Who C

[Xygax]

So again can someone explain the abuse of WHO C?

The rest of your post lacked punctuation and other things I consider criteria for readability, so I'll just respond to this part.  I never contended it was being abused.

-- X

[spawnloser]

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.

Exactly how do you propose they do this?

[X-D]

All clans and tribes used to have Who C actually.

That was changed...hhhmm, 2001 I think?

As to Potaje question, Mansa explained the 3 main ways Who C was abused. And did so quite well.

[Xygax]

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

Actually, it wouldn't, since players in "independent clans" (ie., groups of PCs working together as a clan without coded support) would not have the feature.  But I think even if that weren't the case, the feature is still a very OOC one.

-- X

[SMuz]

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.

Exactly how do you propose they do this?

I wrote a really long post on why they shouldn't be doing that, but that's just too much of a derail. Looong story short, games are too complex to be used with standard data collection models. Try getting data on how people play something simple like checkers. Then try the very first MUD. It's more easily done with instinct. I could give a 2 hour lecture on why instinct is better than data, but it's not important.

[Eloran]

Uhm, SMuz, the collecting of data for studies in the game has already been done. It was a moderate to good success. See: Gimf, Vanth.

[Gimfalisette]

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.

Exactly how do you propose they do this?

... That IS how to do it, in a nutshell. Try reading my posts again, and/or developing a career as a data analyst, if you want more specifics. The ARM staff are smart and experienced enough in technical areas that they could figure out how to do it if they cared to.

We made the decision we made because we feel

Emphasis mine.

the feature is still a very OOC one.

Clan forums are OOC. PMs are OOC. Email is OOC. The use of IM is entirely OOC, and runs rampant. A general feeling of prejudice against anything "OOC" is still a poor basis for decision-making.

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!").

For one thing, you have totally mistaken and reduced the position of those of us advocating for "who c" to something that no one here supports.

For another thing, the opposite of the log in - who c - log out behavior is not staying logged in; it is staying logged out, unless the player believes that s/he has 15 to 30 minutes to burn on simply finding roleplay.

[staggerlee]

Logging in and out at all is ooc.
It breaks my immersion, and I vote that it be disallowed.

[Gimfalisette]

Logging in and out at all is ooc.
It breaks my immersion, and I vote that it be disallowed.

> who

------------------------

There are 250 sleep-deprived, unbathed, jobless, homeless, relationship-free players in the world.

[Eloran]

C'mon, let's not be dicks and get this thing locked. Perhaps if we use logic and reason, we could sway the decision staff have made.

Gimf, you're in command.

[Gimfalisette]

C'mon, let's not be dicks and get this thing locked. Perhaps if we use logic and reason, we could sway the decision staff have made.

Gimf, you're in command.

It's just a little gallows humor, m'dear; and it was funnier than "There are 250 linkdead players in the world." I think I've stated my case plenty, anyways. If the staff wanted me to provide criteria, conditions, or analysis for an actual test of the who c command or really anything else, I'd be more than happy to help. But beyond that, I do not believe there is anything further I can do or say.

[Xygax]

We made the decision we made because we feel

Emphasis mine.

Emphasis, but no point?

the feature is still a very OOC one.

Clan forums are OOC. PMs are OOC. Email is OOC. The use of IM is entirely OOC, and runs rampant. A general feeling of prejudice against anything "OOC" is still a poor basis for decision-making.

And we try as much as possible to reduce and restrict your use of the ones we can't supervise.  Thank you, though, for conceding that the feature is an OOC one, and also for equating it to the "rampant use of IM"; I'll consider those remarks to be points in my favor.  Whether or not you personally feel that we are wrongly prejudiced against the use of OOC communication tools that we can't or don't have the resources to supervise, it has been my experience that they are almost always detrimental to the game.

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!").

For one thing, you have totally mistaken and reduced the position of those of us advocating for "who c" to something that no one here supports.

Sorry if that looked like a strawman.  As I said at the beginning of the remark: the decision wasn't made to improve login/logout times, or to stop any particular behavior, nor in response to any remarks made by any player.  I personally don't care about login times and I don't think this feature will dramatically affect them in either direction.

For another thing, the opposite of the log in - who c - log out behavior is not staying logged in; it is staying logged out, unless the player believes that s/he has 15 to 30 minutes to burn on simply finding roleplay.

I'm fine with that.  If you don't have time to play, don't login.

-- X

[spawnloser]

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.

Exactly how do you propose they do this?

... That IS how to do it, in a nutshell. Try reading my posts again, and/or developing a career as a data analyst, if you want more specifics. The ARM staff are smart and experienced enough in technical areas that they could figure out how to do it if they cared to.

No, it isn't.  That's a statement of what they should do, not how.  I'm not a data analyst.  Are you?  Are any of the staff?  Are you suggesting that if none of them are, they hire someone to tell them how to do it?  If you are one, say how instead of say what... again... and again.

We made the decision we made because we feel

Emphasis mine.

Sometimes feelings are better than data.  How many people here did data analysis on their feelings before dating someone?  ...before deciding that the did/didn't like pizza?  ...before deciding they like Armageddon?  Go ahead and emphasize.  Some people will only disagree with you more for saying that feelings have nothing to do with anything.

the feature is still a very OOC one.

Clan forums are OOC. PMs are OOC. Email is OOC. The use of IM is entirely OOC, and runs rampant. A general feeling of prejudice against anything "OOC" is still a poor basis for decision-making.

Clan forums shouldn't be used to tell people you are online.  Neither should PMs.  Neither should IMing.  This is ALL abuse of OOC tools in my mind and any OOC tool that exists in game should be eliminated to minimize abusive behavior.

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!").

For one thing, you have totally mistaken and reduced the position of those of us advocating for "who c" to something that no one here supports.

For another thing, the opposite of the log in - who c - log out behavior is not staying logged in; it is staying logged out, unless the player believes that s/he has 15 to 30 minutes to burn on simply finding roleplay.

He did not mistake or reduce anyone's position to anything incorrect.  He said that people said they did it.  People DID say they did it.

Also, if you have only 15 to 30 minutes to log in and you NEED someone else to make the game fun for you, don't log in.  Problem solved.  I'm happy.

[brytta.leofa]

For another thing, the opposite of the log in - who c - log out behavior is not staying logged in; it is staying logged out, unless the player believes that s/he has 15 to 30 minutes to burn on simply finding roleplay.

I'm fine with that.  If you don't have time to play, don't login.

k

[staggerlee]

For another thing, the opposite of the log in - who c - log out behavior is not staying logged in; it is staying logged out, unless the player believes that s/he has 15 to 30 minutes to burn on simply finding roleplay.

I'm fine with that.  If you don't have time to play, don't login.

k

Yeah really.

[LoD]

the feature is still a very OOC one.

Clan forums are OOC. PMs are OOC. Email is OOC. The use of IM is entirely OOC, and runs rampant. A general feeling of prejudice against anything "OOC" is still a poor basis for decision-making.

Yes, but there are some very real differences between an OOC construct usable directly from the command line of the MUD through game syntax and these designs that are completely removed from the live game itself.  You even have to log completely out of the game in order to use the "mail" function from the menu.  Clan Forums, GDB, Email, PM's are all "outside of the game", which places the "who c" feature in a completely different category.

I know your point was that a general prejudice against anything "OOC" is a poor basis for decision making, but the constructs you list here isn't exactly comparing OOC apples to OOC apples.  They're two very different things, and so I don't think it's that simple.

All OOC constructs have some inherent risk in affecting the game in a negative way, voluntarily or involuntarily.  Those that are accessible as a direct part of the game contribute to gray lines and blurred boundaries on acceptable/unacceptable behavior.  I think there are other alternatives to "who c" that wouldn't contribute as much to the problems while still providing some solutions.

-LoD

[Eloran]

Are you?

Yeah, she is.

Sometimes feelings are better than data.

That sure worked out well for JFK Jr.  

Any OOC tool that exists in game should be eliminated to minimize abusive behavior.

I've never seen anyone abuse the command. Ever.

Not saying it doesn't happen, but I don't think it's as prevalent as you seem to believe.

Also, if you have only 15 to 30 minutes to log in and you NEED someone else to make the game fun for you, don't log in.  Problem solved.  I'm happy.

No. Problem not solved. If people can only devote a half hour on certain days but -need- to speak to someone to keep a plot rolling, not being able to contact them stalls not only the interaction, but the plot as well. You might be happy, but that plot won't be.

Domino effect, meet a host of pissed players raging at the stalled plot you just borked.

[a strange shadow]

The points that I and a few others are trying to make seem to keep getting lost in the "I can regurgitate more intelligent-sounding stuff than you can in this amount of time" noise.

A character is always in Zalanthas. Its player is not always inhabiting it for OOC reasons. Any command used to decipher whether or not a character is around for interaction (which is NOT THE SAME as being ICly unavailable) would naturally be OOC in nature. Forcing us to use IC means to decipher whether a character, who is part of an organization, is (for OOC reasons) available or unavailable, is flawed logic.

I'm resigned to this change because, like other changes I have strongly disagreed with (hi, stun/stam loss), bitching isn't gonna change a thing. I'm still registering my complaint, though, because I care about the game, and I highly disagree with any change that further fragments the playerbase and/or makes it harder for others to interact with each other. Anything can be abused; mitigate the ways something can be abused rather than scrapping the whole idea.

As someone else said, who-c could have been given to all clans, if "exclusivity" was somehow deemed a problem.

Also, Xygax, there's a difference between "strongly worded" posts and someone saying "fuck it in its goat ass".

Thanks for making us "we have a life, but we love the game" players feel totally welcome, man.

[Malken]

Every clans I've been in, in the last three years or so, all have a thread where you write in your sdesc, your playtime, your character's name, role and something about the character (and most do it with their main GDB name).. Is that now forbidden as well, or..?

I also agree that Armageddon has never been a game you can play if you have a spare 20 minutes here or there.. Even with 'who c', if you have only 30 minutes to play, you'll be lucky to find someone and exchange more than 10 emotes in between before you need to log out again..

You people are going nuts over nothing, seriously.

[spawnloser]

Are you?

Yeah, she is.

Sometimes feelings are better than data.

That sure worked out well for JFK Jr.  

Any OOC tool that exists in game should be eliminated to minimize abusive behavior.

I've never seen anyone abuse the command. Ever.

Not saying it doesn't happen, but I don't think it's as prevalent as you seem to believe.

Also, if you have only 15 to 30 minutes to log in and you NEED someone else to make the game fun for you, don't log in.  Problem solved.  I'm happy.

No. Problem not solved. If people can only devote a half hour on certain days but -need- to speak to someone to keep a plot rolling, not being able to contact them stalls not only the interaction, but the plot as well. You might be happy, but that plot won't be.

Domino effect, meet a host of pissed players raging at the stalled plot you just borked.

1 - Then she should stop saying what and start saying how.  Like I said.
2 - So?
3 - I have.  Anytime someone logs in, does 'who c', and then logs out, it's abuse of 'who c' and I WATCHED it happen  (Little known thing, now that 'who c' is gone... barrier prevented 'who c' from finding you.  I was hidden with a barrier on, watched someone log in and then almost immediately log out multiple times.)
4 - Yes, problem solved.  If you don't have time to play, don't play.  If you need someone to make your time fun and don't have the time to find them, don't play.  Log in when you have the time and don't get involved in plots that require 'who c' for you to be involved in them.

[Xygax]

shadow: You've got some good points, but for now I don't see them outweighing the value we perceive in removing the command.  Your complaint is duly and respectfully noted, however.  No doubt we will continue to tweak systems like this as we go forward.

-- X

[Potaje]

Ok I have some remarks to these "Three" Reasons given as to why Who C was abussive.

1) You lose the roleplay moments of not knowing if someone is online or alive, if they previously contacted you and said, 'HELP ME OMG'.  The player will constantly spam 'Who C' to see if they remain alive, as they try and run to the area to rescue them.  

So you say "if they previously contacted you and said, 'HELP ME OMG'.  The player will constantly spam 'Who C' to see if they remain alive, as they try and run to the area to rescue them.  ", Now how is that differnet than finding someones mind and maintaining contact with them to see if they are alive (aside from maybe the drain). Which I can understand (personally I never thought of using it in such away.)

2) Players will get poisoned, and then type 'Who C', and then contact the people online and say, 'BRING ME CURES NOW'.

This seems like just another part of the first reason which I will consider 1 and 2 to be as one reason. But ok so when your life is in danger do not contact someone and say Help, but find them in person?

3) If you got recruited into the Arm of the Dragon as a spy, and the name you gave the templar was Joe, but when the templar's player typed 'Who C', he will not see Joe, but he'll see Bob.  

It would seem to me that The templar in such a trusted role would and should know how to use Who C properly, and in games play if they do not they should not be in that role.

Oh and I have never seen short desc, only names on Who C.

In the world know for its strong use of psionics, as everyone is born with some level of it, Clans are closer to the borgish collective, I guess, but i would think simply through breeding the Tribals, keeping their gentics so closely watched would have a higher bond of the mind and so feel the "presence" of their mates.

Feel the force Luke... reach out and find the other Jedi...

There are 3 Jedi in the Universe

[Gimfalisette]

1 - Then she should stop saying what and start saying how.  Like I said.

It's essentially the use of the scientific method. The specifics will vary based on the hypothesis, collectable data, desired outcome, and so forth. Without access to all that information, it's not possible to say exactly, precisely how it would be done, but that's the basics. Desired outcome -> hypothesis -> evaluation of testable data -> test methods and conditions -> run test -> analyze data -> re-run as necessary. If you want to know more, feel free to PM with questions, rather than further derailing the thread into an esoteric discussion that no one else cares about.

[SMuz]

Geez, calm down guys. Who -c is a tool that has both advantages and disadvantages.

They're not going to change it back just because some complain. Instead of arguing about why someone else is wrong, why not find another solution that'll please everyone? I think someone on the 2nd page of this thread tried to do that and I like LoD's suggestion as well.

[spawnloser]

@ Potaje -
1 - The difference is that YOUR CHARACTER is using the Way, losing stun and etc, instead of you using an OOC construct.
2 - Use the Way.
3 - Completely borked.  I have absolutely and completely avoided certain towns with certain characters because of what I perceived as abusive play on the part of the player of a templar.  Just because they can be trusted 95% of the time doesn't mean that they will that last 5%... especially when the power they wield IC begins to corrupt them.

@ Gimf -
I never said I was interested.  I'm happy with the decision.  You're the one contesting it and saying they should have done something... so tell them what they should have done.  Suggest how to go about it.  Seek the information you need to give them better information in return.  Stop saying their decision was a bad one because they didn't visibly live up to your standards.  If we all had to visibly live up to everyone's standards for this game, there'd be a lot of people currently playing this game that wouldn't be allowed to any longer.