Who C

[brytta.leofa]

Because I'm hypomanic and on a roll:
- Barrier is a good way to disappear forever and pretend you're dead.
- Barrier is not a good way to convince sarge that you're mucking out the latrines.

[SMuz]

If a Bynner skips sparring and isn't where he's supposed to be, there's always the benefit of the doubt.

No.  No, there really isn't.  Your sergeant does not have so many runners that he'll miss one totally disappearing for a day.  The doubt you're referring to is that you might not be logged on.

It's far more realistic for your Bynner (or militia soldier) to make up an actual excuse for his whereabouts than to put up a barrier and let your fellow players assume that you're logged off.

Even Tuluk is Land of the Disappeared, not Land of the Mysteriously Reappearing.

Very true. But unfair that other clans always know when you're not where you're supposed to be. I'd rather that everyone have the OOC advantage of being logged off than being OOC detected all the time.

I retract my argument because of the barrier thing, though.

[Winterless]

who

There are 57 players other than yourself online.
There are 3 clan members other than yourself online.

Would that help?

That would be nice.

[brytta.leofa]

But unfair that other clans always know when you're not where you're supposed to be. I'd rather that everyone have the OOC advantage of being logged off than being OOC detected all the time.

I'd much rather see "being logged off" removed from our lexicon of Reasons We Can't Find Amos...and for that particular reason, I think universal access to who -c would more enhance realism than detract.

Again, you should not be using barrier to pretend that you're logged off.

[Krath]

Personally, I think a good compromise would be to retain the command, but to have it only show a tally of how many people in your clan(s) are online.

It wouldn't reveal any IC information, but it could still be used as a tool to facilitate interaction by people in isolated tribes and clans.

who

There are 57 players other than yourself online.
There are 3 clan members other than yourself online.

Would that help?

If you absolutely gotta have a who -c, this would be the version I can live with.

* Approve *

*Stamp of Approval*

[spawnloser]

I won't support something that tells you how many clannies are logged in just like I won't support 'who c' because it does the same thing.  Someone logs in, sees none of the clannies on, logs out.  Who is to say that one of their clannies wouldn't log in 1 minute later?

The bitch that someone had about, "Oh, maybe they only have half an hour to play and wouldn't log in if they have noone to interact with," is crap.  Who had 'who c' anyway?  Militias, Tan Muark and Halflings.  The militias can F-off about losing 'who c' because they have PLENTY of people to interact with besides themselves.  In fact, they should be interacting with others.  Tan Muark and Halflings?  They know who each other all are and can contact each other, heck, there's never more than half a dozen (at the absolutely ridiculous most) of either clan, so that means it ain't that hard to try contacting them.

F 'who c' right in it's goat butt.  I'm glad it's gone and I'm glad people are crying over it because it shows how reliant you were on OOC information to drive your IC actions.

[Gimfalisette]

I'm pretty much with everything brytta and shadow said on this issue. Code changes that make casual-er play are bad for the game as a whole. Bad, bad, bad. Not everyone in ARM's potential audience is single, childless, and/or career-free.

F 'who c' right in it's goat butt.  I'm glad it's gone and I'm glad people are crying over it because it shows how reliant you were on OOC information to drive your IC actions.

Yep, players like me and shadow and brytta are just huge fucking OOC twinks. The truth is finally reveal-ed!

[spawnloser]

Ooooh.  Sarcasm.  That defeats my argument completely!

See, I can do that too.

It is OOC information that encourages people NOT to play.  Whether you are logged in or not IS OOC information.  If you can't see that, I'll actually have to stand by my statement of moments before even stronger, and actually agree with what you facetiously said.

[Simple]

The only thing I think is wrong with who c is that you could log in and see nobody there and log out, and 1 minute later a colleague could do it and see no-one and log out, where if you had both stayed on for a couple of minutes, you could have had 2 hours of super RP.

[Shalooonsh]

Settle Down.

Everybody take a nice, deep breath, step back, put down the axe, and chill out.

You are all intelligent people and are completely capable of civility.

This has been the warning.

[Xygax]

Also, please don't report posts simply because the post is written with a tone of authority.  The moderation features of this board aren't intended to help you win your side of the argument.  They're intended to promote less flaming, trolling, and IC information.  Please use them for just that.

-- X

[staggerlee]

The only thing I think is wrong with who c is that you could log in and see nobody there and log out, and 1 minute later a colleague could do it and see no-one and log out, where if you had both stayed on for a couple of minutes, you could have had 2 hours of super RP.

But... that's their decision. I'd rather hang out solo rping and hitting who c occasionally to see if any clannies are doing the same thing back in the (village/barracks/temple).
But we can't force people to remain logged into the game.

I still don't see how "who c" could possibly be abused.

[Simple]

The only thing I think is wrong with who c is that you could log in and see nobody there and log out, and 1 minute later a colleague could do it and see no-one and log out, where if you had both stayed on for a couple of minutes, you could have had 2 hours of super RP.

But... that's their decision. I'd rather hang out solo rping and hitting who c occasionally to see if any clannies are doing the same thing back in the (village/barracks/temple).
But we can't force people to remain logged into the game.

I still don't see how "who c" could possibly be abused.

I'm not on either side in this btw, I'm ambivalent.
I'll play the game world whichever way it is.

[Gimfalisette]

This is one of those decisions where, honestly, from a business/professional perspective, it is irritating to me that ARM staff does not rely on data-driven experimentation to figure out what is actually good for the game, and what is not. Rather, it seems that the staff continues to make decisions based on personal feelings and prejudices and observation, instead of objective measures. It's all well and good to change titles and talk about being professional, but if the "business" is not actually run by practices in common use in the business world, then it's only so much pretty wrapping paper.

Of course, if there actually is data behind this decision, then I retract my statement. But if there was, I expect we'd be given that as a supporting reason.

[spawnloser]

How do you expect them to test for the data?

[staggerlee]

This is one of those decisions where, honestly, from a business/professional perspective, it is irritating to me that ARM staff does not rely on data-driven experimentation to figure out what is actually good for the game, and what is not. Rather, it seems that the staff continues to make decisions based on personal feelings and prejudices and observation, instead of objective measures. It's all well and good to change titles and talk about being professional, but if the "business" is not actually run by practices in common use in the business world, then it's only so much pretty wrapping paper.

Of course, if there actually is data behind this decision, then I retract my statement. But if there was, I expect we'd be given that as a supporting reason.

I have no real insights into their decision making process. I'm sure they try to weigh all the evidence. They could even be considering player feedback, but I don't think I really expect a transparent discussion about it. Sadly.

I don't see how the positives outweigh the negatives on this, it would certainly be nice to hear a staff perspective on how this is going to improve the game.

Anyway, I have work to do so that's it for now: I bitch about games professionally now.

How do you expect them to test for the data?

A live test with feedback from the testers.
Or look at other people's research. There's rough twenty years worth of it out there: every other MUD ever run.

[Gimfalisette]

How do you expect them to test for the data?

There are any number of ways to test for any variable in the game, or even on the website. Number of logins, length of logins, numbers of PCs in clans, overall number of PCs, number of unique accounts in a given time period, use of the request system, visits to the website, particular use of the website, etc etc are all bits of data that are in the system. Setting up the conditions for testing any aspect of ARM administration--code changes, marketing, player communication, the helper system--is highly do-able. Changes do not have to be made in the dim unknowing space of "We're doing it because we think we should."

[Gimfalisette]

Actually, I will amend a little. There have been a change or two in the past year which HAVE been data-driven. The one I am specifically recalling at the moment was the change to special application parameters. Vanth sussed out the data and presented strong arguments for the change, and that was extremely satisfactory to the playerbase as a whole, as evidenced in the reactions to the announcement.

Compare to this change. We're a playerbase of highly intelligent, generally logical and mature folk; and we're not really content to continually get the "Because I don't like it, and said so" rationale for changes.

[spawnloser]

So, you're saying they haven't observed people that had 'who c' and their login habits?

[Gimfalisette]

So, you're saying they haven't observed people that had 'who c' and their login habits?

As mentioned previously, observation is not the same thing as data-collection and analysis. Often, what is believed to be true (from observation) turns out not to be true when the data is analyzed. I have seen this happen over and over and over in business situations. The data should always be collected and analyzed, and tests should always be run, rather than relying solely on human intuition / speculation / observation for important decisions.

[Eloran]

You are all intelligent people and are completely capable of civility.

Whoa hoss, don't you dare go calling me intelligent and capable of civility. >.>

On topic: If we can at least have a stripped down version of who c, I'd like Dan's idea. Pretty please.

[Xygax]

This decision wasn't made out of a specific desire to change login/logout behavior (though I'm hopeful we may see improvements, based on the volume of comments on threads like this one which seem to be of the format "I need 'who c' to work, because I don't have a lot of time to play, so I just login and type 'who c' and if no one is on, I log out!").  We made the decision we made because we feel it improves the game by leveling the playing-field for all clans and removing a very OOC-driven and OOC-driving feature from the game.

I'm of the opinion (and this is not necessarily authoritative; I'm not speaking for the staff) that we don't need empirical evidence for every move we make, nor do we need to make all of our decisions about the direction of the game in a transparent manner (though I think we err on the side of transparency more often then not, and certainly more often than any other mud I've played).

It is certainly possible that we may come to provide other means by which you can communicate with one another en masse, and it is also conceivable that you are all clever enough to come up with other means of ICly coordinating rendezvous and letting each other know you're alive or looking to meet up, without remaining logged in.

-- X

[Potaje]

How is "who c" abused? This I am unclear on... It would seem even if you had a list of those in Your clan that where on, it doesn't tell you where they are or any other information. It does let you know they are possibly attainable, as they are awake, unless they have a barrier up, so if one wanted to "Hide" from their own clan then they could put up a barrier.
Hidding from your clan, why would you not want them to know you are around, if so then maybe you should not be in the clan, it would seem you heart is not with them.
On behalf of the D-elves... You have spent your entire life with this (newly spawned Pc of an age of 13-80) tribe mate, that even if they had gone for some reason a month or more and just returned the whipers and rumors alone through camp would tell you that (Jo-bob Amos) has returned ie.. Who C tells you a name that may be attached to the new PC in camp that otherwise you are so very unrealisticly looking at going um.. I know I grew up with you in this tribe of fifty, where surely 10 or so where kids together or around the same age... but Who The Drov are you again.... And then you have those Players that refuse to put thet needed background at least the name desc on the board so that you at least have a working familurarity with your Brother or Sister. From there the interactions are smoother... not to mention some people do not like to interact either way with their tribe mates, for what ever reason they have, and so instead of being " who is that stranger that won't talk to me no matter how many times I try to start a conversation." you can be like " oh thats Sister, brother Amos, they don't talk much but I remember them from when they hung out with my younger brother, married my cousin' sisters nephews aunt.. bla bla."
That whole we have to introduce yourselves like you just moved to town and started a new school awkwardness should not need to happen in small clans that are tightly nitt (in the Docs). Anyways if you have ever lived in a small town you will find that people tend to know you even if you do not know them (and I mean this as if you had just moved to their town).

So again can someone explain the abuse of WHO C?

And to clarify I am not refutting the change, I am meerly pointing out another aspec that made Who C effective and will be looking for an alternitive. Thank you staff

[LoD]

Only one clan I was ever a part of had "who c", and, while it seemed a nice tool, the lack of it certainly didn't stop me from playing the game and enjoying myself.  It certainly is an OOC construct, and can have an impact on your character's decisions.

1. The character might not stay logged in for very long because the player didn't see anyone in their clan playing and logs.

2. The character may not travel to social-centers or choke points such as city gates, taverns, and shops to search for clan members if they can simply auto-detect their presence with "who c".  What about the rest of the player base that wants to interact with your character, positively or negatively, and perhaps requires this IC travel time in order to achieve those goals.

3. The character may intend to commit a crime within their organization, steal something, or murder someone, and wants to be assured that either no PC's are logged on, or a particular PC (read leader, officer, templar) is not logged on.  The "who c" command becomes all too tempting a tool.

4. The character may have learned that another 2 members of the clan intend to kill him/her, and use "who c" as a tool to know when it's safe to be logged in, and when they may want to "quit" to avoid an encounter.

5. The character may use "who c" as a meter for clan activity, or to obtain a roster of information as a spy without having ever personally met or seen any of the people listed.  They may also feed this information, including real names and sdescs to non-clan members without having to ever interact with any of them.

All of that said, I do see the benefits of having some kind of ability to reference whether your clan mates are around, especially in a small or tight-knit community where it'd be easy to ICly ask someone.  If an OOC construct like "who c" isn't viable, then perhaps there could be something created for Arm 1 or Arm 2 where you have an NPC in a social point, like a gate, gathering hut, or meeting hall, who will remember the passage of clan PC's in a similar way to message the hunt skill returns.

Code Select Expand

Open Clearing Amidst the Huts [NEWS]
A grizzled, gray-haired man is here, stoking the camp fire with a blackened stick.
A small camp fire is here, its flames crackling quietly.

A grizzled, gray-haired man looks at you.

>talk grizzled man Jahn
You ask a grizzled, gray-haired man about Jahn.

A grizzled, gray-haired man glances over toward you and scrunches his features together.
Nodding a few times, A grizzled, gray-haired man says, in sirihish:
  "Yeah, Jahn was here probably a few hours ago."

>talk grizzled man Choros
You ask a grizzled, gray-haired man about Choros.

A grizzled, gray-haired man glances over toward you and scrunches his features together.
Shaking his head, a grizzled, gray-haired man says, in sirihish:
  "Nah, ain't seen him all day."

It would capture some of the realism that people want regarding whether someone in their tight-knit community may have seen someone else ICly without it being auto-magickal knowledge and an OOC construct.  It would also mean that you could code in the ability to avoid being seen by these type of resources if you so desired (i.e. sneaking, hiding, choosing alternate routes, etc...).

-LoD

[Eloran]

"I need 'who c' to work, because I don't have a lot of time to play, so I just login and type 'who c' and if no one is on, I log out!").

Whoa, Xygax. I haven't read the entire thread since it blew up after I passed out, but I don't recall anyone saying this unless it was on the third or fourth page. Citation?

We made the decision we made because we feel it improves the game by leveling the playing-field for all clans.

Giving who c to all tribes/clans would have leveled the playing-field also.