In-game Kudos.

[spawnloser]

Why does the kudos have to go to the person? It should be treated as all others are treated. Sent to staff, editted for IC info, then forwarded into oblivion.

The emphasis highlights why it should never go directly to the player, jhunter.

[Synthesis]

What's the difference between:

> kudo amos Hey dude, gj.  Meet again tomorrow night. btw I'm a sorc, not a ranger, lol!

and

> ooc Hey dude, gj.  Meet again tomorrow night. btw I'm a sorc, not a ranger, lol!

[Riev]

What's the difference between:

> kudo amos Hey dude, gj.  Meet again tomorrow night. btw I'm a sorc, not a ranger, lol!

and

> ooc Hey dude, gj.  Meet again tomorrow night. btw I'm a sorc, not a ranger, lol!

The difference is, as I believe is being suggested, that the kudo command would still be sent into a staff-controlled Kudos queue where they can look it over, scrub and send it off. Whereas with OOC it goes directly to the other player.

I have a hard time believing anyone would seriously be suggesting a Kudos system where the staff has no hand in it, because as was stated earlier you could always just use an Instant Messaging program and it'd achieve the same thing. The current Kudos system has a great flow to it, but it seems that for some, it'd be much easier and more effective to use an in-game system where you would have the option of targeting a specific player to be tagged with it.

As Morgenes said, it'd require some sort of a token system, where it would have to save the targetted person until you could write the kudos, but man if I could just Kudos Amos, and then later Kudos Add 1 or what have you when the scene is over, I would MOST LIKELY send more deserving kudos.

[Rhyden]

I think it's perfect now. If you really think someone deserves a kudos. You'll take time out of your busy shedule to send them a kudos.
If you -really- want to. because I know how hard it can be to feel like "that guy's awesome. I'm gonna send him a kudos... later." - and never do it.
but if you -really- reeally want to. You'll do it.

These are my feelings on the subject.

Also, if an in-game kudos system were coded, it would create another ooc distraction. I prefer keeping ooc stuff out of the game, although a few commands are necessary (like the ooc command, bug, typo, etc.) for coordination and smoothness, though they still deter from rp, in my opinion.

[Mudder]

I like the idea Jhunter! Often when I want to send  a kudos to someone, I find myself forgetting all about it once I log off.
And by some slim chance I do remember, a day or two later. Well, Im just like meh. I don't feel like sending it now. Im lazy, I know.
But if you do not catch me at THAT particular time wanting to do something, good chances I will surely not do it later.

[number13]

. It would still be anonymous and as far as I know the staff doesn't look over kudos and -not- pass them on to the player they're intended for.

That happened to me once. I don't have the data to suggest a ratio, but kudos can be and occasionally are rejected.

Playing the devil's advocate --  If kudos were much easier to send, would people have more expectation of receiving them?  Might middling role-players (like me!) feel a copious butt-hurt over not receiving a perceived minimum supply of "good job!" and e-hugs?

[janeshephard]

. It would still be anonymous and as far as I know the staff doesn't look over kudos and -not- pass them on to the player they're intended for.

That happened to me once. I don't have the data to suggest a ratio, but kudos can be and occasionally are rejected.

Kudos does get rejected if its too specific or if its about something not remarkable. That's the two rejection reasons I've seen in the past.

[Synthesis]

What's the difference between:

> kudo amos Hey dude, gj.  Meet again tomorrow night. btw I'm a sorc, not a ranger, lol!

and

> ooc Hey dude, gj.  Meet again tomorrow night. btw I'm a sorc, not a ranger, lol!

The difference is, as I believe is being suggested, that the kudo command would still be sent into a staff-controlled Kudos queue where they can look it over, scrub and send it off. Whereas with OOC it goes directly to the other player.

I have a hard time believing anyone would seriously be suggesting a Kudos system where the staff has no hand in it, because as was stated earlier you could always just use an Instant Messaging program and it'd achieve the same thing. The current Kudos system has a great flow to it, but it seems that for some, it'd be much easier and more effective to use an in-game system where you would have the option of targeting a specific player to be tagged with it.

As Morgenes said, it'd require some sort of a token system, where it would have to save the targetted person until you could write the kudos, but man if I could just Kudos Amos, and then later Kudos Add 1 or what have you when the scene is over, I would MOST LIKELY send more deserving kudos.

My point is:  any IC information that could be passed via an in-game kudos command could be passed using the OOC coomand, or the emote command, or the say command, or the tell command, or the whisper command, for that matter.

I don't see what the big fucking deal is about sending kudos without Staff looking over them first.  It's not like you get karma or anything other than a warm fuzzy for receiving them.  Sure, some people could be dicks and do something like:

> kudo amos Hey, nice job today. Not. You fucking douchebag.

But again, the same thing can be accomplished by:

> ooc Hey, fuck you Amos, you fucking douchebag.

So far I haven't seen a compelling reason why being able to give someone a quick "attaboy" is a bad idea.

[jhunter]

What's the difference between:

> kudo amos Hey dude, gj.  Meet again tomorrow night. btw I'm a sorc, not a ranger, lol!

and

> ooc Hey dude, gj.  Meet again tomorrow night. btw I'm a sorc, not a ranger, lol!

The difference is, as I believe is being suggested, that the kudo command would still be sent into a staff-controlled Kudos queue where they can look it over, scrub and send it off. Whereas with OOC it goes directly to the other player.

I have a hard time believing anyone would seriously be suggesting a Kudos system where the staff has no hand in it, because as was stated earlier you could always just use an Instant Messaging program and it'd achieve the same thing. The current Kudos system has a great flow to it, but it seems that for some, it'd be much easier and more effective to use an in-game system where you would have the option of targeting a specific player to be tagged with it.

As Morgenes said, it'd require some sort of a token system, where it would have to save the targetted person until you could write the kudos, but man if I could just Kudos Amos, and then later Kudos Add 1 or what have you when the scene is over, I would MOST LIKELY send more deserving kudos.

My point is:  any IC information that could be passed via an in-game kudos command could be passed using the OOC coomand, or the emote command, or the say command, or the tell command, or the whisper command, for that matter.

I don't see what the big fucking deal is about sending kudos without Staff looking over them first.  It's not like you get karma or anything other than a warm fuzzy for receiving them.  Sure, some people could be dicks and do something like:

> kudo amos Hey, nice job today. Not. You fucking douchebag.

But again, the same thing can be accomplished by:

> ooc Hey, fuck you Amos, you fucking douchebag.

So far I haven't seen a compelling reason why being able to give someone a quick "attaboy" is a bad idea.

My thoughts exactly. It would have no more potential for abuse than alot of other things in the game. The difference is, it would automatically go to the staff and you -will- get caught and suffer the consequences for doing so.

We could have concrete rules in place like the GDB stuff. First offense, a warning. Second offense, temporary ban and forced storage of the current character. etc.

[Lizzie]

I don't understand why anyone has a problem with the idea that a kudos command send word to the staff, the same way it does now, except that the command is done in-game instead of through the website. Why would this be a BAD thing? Why do you object so strongly against it?

[Marc]

Degrading the current value of kudos.  If the entire point is to give warm-fuzzies, then an in-game command is perfect.  It -might- turn into a post-game handshake and people just get in the habit of sending a "Nice job, was fun" kudos after every interaction much like some are conditioned to vote every single day.  This -might- happen.

If the point is to give a shout-out for exceptional rp:

I really dig the idea of a way to mark a PC and later go back and kudos via a web app.  Have to be done in a way that people can't use it to store sdesc or anything stupid.  This has a risk for dilution too.  It is also a more deliberate act.

[MarshallDFX]

I do feel that it would be an improvement if it was not instantaneous.  They go in batches on some interval, which limits how much you can identify the character who sent it to you.

I mean, even with the current system you can still make some good guesses, but still.  A little bit of anonymity in kudos makes it nicer, I think.

[spawnloser]

The other difference, Synthesis, is that Kudos are kept as part of the player's permanent record.  OOC is not.  Also, OOC is used in game for communication.  I would assume that the person getting Kudos in game isn't seeing the message immediately.

[Saellyn]

Also, if staff see somebody go OOC  LOL nice job OBTW I'm a Nilazi

Staff is gonna gank the Nilazi -realllllly- hard. Maybe.  I'm pretty sure somebodies Karma will go "WAH WAH WAAAAAAAAAAAH"

[Sinna]

An in-game command for kudos should send a brief (tdesc size) email (after opening the editor) to the targeted character's account while cc'ing the appropriate staff email for review.

I've wanted to give kudos to someone's player and couldn't remember their ldesc and never knew their name and when emailing staff like this have had it said "we need more to go on to find the character." 

I would so use this command.

A yousuck command would be interesting too, but I doubt I could keep up on the spam in my email.