Edit Your Preferences
users can post new topics and replies to this forum
HTML is: Off
BBcode is: On
[quote] On 26-11-2009 12:34, Shantigh wrote: I don't think a structure goes against what it means to be a wiz. I feel it helps rather than hinders them, especially where a player may feel personally agrieved or feel that a wiz is biased against them, being able to go 'by the book' is a bonus, they can still choose to a degree to treat things as case by case, but when it comes down to it - being able to show you aren't carrying out a personal vengeance is paramount. Now, to back that up - I don't feel that anything here was personal, nor do I think it was incorrect to punish the player. However - many things in the past have been taken personally, and in fact on a number of occassions there has been biases. And poppycock, that this isn't the type of game to expect customer service. For those among us who paid to play (when it was a monthly subscription!), certainly we demand, not just expect a level of customer service. And until they remove the paypal donate notice from the site, there should be a level of customer service to do otherwise is simply unprofessional. Terms and conditions are a way of life nowadays on the net, and I do think updates should be agreed to. It's simple common courtesy. I personally find it highly unprofessional that we don't get a choice on agreeing or disagreeing to any changes, however minor, are made to the terms and conditions. I also agree with Royston that the game is not a democracy, however - if any game wishes to keep a player base, they have to treat their players with respect, and that includes any and all disciplinary action. If they fail to do that, people will leave, and without the players, the game dies. So not a democracy, but still beholden to the players. There is more that I forgot to mention in the early hours (apologies Royston, I may out type you yet!) What counts as breaking the ''rules'' is subjective, as Royston says. But players should not be left guessing at what is or not allowed. And I feel it's not good enough to expect players to just know better. I agree that the majority should, but you make rules and guidelines so there can be no errors in what constitutes ill behaviour. Now, somewhere in the rules there are remarks on what counts as bad behaviour, I think this need to be fleshed out and included within a disciplinary structure. It needn't be a nit-picking list, but something that covers most of the bases, such as: --> Excessive Swearing ----- In this case I mean things like ''f'' words, ''c'' words etc. I personally do not count hell, damn, piss, bloody or bugger as swearing, and at least on the game I play (which is aimed at children under 10 to pensioners) - these are allowed. We'll see if MUD's forum filters remove any of the ones I've typed. For the most part, swearing is very low on MUD so excessive swearing is obvious. --> Bullying. ----- This is probably one of the most subjective, but again, it's usually fairly blatant. Even when done in what a player thinks is a subtle manner, most people spot. --> Provocation, ''Trolling'' ----- Another subjective one, but again usually easy to spot. It's usually not an isolated incident and when things are said to upset (come under bullying) or provoke anger, then while the person reacting may end up in the wrong (Excessive swearing or abuse) - the person who manipulated the event shouldn't get off without a similar warning, it takes two to tango after all. --> Abuse ----- And another one which can be subjective, as often it can be done in a subtle way (which also comes under bullying). But again, normally quite blatant. --> Cheating ----- Loobying, Intentional suicides to gain points and Multilining are probably the only real cheating methods. I think it would be in the best interests of the game to have these included in some form of disciplinary. Granted few folk actually play, but it's still required reading for all players, since some still seem to be ignorant or cheat because there is no structure in place and know they'll only get a warning. Cheating isn't subjective, therefore can be dealt with reasonably harshly, and should be, especially with players who know better. This includes returning players who do it. ----- A point on multilining - a definition should be modernised. Thesedays people don't multiline in the days of dial up. And nowadays it's normal for players to talk on MSN, because hey, I'll share some of my embarassing tales, but when I want to talk to a friend, as a friend - I tend to do on MSN, not MUD. There's also the issue of two people playing in the same room, which I do with Tanis on occassion and I'm sure others do. The point should be made that multilining would be classed as getting help in the game when your character was unable to ask for help within the game world - e.g asking a deaf persona to help you, trying to ask for help while mute etc. It's fairly obvious, but again - it should be noted somewhere, so it's possible to refer to it. A list of these things would be useful under a heading of what can get you banned/disciplined on mud. It needn't have long descriptions, the headings alone should be good enough. And while much is subjective, at least when wizards (note plural, as I feel no one wizard should be responsible for decision making) agree that something is wrong, they can point a player at this, explain what they did wrong, and back it up with the set down guidelines/procedure/whatever. As for guesting, I still see a reason for it. Until the site is able to produce immediate accounts (rather than the current 24 hour wait) then guests are required. Of course the Java client is broken and really makes it impossible for guests (And possibly even logged in accounts) play since it doggedly displays the login screen covering all the text. Guesting is useful for players who have forgot details to get in touch with admins as well, and I would feel is certainly quicker than an email. So for the moment, I'd say guesting is still something the game needs - until accounts can be made instantly, even then, it's still a useful tool. I do think MUD and it's wizards would benefit from having guidelines/a system for disciplinary action. At the moment it is very easy for someone to view things as biased, and to stress again, for a game asking for money - there has to be a level of customer care. And while the game is unlikely to be making money, it was a business, and I believe is still likely registered as such, and therefore should have a professional way of dealing with problems. And when you have a professional way of dealing with problems you don't get nearly as much trouble as what this has caused. [/quote]
on this Post
on this Post
(This can be altered or added in your profile)
These forums may be read by anyone, but only registered mudII.co.uk
players may post. When posting, please refrain from behaviour
not tolerated in the game.
These forums are moderated.
Copyright © 2000 - 2001
The phpBB Group
phpBB Created this page in 0.004215 seconds.