Request Tool Effectiveness

[Schrodingers Cat]

It's been a few years since the request tool was implemented.  For some of the newer players, I'm sure they've never known the days of writing emails.  Now that the request tool has been out for a while, and because of many posts I've been seeing lately I was hoping to start a discussion on how effective it is and how it may or may not be improved.

I'm of the opinion that request tool is much more convenient than using email (or multiple emails) to communicate with staff, but I think it can also be a bit stifling as a player.  Communicating through email is free form and is only limited by the user that allows much or as little communication as the one writing it will allow which can be good, but for the one reading it may become overwhelming or possibly confusing when players are unclear.  The request tool is an efficient work saving tool that makes things very clear what players need from the staff allowing staff to keep things organized, coordinate and track communications with players.  The problem I see is that while staff side concerns are usually quickly addressed and fixed if there were problems from the player side they may go unnoticed and linger, making using the tool unnecessarily difficult.

The request tool has come a long ways from when it was first implemented, adding features that make it easier to communicate and respond to the staff about many different issues.  My goal here is to see if there may be any problems players face that they staff may not recognize, determine if they are indeed legitimate problems and then find possible solutions that would help to enhance communication for players while retaining (hopefully increasing) the effectiveness and efficiency that the tool creates for staff.

Are there problems with the request tool?  If so, what are they?  Is there some way that any problems could be alleviated, and if so what might they be?

[Drayab]

I think it works great.

[lordcooper]

Never had an issue.

[Taven]

This makes me think of...

Code Select Expand

Armageddon Player uses Request Tool on a Wild Staffer!
It's super effective!

...that's on topic, right?

I'm of the opinion that request tool is much more convenient than using email (or multiple emails) to communicate with staff, but I think it can also be a bit stifling as a player.  Communicating through email is free form and is only limited by the user that allows much or as little communication as the one writing it will allow which can be good, but for the one reading it may become overwhelming or possibly confusing when players are unclear. The request tool is an efficient work saving tool that makes things very clear what players need from the staff allowing staff to keep things organized, coordinate and track communications with players.  The problem I see is that while staff side concerns are usually quickly addressed and fixed if there were problems from the player side they may go unnoticed and linger, making using the tool unnecessarily difficult.

Could you be more clear on how the request tool might be stifling? It sounds like you're saying the volume and freedom of writing in email makes it more expressive, while the nature of the request tool doesn't allow for that. I don't think that's right, since you can ramble or express yourself as much in the request tool as an email. The only difference is that you have to figure out what section to stick it under, and if there's not something already existing then "Question" usually works just fine.

Could you elaborate on what concerns aren't quickly addressed player side? Do you mean problems with the request tool itself, or problems outlined in the requests sent in? I think Morg is pretty on top of keeping the request tool as convenient as possible and listening to input. For requests sent in via the request tool, as you say, it tracks communications--including how long it takes to reply to reports. I'm sure everybody's had staff miss answering a thing or two in a report, but that's not an issue directly related to the request tool.

Are there problems with the request tool?  If so, what are they?  Is there some way that any problems could be alleviated, and if so what might they be?

I don't have a problem with the request tool. I think the one thing I would like to be able to do is add another word or two on a closed request for a response, but staff already tried doing this. A big problem with this was that things got overlooked and missed, so it was taken out. There aren't any plans to put it back in, since if you really need to say something else, you can file a new request.

[Nyr]

The problem I see is that while staff side concerns are usually quickly addressed and fixed if there were problems from the player side they may go unnoticed and linger, making using the tool unnecessarily difficult.

Agreed...can you elaborate?

[Schrodingers Cat]

Because the request tool is designed, created and maintained by the staff, it would make sense that it fits the staff's needs.  If and when the staff perceives any issues with the tool (as with anything else), they are the ones to make any changes.  Players however have no control over the request tool other than how they use it.  Players  can (and I'm sure do) voice concerns about issues they may have but as they say in business for every complaint you hear there are many that you don't hear.  Recently I've seen many posts on the GDB about the request tool suggesting to me that some players may have concerns or issues that could use some kind of resolution or at least be voiced and discussed to help overcome any perceived problems users may have with the tool.

The purpose of this thread is to 1) discover players opinions of the request tool and 2) identify any problems they (players) may perceive with the request tool (if any), 3) find solutions for any problems that can be solved by changing how players approach using the tool, then 4) identify any problems that might be solved by adjusting or changing how the tool works.

[Nyr]

Recently I've seen many posts on the GDB about the request tool suggesting to me that some players may have concerns or issues that could use some kind of resolution or at least be voiced and discussed to help overcome any perceived problems users may have with the tool.

Could you link some?

[musashi]

The only "problem" I've noticed with the request tool is that sometimes a player will want to reply to a response staff submitted, but can't because staff closed the request along with their response.

Or vice versa. I have also had requests of mine left open by staff for a couple days after they have replied to it ... because they were waiting to see if I was going to reply to them, but I didn't, because the question had been answered to my satisfaction.

Thus, the "closure" aspect of the request tool can be a bit jerky at times.  Maybe if there were a way to tag yourself as "finished with this request, ready to close" player side,that would help? I don't know. That's the only quirky thing about the request tool system that I've noticed.

Over all I enjoy it much more than email.

[Schrodingers Cat]

Recently I've seen many posts on the GDB about the request tool suggesting to me that some players may have concerns or issues that could use some kind of resolution or at least be voiced and discussed to help overcome any perceived problems users may have with the tool.

Could you link some?

No.

[Nyr]

The only "problem" I've noticed with the request tool is that sometimes a player will want to reply to a response staff submitted, but can't because staff closed the request along with their response.

Or vice versa. I have also had requests of mine left open by staff for a couple days after they have replied to it ... because they were waiting to see if I was going to reply to them, but I didn't, because the question had been answered to my satisfaction.

Thus, the "closure" aspect of the request tool can be a bit jerky at times.  Maybe if there were a way to tag yourself as "finished with this request, ready to close" player side,that would help? I don't know. That's the only quirky thing about the request tool system that I've noticed.

Over all I enjoy it much more than email.

Ultimately, the request tool is here for staff to use to keep track of open items with players, whether it be a report, a question, a critical bug, or the like.  We'll definitely do our best to not close it before it is "resolved" to our knowledge and player knowledge, but if you (as the user) are not "done" after a request is closed, you may submit a new request.  I don't like the idea of forcing staff to wait for a player's response in order to close a request.  There are enough requests filed on a regular basis that I personally have to bump a few times for players that I feel that this would result in unnecessary request tool clutter.

I think that could be made easier by adding a link in resolved requests to allow players to open a new request as a followup to the old one, but we would want to be sure it doesn't create additional clutter in the request tool.  We'd have to test that out if we did that.

[Cerelum]

Recently I've seen many posts on the GDB about the request tool suggesting to me that some players may have concerns or issues that could use some kind of resolution or at least be voiced and discussed to help overcome any perceived problems users may have with the tool.

Could you link some?

No.

This was anti-climatic.

[Taven]

Recently I've seen many posts on the GDB about the request tool suggesting to me that some players may have concerns or issues that could use some kind of resolution or at least be voiced and discussed to help overcome any perceived problems users may have with the tool.

Could you link some?

No.

This was anti-climatic.

I used the search tool to check for any posts with the word "Request Tool" made in the last 100 days. Some of them weren't really relevant, but here were the ones that I found that related to the topic at hand:
   
April 09, 2012 - Request tool issue? : Player was worried about not getting reply emails from the request tool at all, and linked a similar issue. It turned out that the request simply hadn't been resolved yet in their case, and Morg said that they could email him if they did have any problems with the request tool.
   
April 21, 2012 - A different kind of request tool question : Player had an issue with reordering lists to the original way they appeared. They discovered how to fix it on their own, and also got a reply from Nyr on how to fix it.
   
March 28, 2012 - Request Tool Questions : Player wanted to make request tool searchable for players like it was for staff. Morg assisted in mentioning how the request tool could already be searched, providing a link and asking if that helped.
   
Feb 29, 2012 - Just Wondering... : Player felt like staff was harder to approach with the change from the request tool to email. Staffers responded and offered their opinions and advice.
   
May 28, 2012 - Dear Nyrbot (a request question) : Player didn't have internet to see a request was resolved, and it was closed so they could not reply. They wanted advice on how to respond or proceed. Nyr advises making a new request, since you can't reply to old requests.


I'm not sure any of that is really useful, though. The OP's concern seems to be more with general possible improvements and feedback, over specific things posted (even though posts were referenced).

[Barsook]

I think that could be made easier by adding a link in resolved requests to allow players to open a new request as a followup to the old one, but we would want to be sure it doesn't create additional clutter in the request tool.  We'd have to test that out if we did that.

Can I be the guinea pig?

[Nyr]

Recently I've seen many posts on the GDB about the request tool suggesting to me that some players may have concerns or issues that could use some kind of resolution or at least be voiced and discussed to help overcome any perceived problems users may have with the tool.

Could you link some?

No.

Incredibly helpful.  

Respectfully, at this point, you're free to shove off.  No one is forcing you to post on this forum about problems you won't identify regarding a tool that you rarely use that is intended to assist those that play a game that you don't play.

[Nyr]

I think that could be made easier by adding a link in resolved requests to allow players to open a new request as a followup to the old one, but we would want to be sure it doesn't create additional clutter in the request tool.  We'd have to test that out if we did that.

Can I be the guinea pig?

I think it'd be an "everyone test," not an individual player test.  I'm not sure if it can be done, but I know that it is something that has come up staff side as a possibility.

[Lizzie]

My biggest gripe with the request tool is that you can't give it your own subject heading for the e-mail it sends you. Here's part of my "archived" e-mail list to show you what I mean:

     Re: [ArmageddonMUD] Game Related - Question Reques...
   requests@armageddon.org    Sep 30, 2010         [ArmageddonMUD] Game Related - Question Request #2...
   Rathustra@armageddon.org    Sep 19, 2010         Re: [Red Fangs] Clan Related - Character Report Re...
   Rathustra@armageddon.org    Sep 19, 2010         Re: [Red Fangs] Clan Related - Question/Request Re...
   requests@armageddon.org    Sep 16, 2010         Re: [Red Fangs] Clan Related - Question/Request Re...
   Rathustra@armageddon.org    Sep 11, 2010         Re: [Red Fangs] Clan Related - Character Report Re...
   Rathustra@armageddon.org    Sep 9, 2010         Re: [Red Fangs] Clan Related - Character Report Re...
   Rathustra@armageddon.org    Sep 4, 2010         Re: [Red Fangs] Clan Related - Character Report Re...
   requests@armageddon.org    Sep 3, 2010         [Red Fangs] Clan Related - Character Report Reques...

I have absolutely no idea what any of these requests are *about.* I know who my character was, and what clan she was in (obviously). And that's it. My current e-mail list looks pretty much the same, and 3 days after I get an e-mail from staff, I don't remember what it was about and have to scroll through my e-mail list, opening each e-mail and skimming through each one, until I find the one I was looking for.

I really REALLY miss the days when we could use regular e-mail. Does the staff see the same thing on their end, that I see on mine? How in the world can they possibly keep track of things, if they're seeing what I see, times however many players are in their clan sending requests?

Not that it matters; the staff prefer it, however it is they're seeing it. But from a player's perspective, it makes it difficult for me to really -want- to send any requests at all, even when the staff specifically asks for one. If I have to open up an e-mail and read it -just- to find out the actual subject of the post, then I'd just as soon not send anything at all.

What I would've preferred to see (The * means the staff closed it, resolved):

     Re: [ArmageddonMUD] Game Related - Question Reques...
   requests@armageddon.org    Sep 30, 2010         Game Related: Apartment Bug Preventing Movement
   Rathustra@armageddon.org    Sep 19, 2010         Re: [Red Fangs*] (Char Rpt) The RPT, the Mask, General
   Rathustra@armageddon.org    Sep 19, 2010         Re: [Red Fangs*] (Char Rpt) Scheduling upcoming RPT
   requests@armageddon.org    Sep 16, 2010         Re: [Red Fangs] (Char Rpt) Scheduling upcoming RPT
   Rathustra@armageddon.org    Sep 11, 2010         Re: [Red Fangs*] (Char Rpt) Claw got a new Owned
   Rathustra@armageddon.org    Sep 9, 2010         Re: [Red Fangs*] (Char Rpt) Log--Clearing the Crater
   Rathustra@armageddon.org    Sep 4, 2010         Re: [Red Fangs*] (Char Rpt) Howls Goes Crazy in Camp
   requests@armageddon.org    Sep 3, 2010         [Red Fangs] (Char Rpt) Howls Goes Crazy in Camp

I might forget in 3 years the details of these e-mails, but they would at least give me some idea of which ones I'd even care about enough to want to re-read. Like - scheduling an RPT - not important, and in fact I probably could just delete it at this point (my e-mail system/host archives this stuff automatically so it's not taking up much space til I open my archives). But that thing about Howls going crazy in camp, now that definitely sounds like something I'd want to reflect on and reminisce. And the log of clearing the crater - was great times. I'd be very happy to be able to see it exists, at a glance, as in the above.

I can't re-name incoming e-mails client-side. I really wish I could name them, or at least give them a subtitle that my e-mail inbox would see, when it gets sent from the website-side. Sort of like an optional e-mail sdesc. If we leave it blank when we're submitting the request, then it'd default to the top example. If you fill the blank in with a limited-character subtitle, then -that- is what the subject heading will be, when you receive the e-mail.

[Schrodingers Cat]

Recently I've seen many posts on the GDB about the request tool suggesting to me that some players may have concerns or issues that could use some kind of resolution or at least be voiced and discussed to help overcome any perceived problems users may have with the tool.

Could you link some?

No.

Incredibly helpful.  

Respectfully, at this point, you're free to shove off.  No one is forcing you to post on this forum about problems you won't identify regarding a tool that you rarely use that is intended to assist those that play a game that you don't play.

Respectfully, relax and don't be so defensive.  Where is the harm being done here?

[Nyr]

Recently I've seen many posts on the GDB about the request tool suggesting to me that some players may have concerns or issues that could use some kind of resolution or at least be voiced and discussed to help overcome any perceived problems users may have with the tool.

Could you link some?

No.

Incredibly helpful.  

Respectfully, at this point, you're free to shove off.  No one is forcing you to post on this forum about problems you won't identify regarding a tool that you rarely use that is intended to assist those that play a game that you don't play.

Respectfully, relax and don't be so defensive.  Where is the harm being done here?

Well, the adults are having a good discussion about ways to improve the tool, and you're being a putz.  Now go play in the sandbox.

[Barsook]

I think that could be made easier by adding a link in resolved requests to allow players to open a new request as a followup to the old one, but we would want to be sure it doesn't create additional clutter in the request tool.  We'd have to test that out if we did that.

Can I be the guinea pig?

I think it'd be an "everyone test," not an individual player test.  I'm not sure if it can be done, but I know that it is something that has come up staff side as a possibility.

I know that it should be "everyone test".  I was just joking.  But maybe have a set of beta-testers who are players that are willing to test the feature out.

[Taven]

I think that could be made easier by adding a link in resolved requests to allow players to open a new request as a followup to the old one, but we would want to be sure it doesn't create additional clutter in the request tool.  We'd have to test that out if we did that.

I think something similar about before, but I can't find the thread. If I remember right the discussion was about adding a box for typing in the number of a related request, since all requests had numbers. That way you could have that turn into a link or something staff side, for easy reference.

My biggest gripe with the request tool is that you can't give it your own subject heading for the e-mail it sends you.

Adding titles for the request tool has been suggested before, and I imagine that the requests in the request tool could be made to show up in your emails. I know Morg thought it was a good idea, but I don't think he ever got around to working on it, due to the vast numbers of things on his plate.

I agree that some sort of titling would be helpful.

[Nyr]

Removed a couple of posts, banned someone continuing to bait staff.  Keep on topic and contribute if you have something to contribute apart from a chip on your shoulder.  Thanks! 

[FantasyWriter]

I would LOVE to have subject lines.  Searching old request is a major pain, yet I can open the Elorin Kadius folder in my email (when weekly reports were still handled through email) and search through nine months of requests and find what I want in about five mins.

[Cerelum]

I personally like it.  When I returned I looked at the request tool and saw all the questions I asked back in the day.  Some of them were things I wanted to know again cause I forgot since I vanished for so long.

Now on a list of "things that would be nice" here you go.

1. It would be nice for my OCD to be able to tell when staff has looked at a request.  This would allow us to know when they are sandbagging or not.  (Just kidding, but it would be nice to know who looked at it but didn't act)

2. Perhaps a counter to tell you what number you in the queue for whatever you're in for.  Example. "Your message is currently number 2 of 9 in order of receipt." Phone systems can do it, why couldn't the request system?

3. I totally know none of these things will ever happen, but I said "Things that would be nice."

Later

[Nyr]

Does the staff see the same thing on their end, that I see on mine?

That's a good question.  We actually don't go through e-mail as an intermediary anymore.  We use the tool itself to organize requests in several different ways.  Since we do that, that is likely why there's no title function:  for us, we don't really have any reason for a title.  We know what your account is, what the PC's name is, what clan the request is for, and whether or not it's a character report.  If we're your clan staff, we then know from having dealt with you before, "hey, this guy/gal put in a report last week. This must be this week's report.  Or maybe they put in a new one."  Then we open it up.  From our perspective, it's not really that big of a deal to have a title when we need to read the body of it anyway.

I'm not sure what is required in order to code that titling up that way, but that's a nifty idea.

[Maso]

*gets out the popcorn*

Seriously though...Lizzies suggestion of a title function that would be used in the titles of emails regarding that request would be awesome. It can be a little hard to locate specific requests if you are more prone to using your email inbox rather than the request interface (which is a little bit funny sometimes, and the text is super tiny? Or am I using it wrong?)

The other thing I would add, is that it would be nicer if staff were a little slower to mark requests as 'resolved'. I think this has come up before, and reasons have been given etc...but I still think it would be a much neater scenario if 'back and forth' between a particular issue stayed within the same request. And that really, especially in the case of 'Questions', that it be more up to the player when their question has been resolved. Having it the other way around makes it seem like the staff can hide behind closing a request and discourage further conversation on a topic - when a player might have more to say! Kind of like hanging up the phone on someone.