just to get back into the party and bring another unending flurry of bull.  It's literally forcing people to either close the rooms and reopen nonstop, or not open it to the public at all. 

To make matters worse, these people can even log onto multiple accounts, and have these multiple accounts all report their target at once with no intention other to try and get them banned for some bollocks of a reason.

If room hosts could kick, they could at least ignore and kick someone, effectively removing that instance of the person from causing issues in their room, without having to shut down a wedding or otherwise great party.

Similar to my post from before I'll cover a few simple FAQs that spring to mind:

  1. But can't people abuse this/get a power trip Sure, but, I mean, it's their room, their rules, right?
  2. This won't prevent someone from getting yet another account and doing the same thing - True... but it allows hosts to deal the current account swiftly.
  3. What if someone kicks me for a reason I find unfair? See answer #1.
  4. I don't think people should be able to kick me from their own place, it's heckin' rude. - You'll get over it.
  5. No one would actually buy THAT many accounts to troll that hardcore. Oh, bless your heart....

Cheers,

     -L

Edited by Laina
Typos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Quote

But can't people abuse this/get a power trip Sure, but, I mean, it's their room, their rules, right?

This is not a minor concern. People tend to suck with online "powers." I believe the ignore function is sufficient. Anyone in your room who is being bothered by a troublemaker can use the existing function to resolve the issue. 

"Their room, their rules" doesn't fly with me. It is SexGameDevil's game, SexGameDevil's rules. One customer should not be able to take enforcement action against another customer in the game experience. 

Edited by York

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, your room your rules. Pretty simple.

Older worlds have had room moderation tools for 15 years and works fine.

I think an easy way to look at this is:

 'Are those in older worlds more capable and those in 3DX  less to have these tools?'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except it's not that simple. Consider that at any given time in 3DX, there are maybe 3 rooms that are really hot spots with a lot of people. Now consider a room mod/owner kicking people out of popular rooms, not because they're actually being a troublemaker, but because "well, I just don't like this person, so f*ck him." This subscriber has now unilaterally taken a significant chunk of game experience away from another subscriber. No actual game staff involved. No reasonable set of rules involved. No formal inquiry process. 

Why is there such an obsession with controlling people in online fantasy worlds? That's a good question to ask. If you don't like someone, ignore them. Allow other people to come to their own determinations with said ignore function. Pretty simple. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, York said:

Except it's not that simple. Consider that at any given time in 3DX, there are maybe 3 rooms that are really hot spots with a lot of people. Now consider a room mod/owner kicking people out of popular rooms, not because they're actually being a troublemaker, but because "well, I just don't like this person, so f*ck him." This subscriber has now unilaterally taken a significant chunk of game experience away from another subscriber. No actual game staff involved. No reasonable set of rules involved. No formal inquiry process. 

Why is there such an obsession with controlling people in online fantasy worlds? That's a good question to ask. If you don't like someone, ignore them. Allow other people to come to their own determinations with said ignore function. Pretty simple. 

What happens when someone literally creates dozens of accounts with the specific intent to report and or troll a single person just because they don't like them, and makes it perfectly clear they have no intent of stopping - if they continue to get ignored and banned they'll continue to create the accounts.  It's abuse in of itself.

It's making it grossly inconvenient for everyone involved with visiting that room to have to ignore the same exact person more than once or keep having to close/rejoin a room to deal with a single person creating multiple accounts.

If that person was ignored in the first place, they can't even get into the big ass room - unless they create a new account with the sole purpose of being a cheeky fuck, again.

If a room owner doesn't like you, they should need no other reason to remove you from their premises.  It's very fucking simple - when you're in someone else's house, you follow their rules.

You gonna go into the local PD and start pissing on the floor?  No, probably not.  There's consequences.

You go to someone's party and spit in their face?  They should have every right to remove you from the place.

 

The "game experience" is going to be what you make it.  If someone chooses to prohibit you from entering their room, you can go somewhere else, plenty of places to go.  The question you'd have to ask yourself is "Why is it that no one likes me and doesn't want me in their rooms?"

Edited by Laina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, York said:

Now consider a room mod/owner kicking people out of popular rooms, not because they're actually being a troublemaker, but because "well, I just don't like this person, so f*ck him."

If room owner did this to a few very special people they hate... Well, you can already do it, just with ignore function. Yes, if you are a big room owner, you already can cut off some people from the "significant chunk of game experience". The only difference that it will not work immediately.

If you talk about mass kicks... Well, good luck to such a room owner lol. Room with mass kicks not going to stay on top long term.

32 minutes ago, York said:

Why is there such an obsession with controlling people in online fantasy worlds? That's a good question to ask. If you don't like someone, ignore them. Allow other people to come to their own determinations with said ignore function. Pretty simple. 

Yeah, and let the troll ruin the atmosphere and irritate people enough so they use ignore button themselves. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
58 minutes ago, York said:

Except it's not that simple. Consider that at any given time in 3DX, there are maybe 3 rooms that are really hot spots with a lot of people. Now consider a room mod/owner kicking people out of popular rooms, not because they're actually being a troublemaker, but because "well, I just don't like this person, so f*ck him." This subscriber has now unilaterally taken a significant chunk of game experience away from another subscriber. No actual game staff involved. No reasonable set of rules involved. No formal inquiry process. 

Why is there such an obsession with controlling people in online fantasy worlds? That's a good question to ask. If you don't like someone, ignore them. Allow other people to come to their own determinations with said ignore function. Pretty simple. 

 

You seem pretty worried about this. Why is that?

The older worlds have had comprehensive room moderation for nearly 15 years and thousands of users on at once. . They even have room clear commands that at a push of a button everyone is kicked.  If your causing problems, then you should be kicked and banned.  It gives a  great sense of pleasure to kick and ban asshats.

Again, I ask. Are you're implying those in 3DX are not responsible enough compared to other worlds?

Yes, it's that easy. 

Edited by THX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Laina, maybe I'm just not understanding this completely, cause you're saying they can create endless accounts, but this game is behind a paywall, so how exactly is that happening so conveniently for these alleged perpetrators? Honest question.

Some of your RL examples are what I would consider poor examples, because they don't involve someone who has subscribed to a service through payment and is by contract entitled to the full game experience unless they are deemed to be in violation of the Terms of Service by a staff member of the game, not another peer subscriber. 

THX, are you attempting to vilify me with that line of questioning? I thought witch trials were history. "Oh no! She thinks witch trials are crazy! She must be a witch too!" Really? That's lazy, and you should know that. 

I am a libertarian at heart. I am familiar with these other worlds you speak of and I see tons of abuse in those worlds. As I said before, people who are not actual staff of the business (and therefore have no financial interest in behaving professionally) tend to be horrible with online powers. I'm speaking from experience as a former chief moderator of a game much larger than 3DX. 

This issue I'm pointing out, and which you aren't really appreciating, is who is defining the boundary of "asshat" and should a peer subscriber be determining who is an asshat and who isn't an asshat? To me that seems like a recipe for disaster to give unregulated and unaccountable players of the game the ability to take action against other paying players, again speaking from tons of experience in moderating.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Even if 3DXC is behind a paywall, some people earn so much money that these costs would be peanuts for them.

And yes, you have the right to enter 3DXC when you pay and subscribe. But that doesn't give you the right to enter every room and don't follow the rules of this specific room.
If the room owner has "no colds" or "women / men only" rules and you don't follow them, even your subscription doesn't allow you to stay in this room then.
We had this case with a popular "videographer / photographer", who we told before that he is not wanted at our all-women event. He came nonetheless, got very agressive when he was asked to leave and whined about it even half a year later.
It would have been SO much easier to handle if there had been a "kick" button.

Edited by Diana Prince

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Lisa did make a post in one of their topics about the new server solution that room moderation is on their todo list with this new server.

 

Edit: This topic:

 

Edited by Ashbash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Currently if you are hosting and you have someone in your room you don't want there, for whatever reason, good or bad, you can Ignore them, Clear and Close your room and then re-open it and that person on that Avi will not be able to re-enter it.

A 'Boot from room' option would not give a host any more power than they already possess, it would just make the above process quicker, simpler and less inconvenient for everyone else in the room.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't remember the number of times i opened my personal club (The Vamp's Crypt) with (NO SEX) clearly stated in the name of the room. Then a couple enter and start to have sex in middle of the dancefloor. I say in local a first warning to them saying sex is not allowed ( no anwser they continue sexing). I PM them both telling them sex is not allowed (no anwser and they continue sexing). No other option than close my club, breaking the fun of the ones that was here to enjoy the music (the chatting and all the things that are not sex), and to reopen it with hope that there will not be a second couple acting the same.

With a "kick in the butt" button, i would just have to press it to kick the couple out of the club, without disturbing the others peoples in the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, R0bT said:

This @York person uses far to much common sense.  Confusing these people.  They dont know how to react 

You're right about common sense.  However, you of all people should know full well that I am not confused.

10 hours ago, York said:

Laina, maybe I'm just not understanding this completely, cause you're saying they can create endless accounts, but this game is behind a paywall, so how exactly is that happening so conveniently for these alleged perpetrators? Honest question.

Honest and excelllent question- although I did already answer it.  I said in a previous post that the offender in question stated that he was perfectly willingly to continue to pay $20 per account just to continue their harassment.  Their repeated bans for violation of TOS hasn't stopped them yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a club operating in another world for almost 8 years. And I've booted two "2" people in all that time, and then only after multiple PM complaints that

that individual was harassing the women present. I would send the offender a PM warning, if he continued, I'd use the boot.

That's not me unilaterally restricting anybody's access to a "Chunk of the game". That's something they caused all by themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really believe in trolls with "dozens" of accounts. A couple of accounts – yeah, but dozens? Will not believe till meet one myself. 

People who earn enough amount of money that a few hundreds of bucks for them is such a minor amount that they are ready to throw it out like this... most probably don't have enough time to spend in such a worthless way, spending dozens and hundreds of hours to troll people in a sex game.

It does not mean that I am against the kick/ban from room option though. I think it would be a great addition to the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HazyRays said:

Currently if you are hosting and you have someone in your room you don't want there, for whatever reason, good or bad, you can Ignore them, Clear and Close your room and then re-open it and that person on that Avi will not be able to re-enter it.

A 'Boot from room' option would not give a host any more power than they already possess, it would just make the above process quicker, simpler and less inconvenient for everyone else in the room.

Quite what I am getting at.  It gives the host no more power than already possessed.  Just makes it more convenient for the host and their guests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Xizl said:

I don't really believe in trolls with "dozens" of accounts. A couple of accounts – yeah, but dozens? Will not believe till meet one myself. 

People who earn enough amount of money that a few hundreds of bucks for them is such a minor amount that they are ready to throw it out like this... most probably don't have enough time to spend in such a worthless way, spending dozens and hundreds of hours to troll people in a sex game.

It does not mean that I am against the kick/ban from room option though. I think it would be a great addition to the game. 

I just pray you never find someone so petty, then.  I've encountered it with one person out of thousands upon thousands.  (And that's my being here since 2013)

Edited by Laina
Additional Information Added

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, York said:

Laina, maybe I'm just not understanding this completely, cause you're saying they can create endless accounts, but this game is behind a paywall, so how exactly is that happening so conveniently for these alleged perpetrators? Honest question.

Some of your RL examples are what I would consider poor examples, because they don't involve someone who has subscribed to a service through payment and is by contract entitled to the full game experience unless they are deemed to be in violation of the Terms of Service by a staff member of the game, not another peer subscriber. 

THX, are you attempting to vilify me with that line of questioning? I thought witch trials were history. "Oh no! She thinks witch trials are crazy! She must be a witch too!" Really? That's lazy, and you should know that. 

I am a libertarian at heart. I am familiar with these other worlds you speak of and I see tons of abuse in those worlds. As I said before, people who are not actual staff of the business (and therefore have no financial interest in behaving professionally) tend to be horrible with online powers. I'm speaking from experience as a former chief moderator of a game much larger than 3DX. 

This issue I'm pointing out, and which you aren't really appreciating, is who is defining the boundary of "asshat" and should a peer subscriber be determining who is an asshat and who isn't an asshat? To me that seems like a recipe for disaster to give unregulated and unaccountable players of the game the ability to take action against other paying players, again speaking from tons of experience in moderating.

 

 

I am not trying to vilify you by the question ' Are you implying 3DX users unable to moderate their rooms like other worlds can.'  I am confronting that premise.  One you are actively arguing against - realize it or not.

The libertarian analogy, I would love to address elswhere and discuss as I have a thing for politics you can say,  and i am not sure you understand what Liberrarian philosophy towards accountability and freedoms are. It's an interesting outlook worth reading up on.

As for 'who defines 'asshats,' that is easy.  The room owner. It isn't a democracy anymore than it is who gets to come in your real life house.

I find it difficult to believe if I was in your room engaging in conduct you don't like,  that you wouldn't want it to end and want the tools to do it.. 

Kick and room ban is an excellent place to start. In a world where there are no mods by staff active, the tools are very effective. The only way they become even better if bans become account wide bans again. But I must admit, you can kickk and ban people faster than they can make accounts and for everytine they reveal themselves you kick and ban them, don't get mad...smile. You just cost them more money and in the end they stop or you bleed them financially till they are forced too.. 

Win....win.

Edited by THX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, HazyRays said:

Currently if you are hosting and you have someone in your room you don't want there, for whatever reason, good or bad, you can Ignore them, Clear and Close your room and then re-open it and that person on that Avi will not be able to re-enter it.

A 'Boot from room' option would not give a host any more power than they already possess, it would just make the above process quicker, simpler and less inconvenient for everyone else in the room.

 

I actually disagree with the current system, too. Just so you know that there is some logical coherence in my position. I'm not saying that boot powers are excessive, but being able to permanently stop a subscriber from entering rooms is okay. I think they're both flawed, because a subscriber is determining, unilaterally and without any regard for whether an actual TOS violation has occurred, what access/experience another subscriber is going to have in the game. This won't amount to much if it's only small rooms, but does amount to a concerning significance with rooms that are more medium to large size. 

 

12 hours ago, Laina said:

Honest and excelllent question- although I did already answer it.  I said in a previous post that the offender in question stated that he was perfectly willingly to continue to pay $20 per account just to continue their harassment.  Their repeated bans for violation of TOS hasn't stopped them yet.

Well, that's very disturbing that someone would be so motivated to waste money on that level. However, I suspect along with Xizi that you may be exaggerating a bit regarding the quantity. I would still disagree that based on the actions of a handful of disturbed individuals that will spend that amount of money, the game should be developing systems that have other consequences.  

 

3 hours ago, THX said:

I am not trying to vilify you by the question ' Are you implying 3DX users unable to moderate their rooms like other worlds can.'  I am confronting that premise.  One you are actively arguing against - realize it or not.

The libertarian analogy, I would love to address elswhere and discuss as I have a thing for politics you can say,  and i am not sure you understand what Liberrarian philosophy towards accountability and freedoms are. It's an interesting outlook worth reading up on.

As for 'who defines 'asshats,' that is easy.  The room owner. It isn't a democracy anymore than it is who gets to come in your real life house.

I find it difficult to believe if I was in your room engaging in conduct you don't like,  that you wouldn't want it to end and want the tools to do it.. 

Kick and room ban is an excellent place to start. In a world where there are no mods by staff active, the tools are very effective. The only way they become even better if bans become account wide bans again. But I must admit, you can kickk and ban people faster than they can make accounts and for everytine they reveal themselves you kick and ban them, don't get mad...smile. You just cost them more money and in the end they stop or you bleed them financially till they are forced too.. 

Win....win.

"You seem pretty worried about this. Why is that?" - This is the question I was referring to when I said vilifying. 

My question about who defines asshats was not a literal one. I obviously know that you're arguing the room owner should. My question was more about, what type of person in both character and position should be defining these boundaries when you consider the impact.

Your real life house example is not applicable. My house is my property, purchased with my money. I have full property rights to it and therefore rightly may create, amend, and remove rules of the property, and unilaterally decide who may be on my property. Transferring that situation to here would point to SexGameDevil's authorities over 3DXChat, because 3DXChat is the property of SexGameDevil. If a subscriber makes a room called "Lolipop Fantasy F*ckLand," that doesn't make that subscriber an empowered agent of 3DXChat just because they made that room. The room isn't a property in and of itself - it's a digital fiction within an actual intellectual property. This is the part of my position that I don't think you're appreciating. A room owner is just a peer subscriber. A room owner is not an agent of SexGameDevil. If you take a step back and think about it, it's lunacy to suggest that just because someone has created a room in 3DXChat, they are now going to be given authorities similar to an agent of SexGameDevil to alter a subscriber's experience/access in the game even though this room owner subscriber is unregulated, unaccountable, and not bound to ensure action is only taken if a TOS violation has occurred.  

If you were in my room engaging in conduct I didn't like, I would use the ignore function, maybe the report function too depending on what the conduct is. I could go the extra step and suggest to others in the room to do the same if they don't want their experience ruined. Although, I would suspect that the others in the room are adults with minds of their own and can make their own determinations about what is bothering them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, York said:

I actually disagree with the current system, too. Just so you know that there is some logical coherence in my position. I'm not saying that boot powers are excessive, but being able to permanently stop a subscriber from entering rooms is okay. I think they're both flawed, because a subscriber is determining, unilaterally and without any regard for whether an actual TOS violation has occurred, what access/experience another subscriber is going to have in the game. This won't amount to much if it's only small rooms, but does amount to a concerning significance with rooms that are more medium to large size. 

 

Well, that's very disturbing that someone would be so motivated to waste money on that level. However, I suspect along with Xizi that you may be exaggerating a bit regarding the quantity. I would still disagree that based on the actions of a handful of disturbed individuals that will spend that amount of money, the game should be developing systems that have other consequences.  

 

"You seem pretty worried about this. Why is that?" - This is the question I was referring to when I said vilifying. 

My question about who defines asshats was not a literal one. I obviously know that you're arguing the room owner should. My question was more about, what type of person in both character and position should be defining these boundaries when you consider the impact.

Your real life house example is not applicable. My house is my property, purchased with my money. I have full property rights to it and therefore rightly may create, amend, and remove rules of the property, and unilaterally decide who may be on my property. Transferring that situation to here would point to SexGameDevil's authorities over 3DXChat, because 3DXChat is the property of SexGameDevil. If a subscriber makes a room called "Lolipop Fantasy F*ckLand," that doesn't make that subscriber an empowered agent of 3DXChat just because they made that room. The room isn't a property in and of itself - it's a digital fiction within an actual intellectual property. This is the part of my position that I don't think you're appreciating. A room owner is just a peer subscriber. A room owner is not an agent of SexGameDevil. If you take a step back and think about it, it's lunacy to suggest that just because someone has created a room in 3DXChat, they are now going to be given authorities similar to an agent of SexGameDevil to alter a subscriber's experience/access in the game even though this room owner subscriber is unregulated, unaccountable, and not bound to ensure action is only taken if a TOS violation has occurred.  

If you were in my room engaging in conduct I didn't like, I would use the ignore function, maybe the report function too depending on what the conduct is. I could go the extra step and suggest to others in the room to do the same if they don't want their experience ruined. Although, I would suspect that the others in the room are adults with minds of their own and can make their own determinations about what is bothering them. 

 

But why would that matter?

 

You say  "My house is purchased with my money". Unless I misunderstand,  what is thew difference?

 

Edited by THX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, York said:

I actually disagree with the current system, too. Just so you know that there is some logical coherence in my position. I'm not saying that boot powers are excessive, but being able to permanently stop a subscriber from entering rooms is okay. I think they're both flawed, because a subscriber is determining, unilaterally and without any regard for whether an actual TOS violation has occurred, what access/experience another subscriber is going to have in the game. This won't amount to much if it's only small rooms, but does amount to a concerning significance with rooms that are more medium to large size. 

 

 

I'm curious as to what system you would propose that would be more effective?

I understand the argument you are making and the position you have adopted, but it's not enough to say that something of this nature is unfair without offering a workable alternative.

The lack of that in your posts is mainly why you are being met with such opposition.

 

PS  First time I've ever successfully quoted someone so yayyy for me  😁

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe something like in World of Warcraft, when you wanted to kick someone to a group, you made the group vote via a function, if more yes than no, the person was kicked. I guess such function is not possible for 3DX but we could imagine a system like when you are in a room, even if not yours, you could have a button "ask for kick" and if someone is reported by x persons, this person is kicked, and it is not let to the sole judgement of the room owner?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, York said:

Well, that's very disturbing that someone would be so motivated to waste money on that level. However, I suspect along with Xizi that you may be exaggerating a bit regarding the quantity. I would still disagree that based on the actions of a handful of disturbed individuals that will spend that amount of money, the game should be developing systems that have other consequences.  

Considering that booting someone from your own room is, in essence, the same as ignoring them and rebooting the room, just more convenient for you and your guests, the fact that the denying someone access to your room acts as a block to the experience of the game diminishes.  It is YOUR room and the guests within providing the experience.  If someone wishes to utilize your club/wedding/room as their experience, they should, within reason, respect your wishes.

If you're throwing a ceremony and wish for everyone to be able to attend, it would be terribly inconvenient to remove a pest by having to ignore them and close the room, then wait for all the guests to arrive again.  Or let's say you're just going to ignore them and encourage everyone to block them- you're interrupting the ceremony further.

It's not like the ability to moderate your room isn't something you can't already do.  Nor is it giving someone power to deny someone access to other areas of the game.  It's literally just reforming an already present capability by adding convenience and thereby removing inconveniences from the host and guests.

People already willy-nilly throw people on ignore just for disagreeing with them.  Sure, they can do the same with kicking.  Some people give warnings, others do not.  This is no different with or without the capacity to kick.

The kick doesn't even have to ban or auto-ignore, but serve as a warning to the target.

Again, this post is not about one particular class of villainous wretch - such as the multi-account trolls, but a warding tool that simply expedites an already possible feature against those that would end up on someone's ignore list anyway.

This isn't to say I don't love a good argument. I'll troll right back in these cases, and I don't mind the unsavory types.  I just get tired of seeing people who just want to be peaceful getting harassed nonstop.

Ciao,

     -L, via Mobile

Edited by Laina
Typos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, HazyRays said:

I'm curious as to what system you would propose that would be more effective?

I understand the argument you are making and the position you have adopted, but it's not enough to say that something of this nature is unfair without offering a workable alternative.

The lack of that in your posts is mainly why you are being met with such opposition.

At this point in time, I believe the ignore function is sufficient for the problem that people are articulating. I am saying I do not think there needs to be an alternative. I do not really think there is a pressing problem that needs to be fixed. However, I am humble to the fact that given more experience in 3DX, maybe I would in fact see a need as you see a need. In that case, I would recommend a team of regulated volunteer moderators that are powered across all rooms and can respond in real time to issues that are occurring. These volunteers would be trained to only take action in the event of a TOS violation, and if they abuse their powers, they would be removed from the team. This would strike a balance between the alleged need to immediately deal with problem people, while also ensuring fairness in how accused subscribers are restricted from the game experience. If one of these volunteers isn't in your particular room, a type of 911 call out system could be created to bring a situation to the attention of a regulated volunteer no matter what room in the world they're in. 

 

17 hours ago, Laina said:

Considering that booting someone from your own room is, in essence, the same as ignoring them and rebooting the room, just more convenient for you and your guests, the fact that the denying someone access to your room acts as a block to the experience of the game diminishes.  It is YOUR room and the guests within providing the experience.  If someone wishes to utilize your club/wedding/room as their experience, they should, within reason, respect your wishes.

If you're throwing a ceremony and wish for everyone to be able to attend, it would be terribly inconvenient to remove a pest by having to ignore them and close the room, then wait for all the guests to arrive again.  Or let's say you're just going to ignore them and encourage everyone to block them- you're interrupting the ceremony further.

It's not like the ability to moderate your room isn't something you can't already do.  Nor is it giving someone power to deny someone access to other areas of the game.  It's literally just reforming an already present capability by adding convenience and thereby removing inconveniences from the host and guests.

Yeah, Laina, like I said in my previous post, I understand you're saying it's not that big of a difference from the current system, and I'm saying even the current system has too much room for abuse and potential for inappropriately limiting subscriber experiences. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...