Other > Closed suggestions
GM abuse counteraction, GM activity to be made transparent
Nice_Boat:
--- Quote from: HertogJan on July 18, 2010, 09:21:29 pm ---I've admined a game server for about 2 years and am admininga torrent server for over 5 years now.
--- End quote ---
Nice, it was just a StarCraft league in my case. I had three people checking my every punitive action and every player could file a complaint against my decision using an on-site form.
--- Quote from: HertogJan on July 18, 2010, 09:21:29 pm ---No way would anyone outside staff members ever have access to log files.
If you do that, you open your doors wide for cheaters and exploiters as you give them all the information needed on how to prevent detection.
All it will lead to is an endless stream of discussion about GM's and their action, wether right or wrong.
In my personal experience it's the cheaters and exploiters who are shouting the hardest about abuse.
--- End quote ---
No, why? Sensible censorship when it comes to information that could help cheating wouldn't be shunned upon. And it's not like we don't know shit about what GMs can and can't do. Actually, I could paste a list here and it would probably be pretty close to being complete. As I've said before, it's no CIA secret.
--- Quote from: HertogJan on July 18, 2010, 09:21:29 pm ---As for the comment someone made about dictatorship:
End your internet access subscription and crawl back under the rock you came underneath from.
Servers are maintained by people who set the rules for their guests. Whether it's a server hosting a game, a forum or whatever other kind of thing.
You may in some occassions have some saying in a few of the rules, at the end of the day you have no saying in most rules. Especially not in the important ones.
That's no different here.
--- End quote ---
Since you seem to be new to 2238, you probably missed the fact that GMs are not the owners of this server and this thread is endorsed by one of the "creators", whom I asked for permission before even mentioning this subject. Basically, the GMs are here to serve - both the Devs and us. Given the situation, I don't really feel like crawling under any rocks or ending my internet subscription, sorry.
--- Quote from: HertogJan on July 18, 2010, 09:21:29 pm ---I have no idea what's logged as far as GMs go and what's the underlying sytem, but I think an easy system could be implemented (depending on the database system that is):
Simply log all actions by GMs which cause changes to a player character. Thus leveling, adding items, killing them, etc.
--- End quote ---
We aren't asking for anything more. To be made public, that is.
--- Quote from: HertogJan on July 18, 2010, 09:21:29 pm ---Further more, I'm pretty sure that whoever of the devs is/are responsible for the GMs, check logfiles from time to time.
If they have no time to do so, or there's reason for it to be done more regularly, they should promote the most trusted/experienced/objective GM.
Yes, a GM, as that person knows things from a player's point of view and a GMs point of view.
Not to mention (s)he mostly likely knows the GM and can therefore better assess the situation.
--- End quote ---
The problem is GM activity is not top secret and as far as trusting GMs goes, please reffer to the origins of this thread (yes, entire national sub-board) and the arguments mentioned above.
--- Quote from: HertogJan on July 18, 2010, 09:21:29 pm ---Players should keep in mind that GMs probably have their own private forum(s) to discuss issues, actions taken, actions to be taken, etc.
Especially if it concerns something serious.
--- End quote ---
It's actually an IRC channel and I somehow doubt they're preparing a battleplan before GM x decides he's going to slap player y for 9999 AP for no real reason.
--- Quote from: HertogJan on July 18, 2010, 09:21:29 pm ---As for thieves, bombers, caravan traps, etc. the GMs not liking them simply have to learn to life with them like the rest of us.
--- End quote ---
And who's gonna check if they are? The Devs? Don't they have better things to do, like, you know, developing the game?
--- Quote from: HertogJan on July 18, 2010, 09:21:29 pm ---Sure you can automate part of the process, but the complaining, whining and discussing part is completely human and won't go away.
--- End quote ---
ctrl + v "You should contact XYZ if you have any complaints against GM activities" -> Junk is more efficient than <Pointless Discussion> -> Junk and far less disturbing than "I don't really care" -> Junk.
Surf:
--- Quote from: Nice_Boat on July 18, 2010, 09:41:46 pm ---
No, why? Sensible censorship when it comes to information that could help cheating wouldn't be shunned upon. And it's not like we don't know shit about what GMs can and can't do. Actually, I could paste a list here and it would probably be pretty close to being complete. As I've said before, it's no CIA secret.
--- End quote ---
If you would know this so good like you are saying, probably 80% of the "GM abuse" threads wouldn't be open in the first place. There is no reason some GM should copy/paste all the commands and stuff in here.
--- Quote ---Basically, the GMs are here to serve - both the Devs and us. Given the situation, I don't really feel like crawling under any rocks or ending my internet subscription, sorry.
--- End quote ---
We are here to help, yep. But that doesn't mean that we are the little "everyones monkeys" for individuals who like to cause trouble over and over again, telling lies or false assumptions on the forum etc. And yes, this is a rule. You may ask the person you got permission opening this thread.
--- Quote ---It's actually an IRC channel
--- End quote ---
Not entirely true.
--- Quote ---And who's gonna check if they are? The Devs? Don't they have better things to do, like, you know, developing the game?
--- End quote ---
Don't you have something better to, like, betatesting the game?
Nice_Boat:
--- Quote from: Surf Solar on July 18, 2010, 09:56:51 pm ---If you would know this so good like you are saying, probably 80% of the "GM abuse" threads wouldn't be open in the first place. There is no reason some GM should copy/paste all the commands and stuff in here.
--- End quote ---
Replace the commands with descriptions than. And it's not like those commands are useful if you aren't logged in on GM account.
--- Quote from: Surf Solar on July 18, 2010, 09:56:51 pm ---We are here to help, yep. But that doesn't mean that we are the little "everyones monkeys" for individuals who like to cause trouble over and over again, telling lies or false assumptions on the forum etc. And yes, this is a rule. You may ask the person you got permission opening this thread.
--- End quote ---
I'm not sure what you're saying, so please be more specific, especially if you're suggesting I'm a liar or I assume something falsely. Moreover, I don't understand what rule are you talking about, please elaborate.
--- Quote from: Surf Solar on July 18, 2010, 09:56:51 pm ---Not entirely true.
--- End quote ---
Not entirely false either.
--- Quote from: Surf Solar on July 18, 2010, 09:56:51 pm ---Don't you have something better to, like, betatesting the game?
--- End quote ---
I don't really want to betatest this game without being reasonably assured it's not rigged - and I'm not alone on this one.
Once again - what are you scared of? Revealing top secret GM commands to the public? They don't work on normal accounts. Revealing sensitive information using in game chat? Censor it. If you're so clean and just, why is there such a resistance to having someone outside of your clique watching you with reasonable effectiveness?
Surf:
--- Quote from: Nice_Boat on July 18, 2010, 10:03:24 pm ---Replace the commands with descriptions than. And it's not like those commands are useful if you aren't logged in on GM account.
--- End quote ---
Don't have any problems with that. If one of the devs wants that, then for sure we/them are doing such a little "disclaimer". But - again - that is just my opinion. I already said that not everyone in the team shares the same opinion about stuff.
So you have to wait for one of the devs to post here. ;)
--- Quote ---I'm not sure what you're saying, so please be more specific, especially if you're suggesting I'm a liar or I assume something falsely. Moreover, I don't understand what rule are you talking about, please elaborate.
--- End quote ---
Do you see your particular name in that list? No. I was just generally speaking. And that rule is in of our internal rulesets, guidelines you might call it.
--- Quote ---I don't really want to betatest this game without being reasonably assured it's not rigged - and I'm not alone on this one.
--- End quote ---
Rigged? As Jovanka already asked, what particular things happened to you so that you can say this game is rigged?
More then a few people are fully fine with the team members (and no, we don't give a away free stuff ::) ).
If one has positive feelings about something, (s)he doesn't write that much on the forum, but if one thinks he has been harassed by "GM abuse" which is in 90% of the cases just a mistake, (s)he writes that in the forum as negative feedback.
That's just human. Still don't see what is "rigged" here, you are making an elephant out of a mosquito.
--- Quote ---Once again - what are you scared of? Revealing top secret GM commands to the public? They don't work on normal accounts. Revealing sensitive information using in game chat? Censor it. If you're so clean and just, why is there such a resistance to having someone outside of your clique watching you with reasonable effectiveness?
--- End quote ---
I am not scared of, I am just stating my opinion. In fact, I already wrote it several times that I wouldn't matter, I just think it isn't needed.
Pozzo:
Just one thing :
--- Quote ---No, threads like these are created because of the general annoyance.
--- End quote ---
Man, don't speak for everybody please.
I don't care about what GM do in their life or in the game.
If you feel paranoiac maybe you're not so innocent.
Edit : and I must add that we don't need a policy for GM. We play the game for fun, this is not a full-time job.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version