210 replies to this topic

[RG Notch]

Mercules, on 22 December 2014 - 08:54 AM, said:

Typically they don't tell you what the results are. I have had one support person slip up and let me know that someone would no longer have that account due to the actions I reported.

Why do you think they don't tell you those results?

[Joseph Mallan]

RG Notch, on 22 December 2014 - 10:03 AM, said:

Why do you think they don't tell you those results?

Trolling players you don't like just so they get banned may be a reason.

[Mercules]

RG Notch, on 22 December 2014 - 10:03 AM, said:

Why do you think they don't tell you those results?

Because it is typically policy to not share the results of moderation. I handled the abuse cases for an ISP for several years and I did not share what moderation was done with the person reporting the abuse. Why? Policy.

[Kvaneal]

Of many MMOs played over the last 17 years...

This is one of the least hateful communities I've encountered. Relax.

[Joseph Mallan]

Kvaneal, on 22 December 2014 - 10:21 AM, said:

Of many MMOs played over the last 17 years...

This is one of the least hateful communities I've encountered. Relax.

You never visited HeavyMetalPro forum or BattleCorps did you! Some of my favorite friends are from those forums!

[Davegt27]

Paint job sounds cool

[RG Notch]

Mercules, on 22 December 2014 - 10:15 AM, said:

Because it is typically policy to not share the results of moderation. I handled the abuse cases for an ISP for several years and I did not share what moderation was done with the person reporting the abuse. Why? Policy.

Hmm, wonder if the policy acts as covering one's ass for not actually acting on complaints. Why? Small population can't afford to ban paying or potential paying players. Always funny to see no logical, non CYA reason. It's why I don't bother reporting anyone and smart people would be served well by saving the effort. If PGI paid more than lip service to managing the community they would have instituted an in game report tool as they said way back. Sadly, since support isn't monetizable, and in fact drains away money it isn't a priority.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

RG Notch, on 22 December 2014 - 10:50 AM, said:

Hmm, wonder if the policy acts as covering one's ass for not actually acting on complaints. Why? Small population can't afford to ban paying or potential paying players.

Actually a small company can't afford to have prospective customer driven away by Trolls and bigots. Keeping 1 troll around and allowing them to harass dozens or hundreds of people a day isn't good business.

I never quite understood the name/shame policy. I think it deters people from reporting when they feel their reports go ignored. I think PGI should standardize and publicize the penalties for infractions. No more subjective moderation, for instance: Joe may get 3 days suspension for team killing a staffer, while Frank gets a pass for racial slurs because he friends with the staff.

Edited by Agent 0 Fortune, 22 December 2014 - 11:45 AM.

[Kiryuin Ragyo]

Kaspirikay, on 21 December 2014 - 07:03 PM, said:

So, I'm sure we've seen abusive language being thrown about a lot and random TKers as well.

I think its time we had an in-game/after game rating system like that of LoL and other games like that. Those with bad enough ratings would get muted for a number of games.

Or those that has been reported as TKers would be locked out for x number of games.

On the flip side, those with good ratings would be seen as desirable players to play with. Maybe even give a paintjob or something if the rating stays up for a period of time.

Thoughts?

Cool Starry Bra... reduce your self to zero.

[Kampfer]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 22 December 2014 - 11:44 AM, said:

Actually a small company can't afford to have prospective customer driven away by Trolls and bigots. Keeping 1 troll around and allowing them to harass dozens or hundreds of people a day isn't good business.

I never quite understood the name/shame policy. I think it deters people from reporting when they feel their reports go ignored. I think PGI should standardize and publicize the penalties for infractions. No more subjective moderation, for instance: Joe may get 3 days suspension for team killing a staffer, while Frank gets a pass for racial slurs because he friends with the staff.

Here are two things I've never seen ever:
1) someone announcing they were quitting cause someone said something mean to them, they quit because of content
2) Any game company ever announcing disciplinary actions against a player.

Players being disciplined have a right to privacy you know that right?

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Kampfer, on 22 December 2014 - 12:12 PM, said:

Players being disciplined have a right to privacy you know that right?

No. No I did not, maybe you could cite that for me.

[Mercules]

RG Notch, on 22 December 2014 - 10:50 AM, said:

Hmm, wonder if the policy acts as covering one's ass for not actually acting on complaints. Why? Small population can't afford to ban paying or potential paying players. Always funny to see no logical, non CYA reason. It's why I don't bother reporting anyone and smart people would be served well by saving the effort. If PGI paid more than lip service to managing the community they would have instituted an in game report tool as they said way back. Sadly, since support isn't monetizable, and in fact drains away money it isn't a priority.

Hmmm... I wonder if EVERY company has the same policy. Why? Because it is best not to talk about moderation. In part because what an End User thinks should be done and what the company thinks should be done is not always the same. So the standard is something like...

"USLink takes complaints about abuse of their system very seriously but to preserve the privacy of our customers we do not talk about the measures taken if we do find through our investigation that abuse has occurred."


Typically what happened was that I would call the person and inform them that this was there one and only warning once I had irrefutable proof. They would then deny it, I would present the proof. They would continue to deny it and I would point out that it was possible someone else had their username and password and that I could change their password to ensure that anyone out there with it could no longer use their login credentials, but they are responsible for protecting that password and any further abuse incidents would lead to the cancelling of their account.

No matter what the results were though, I did no discus the results with the person who sent the complaint. Yes, part of it is because if we did the person would likely complain about how we handled it. Some of the end users out there want the person to have their thumbs cut off when really all that needs to be done is make them understand they can't do that and on the second issue delete them.

[LORD TSARKON]

Simple solutions...

/ignore <Player Name>

That way you do not see what they type..


Team Damage Percentage/ Kills on scorecards

For example..

LORd TSARKON 5% Team Damage / 0 Team Kills

[RG Notch]

Mercules, on 22 December 2014 - 12:22 PM, said:

Hmmm... I wonder if EVERY company has the same policy. Why? Because it is best not to talk about moderation. In part because what an End User thinks should be done and what the company thinks should be done is not always the same. So the standard is something like...

"USLink takes complaints about abuse of their system very seriously but to preserve the privacy of our customers we do not talk about the measures taken if we do find through our investigation that abuse has occurred."


Typically what happened was that I would call the person and inform them that this was there one and only warning once I had irrefutable proof. They would then deny it, I would present the proof. They would continue to deny it and I would point out that it was possible someone else had their username and password and that I could change their password to ensure that anyone out there with it could no longer use their login credentials, but they are responsible for protecting that password and any further abuse incidents would lead to the cancelling of their account.

No matter what the results were though, I did no discus the results with the person who sent the complaint. Yes, part of it is because if we did the person would likely complain about how we handled it. Some of the end users out there want the person to have their thumbs cut off when really all that needs to be done is make them understand they can't do that and on the second issue delete them.

That's fine. You can say whatever you want and it may be true. It's not going to change my opinion that it simply exists in order to allow a company to shirk it's duty under the guise of privacy. At least they could make the excuse be something other than privacy because that's clearly a dodge. All I know is if there was follow up, even if I didn't agree but knew something was done would encourage me to at least make the report. Hiding behind privacy justs means I don't bother. I imagine I'm not the only one and worse I'm sure there's people that don't care because they figure no one will complain or PGI won't do anything. So you can try to spin it how you like, to me it smacks of laziness and leads to a worse community.

[LORD ORION]

Eonai, on 22 December 2014 - 01:27 AM, said:

I'm actually surprised we have people against this.

Why oppose it at all?

Because if you are too goddamn lazy to take a SS and write an e-mail to support it was not that big of an issue.

and

You want support to base bans on player reporting metrics? Jesus.... that will be troll'd more than MWO forums and chat.

[Mercules]

RG Notch, on 22 December 2014 - 12:42 PM, said:

That's fine. You can say whatever you want and it may be true. It's not going to change my opinion that it simply exists in order to allow a company to shirk it's duty under the guise of privacy. At least they could make the excuse be something other than privacy because that's clearly a dodge. All I know is if there was follow up, even if I didn't agree but knew something was done would encourage me to at least make the report. Hiding behind privacy justs means I don't bother. I imagine I'm not the only one and worse I'm sure there's people that don't care because they figure no one will complain or PGI won't do anything. So you can try to spin it how you like, to me it smacks of laziness and leads to a worse community.

What a dumb idea.

You can't grasp the concept that things you don't see happening still happen?

Wow.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[RG Notch]

Mercules, on 22 December 2014 - 01:07 PM, said:

What a dumb idea.

You can't grasp the concept that things you don't see happening still happen?

Wow.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

LOL, it's not simply absence of evidence, it's absence of evidence combined with motive to conceal said evidence. If you can't accept that then WOW right back at you.

[operatorZ]

After having played years in "similar" online games (World of Tanks, Warplanes) I will say that to me the vast majority of players in MWO are mature and easy to get along with. Compared to those other games; MWO has a far lesser amount of Trolls, griefers, TK's. Those games had an almost pathological group of players in them that went out of their way to make other peoples playing experience miserable. IMHO

I hope MWO stays classy....

All though.... with the release of CW I have seen a good uptick in very immature posts/opinions/trolls.....almost like there's a connection between the "competitive" game mode release and players with this type of behavior...

or it could be just confirmation bias....as I want my all time favorite game to be filled with "good" people....

[ManOpeace]

Nothing will stop a stock Nova alphaing a light/medium's leg and blowing themselves up in a Free to Play game.

[0111101]

I don't see any other threads specifically addressing this issue and don't feel the need to create a new one so here goes.

I've had the misfortune of running into a player multiple times who has been toxic towards the team every time I'm in a match with him. He is always one of the first on our team to die, and I only ever see him get 150-200 damage, tops. I have no issue with his performance as everyone plays at a different level of skill. My issue is with his behavior in all the matches I've been with him. Upon dying he immediately starts hurling verbal abuse at the team. Calling everyone useless, mentally handicapped, swearing profusely at them, etc. (Obviously for the sake of keeping it G-rated in the forum I'm giving the gist of his abuse and not his actual choice of words.)

The first time I played with him, I thought maybe he was just having a really bad day and taking it out on his fellow players. But then I got matched with him again days later and he did the same thing. Then it happened again today, just an hour ago. Same guy, same toxic behavior. I don't want him banned but I want his behavior rectified. I gave him some choice words today after reaching the boiling point with his incessant toxicity (oops) but I'm certain the next time he plays MWO he will do the same thing to his team.

So, what do I do now? Will PGI do anything about this if I submit a ticket, or would I just be wasting my time? I don't see any point in blocking him, sure that will solve the problem for me as I won't see his verbal abuse in-game but what about the other ten players on our team who have to deal with his abuse?

Edited by 0111101, 28 January 2015 - 01:38 PM.