Chat Exclusion Feature

General Discussion related to the Plazma Burst game series!

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby Hikarikaze » 20 January 2017, 08:48

Green Eyed Demon wrote:I see this topic is getting a well deserved attention

Sad

Sad indeed





The feature's totally being used right, perfectly as intended
User avatar
Hikarikaze
Noir Lime [600]
 
Posts: 694
Joined: 24 January 2014, 02:05
Location: Somewhere, just not here

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby Spartz » 21 January 2017, 11:26

I Really support it to remove this, but there are too many new players or even old players that doesn't read chat rules
like hik posted those two pictures above me.

What is happening to PB2 Community?

Spoiler: Show More
Salt?
User avatar
Spartz
Recruit
 
Posts: 12
Joined: 11 February 2014, 15:50
Location: Earth

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby Incompetence » 21 January 2017, 23:00



This is self moderation and the thing the system wants to accomplish? what a complete joke

if the screenshots posted here in the topic aren't convincing or even enough to evidence the clear misuse of the system, i doubt anything towards the feature will happen
User avatar
Incompetence
Civil Security Heavy [300]
 
Posts: 331
Joined: 3 February 2016, 03:55
Location: Definitely not behind you

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby DoomWrath » 21 January 2017, 23:08

User moderation only works with very small, exceptionally mature communities where everyone knows each other. This is a feature, along with karma, that in my eyes has always been unnecessary and broken. Karma initially was implemented to test the system for PB2.5, the exclusion system may be in a similar state.

I don't think it's a necessary feature for the chatroom.
User avatar
DoomWrath
Usurpation Destroyer [350]
 
Posts: 397
Joined: 16 July 2013, 20:27
Location: PzKpfw. VI/B

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby mrnat444 » 22 January 2017, 03:55

The more I think about it, the more it does seem it's barely ever used for it's purpose (though this is likely somewhat because the community has shrunken), but rather for jokes, trolls, and abuse. I think it should be removed for a few weeks or a month to see how things turn out (i.e. staff spending more/less time dealing with people in chat because of the change).

Depending on what the results of this would be, it could be permanently removed, or brought back and altered. Or a different system could be put in place.

But what do I know, I just make maps.
User avatar
mrnat444
Usurpation Soldier [50]
 
Posts: 70
Joined: 16 October 2013, 00:51

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby gajacar25 » 23 January 2017, 08:57

http://prntscr.com/dz582h

http://prntscr.com/dz588a


How many times is someone going to abuse this feature until its removed?
If you're drowning you don't clutch no straw
If you're drowning you don't clutch no straw
You don't want to live you don't want to cry no more
User avatar
gajacar25
Recruit
 
Posts: 24
Joined: 9 October 2013, 17:17
Location: I'm already pissed enough about people using my nationality as an excuse.

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby Hikarikaze » 23 January 2017, 09:27

Wow, there's already 5 screenshots (if you include mine as well) that show how abused the system is. I'm not surprised and neither should anyone else be. It's more common than what these 5 screenshots are showing

If we are to assume that the system perhaps isn't going away, we should then focus on how we can make more people use the system and use it properly. Right now, there's nothing telling them that whatever reason they're putting in is right or wrong and the rules are often overlooked because to most people, it's just a menacing wall of text that one has no obligation to read. It gets treated as such in a matter of seconds

Not even common sense is dictating what is right or what is wrong because what's common sense is subjective. One person may find his or her reason to be right because it's "common sense" for him or her while another may disagree. There's no universal rule or definition as to what's right or wrong and that's also what's fueling the abuse. There's no clarity and where there's clarity, that clarity isn't visible enough. Targeting those should be a priority in case the system does stay because it clearly needs fixes and there's multiple avenues of approach to do this. I'm also positive that posting the rules and expecting people to read them isn't enough

Also it'd be nice if there could be some more new faces in the discussion
User avatar
Hikarikaze
Noir Lime [600]
 
Posts: 694
Joined: 24 January 2014, 02:05
Location: Somewhere, just not here

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby KARL SERG » 23 January 2017, 09:47

There should be a list of Reasons which have to do with the rules. When someone votes another Person out for some reason or another, only the 2 of them can see the reason (so there can be no associations among the People which aren't independent in thinking).

The People could still be able to plot someone's kicking out of the chat, but they will do that because they agree, not because they are following a trend.
User avatar
KARL SERG
Civil Security Ghost [400]
 
Posts: 412
Joined: 17 July 2013, 12:01
Location: Romanian Oligarchic Republic

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby gajacar25 » 23 January 2017, 19:56

If possible, I think having the exclusion feature be used more as a reporting feature would work well. Having someone moderate it before it actually goes through.

And yes, new faces would be great, however, it seems most people don't find this as important as some other issues. Disappointing.
If you're drowning you don't clutch no straw
If you're drowning you don't clutch no straw
You don't want to live you don't want to cry no more
User avatar
gajacar25
Recruit
 
Posts: 24
Joined: 9 October 2013, 17:17
Location: I'm already pissed enough about people using my nationality as an excuse.

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby iswift » 29 January 2017, 00:00

I agree that immature people take advantage of it, something needs to be done. Staff?
As you remember, we don't tolerate trolling. Continue to post such topics then you will be dealt accordingly.

u prob put " flash game moderator " on ur resume LMFAO

iswift
Cyber Grub [25]
 
Posts: 35
Joined: 10 September 2013, 23:07

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby Hikarikaze » 29 January 2017, 00:21

Some more examples that I either screenshotted or received from others. Case in point, the system does get abused far more likelier than expected











Take a look at these. What do all of these exclusions have in common? The common trend of using an unjustified and especially baseless reasons exists in all of these exclusions. Why is that?

It may look like it's no big deal because half the votes don't go through but it actually is a big deal. It affects accounts directly. These votes don't expire for a very long time meaning you can scroll back up if you missed a vote and still contribute. Those targeted by the system still have a chance to lose their right to communicate in the chat and they are at risk of being targeted for something they never did. This game of pointing fingers and showing false superiority has to stop one way or another

What really strikes me as confusing is the following. Take a look at this:



My concern here isn't the reason. My main concern is the amount of support that reason is getting. Only three people voted and the karma needed already had 1/6 of the value met. Why is it that reasons like this get support but legitimate reasons barely do?

Is it because people contribute as a joke? Do people actually find themselves content with going through with this? Is it out of boredom?

Why do votes that don't deserve support get that support whereas it's the complete opposite for votes that do deserve that support? This isn't a one time thing here; this happens commonly. People are more likely to participate in an invalid vote than an actually valid one. What kind of logic is this? It makes absolutely no sense; there's no difference in contributing to a valid vote or an invalid one, so why are people so reluctant?
User avatar
Hikarikaze
Noir Lime [600]
 
Posts: 694
Joined: 24 January 2014, 02:05
Location: Somewhere, just not here

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby KARL SERG » 29 January 2017, 10:06

Hikarikaze wrote:My concern here isn't the reason. My main concern is the amount of support that reason is getting. Only three people voted and the karma needed already had 1/6 of the value met. Why is it that reasons like this get support but legitimate reasons barely do?

Is it because people contribute as a joke? Do people actually find themselves content with going through with this? Is it out of boredom?

Why do votes that don't deserve support get that support whereas it's the complete opposite for votes that do deserve that support? This isn't a one time thing here; this happens commonly. People are more likely to participate in an invalid vote than an actually valid one. What kind of logic is this? It makes absolutely no sense; there's no difference in contributing to a valid vote or an invalid one, so why are people so reluctant?


It doesn't have to make sense. People tend to unjustly associate with each other to push votes like that for the hell of it (I have gone through it IRL, hence I ignored the decision of the People and deemed it a joke). It is horrendous, but so is most of the "Human Nature" (it should be ruthlessly eliminated through the help of technology or other means in the future if we have the opportunity).

Human mind doesn't work with flawless logic, unfortunately. It works with incomplete information, frequently faulty logic which has mistakes of its own or is supposed to back the individual and, worst of all, the thrill of adhering to a belief for being popular instead of adhering to it for being openly forced to do so or genuinely being interested in it.

I maintain my suggestion, voting should not be disclosed to the public, only the Staff, the Voter and the person who got voted. There should be a list of preset reasons that are valid and only when People agree without being influenced by each other (at least not openly), should the person be voted. This is why voting is a secret process IRL.
User avatar
KARL SERG
Civil Security Ghost [400]
 
Posts: 412
Joined: 17 July 2013, 12:01
Location: Romanian Oligarchic Republic

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby Hikarikaze » 29 January 2017, 19:09

KARL SERG wrote:Human mind doesn't work with flawless logic, unfortunately. It works with incomplete information, frequently faulty logic which has mistakes of its own or is supposed to back the individual and, worst of all, the thrill of adhering to a belief for being popular instead of adhering to it for being openly forced to do so or genuinely being interested in it.

I'm aware of this. No logic is perfect or flawless even if we perceive it to be. The human mind works with what it has and attempts to place the missing pieces by itself; those missing pieces can be anything as long as it's simple and makes the most logical sense to use. It happens all the time; a good example is listening to obscure song lyrics. If someone tells you that the lyrics are saying something else, you'll start to hear that instead because you assume it to be the most logical piece to complete the pattern

Human judgment is afflicted with numerous biases. Decision making becomes less genuine and accurate because of the cognitive, perceptual, and motivational biases a person possesses. These 3 things are perhaps why the system is always abused, primarily the perceptual and motivational biases behind the decision. The person abusing won't find or identify their own mistake, error, or bias, but you can identify it in others at least; trying to convince or tell them that their decision is biased on the other hand may be challenge. Unfortunately, that's one of the main issues with trusting people with a system that especially gives them power. Failure to identify your own biases exposes a flaw in being self-aware and it lays out consequences that soon exists in conflict between one another. You see flawed judgment all the time with this system because there is no limitation in regards to reasoning. Any reason is allowed and any reason will be used as long as the person putting in the reason feels it's justified or correct. That's why we need a less opinion-based system and more of a defined systematic approach to try and reduce human error while still allowing personal judgment to pass

KARL SERG wrote:I maintain my suggestion, voting should not be disclosed to the public, only the Staff, the Voter and the person who got voted. There should be a list of preset reasons that are valid and only when People agree without being influenced by each other (at least not openly), should the person be voted. This is why voting is a secret process IRL.

I believe I had suggested a list of acceptable reasons to choose from and I do support this idea. This is what I meant by having a more systematic approach while still allowing human decision making to go through, in the form of selecting one of the preset reasons that you feel is right. People might randomly put a random reason or they may use the wrong reason just to start a vote but it's better than having people put obscure and completely random reasons in. It'd be a step in the right direction at least, even if that step is a very small one
User avatar
Hikarikaze
Noir Lime [600]
 
Posts: 694
Joined: 24 January 2014, 02:05
Location: Somewhere, just not here

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby gajacar25 » 30 January 2017, 12:56

Trying to improve on this system is a good thing, but whatever system we come up with, there will be some sort of abuse. A step in the right direction, yes. However, I don't think that most of the people who abuse the system will care, they will probably just put in any reason.

This is a problem that comes with human nature. You've said it yourself, the person abusing won't identify their own mistake. People have different and sometimes skewed views of justice, and what is right and wrong. People have biases, these biases lead to these different views. And, again, you said it yourself, no logic is perfect or flawless.

So, anyone who would misuse it would not see himself misusing it. I remember seeing a day or two ago, after iSwift misused it to try and vote-kick Artichokecat, Tempus muted him for 30 minutes. Proceeding that, iSwift made two alts and said that Tempus was abusing. It's sad.

My conclusion? SOMETHING needs to be done. The longer the system remains, the more likely it is that another person will be vote-kicked, which might lead to that person leaving the community, and I'd say somewhat rightfully so. It might not seem plausible, but it certainly could happen.

So, here are a few of the things that could be done with the system.

1 - The system needs premade reasons.

This is a step in the right direction. Nothing too complicated about it to explain.

2 - The system could become a private thing.

So, as you suggested, the process should be secret to other users. The one being voted and the voter, along with the staff, will be aware of it. The staff will end up deciding whether or not the vote is valid or not.
The problem with this, however, is what if no staff member is online? It'll take possibly hours before the vote gets any response. And what if it ends up being a baseless vote, just for the hell of it? I think that making votes with no real reason or evidence should still be punishable.

3 - The system could still be public, but perhaps there could be an option to vote against it, removing your amount of karma from the vote kick. This system could very much be abused still, but it'll add at least a bit more balance to the system.

4 - Removing the system.

I'm unsure if any of what I've said is of much help, but I hope it is. This discussion is finally starting to get more active, which is a great thing.
If you're drowning you don't clutch no straw
If you're drowning you don't clutch no straw
You don't want to live you don't want to cry no more
User avatar
gajacar25
Recruit
 
Posts: 24
Joined: 9 October 2013, 17:17
Location: I'm already pissed enough about people using my nationality as an excuse.

Re: Chat Exclusion Feature

Postby Astar » 30 January 2017, 13:36

I did not really intend to post on anything outside of my own thread, but this has been going on for sometime without any resolution. New faces can't hurt.

My opinion here isn't anything new - I quite strongly agree with everything Hikarikaze has said. The exclusion system has been abused more than enough times to justify proper action being taken. However, I'd like to mention Gajacar's 3rd suggestion, since it struck me as being a decent step in the right direction without removing the system entirely. (A potential intermediate?)

gajacar25 wrote:3 - The system could still be public, but perhaps there could be an option to vote against it, removing your amount of karma from the vote kick. This system could very much be abused still, but it'll add at least a bit more balance to the system.


By allowing a form of "counter-vote", the exclusion system is still very much self-moderated by the community but yet the system itself gains a form of moderation - an extra safety if you ask me. While, like Gajacar mentioned, the system could still be abused, this greatly narrows down the chances of such abuse occurring as the one issue of "staff not being present" doesn't really apply here. There can be anywhere between 2 to 20 people in the chat at any one time, and all it takes is one or two people in the right frame of mind to counter-balance the consequences of such senseless, abusive behaviour. It's not perfect, but as some others mentioned, it can be a step in the right direction, which is definitely a whole lot better than no step at all.

Also, the suggestion of letting staff validate user-created exclusion votes is also fine. It cleanly eliminates most abuse (of course, Staff themselves can make judgement errors, but we can trust them to get it right almost all the time) with the only drawback being the time taken, or the delay, to the exclusion action taken. However, it's not a drawback at all if a majority of such exclusion votes aren't going to be approved/validated anyways, so such delays wouldn't even matter if no action is even going to be taken. A perfectly viable idea in my opinion.

Of course, removing the system entirely would be the most absolute solution, which I definitely have no issue with - the cleanest, most foolproof resolution to this problem is certainly welcome. I'm sure the rest of the posts in this thread have stated enough. Not sure if I helped, but I hope it did.

Sincerely,
- Astar
Sincerely, ~ ~ GM "Nana"
User avatar
Astar
 
Posts: 3
Joined: 28 December 2016, 07:00

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users