Persistant Squelch

[Vortex]

Pretty straightforward. Easy to do. It's been a staple in online gaming for well over a decade...should be here too.  Lets make that big old push out of the '90's, shall we!

The people I didn't want to hear yesterday, I still don't want to hear today.

 

[Karnak]

HiTech has explained in the past why he won't do it.

Basically if "Bob" is a really annoying guy and many people put him on ignore and then he quits and a new guy joins and picks "Bob" as his handle all the people who had annoying "Bob" on ignore now have new "Bob" on ignore and new "Bob" is more likely to have a poor experience as people don't respond to his questions, comments or greetings and is less likely to become a subscriber.

[The Fugitive]

You've been here long enough to know the reasons HTC won't do it.

I'd love to see it as a monthly thing at least. They get reset for the new campaign. Would save on SOME typing at least.  

[Lusche]

I just want a bigger squelch buffer. 

(Yes, I'm serious)

[Vortex]

HiTech has explained in the past why he won't do it.

Basically if "Bob" is a really annoying guy and many people put him on ignore and then he quits and a new guy joins and picks "Bob" as his handle all the people who had annoying "Bob" on ignore now have new "Bob" on ignore and new "Bob" is more likely to have a poor experience as people don't respond to his questions, comments or greetings and is less likely to become a subscriber.

You will have to excuse the tone, but that's a _really_ bad reason to not have one. REALLY bad. I know you're just relaying the info so this isn't directed at you Karnak, but the premise just doesn't hold water.

Punishing an entire player community for the off-chance that an a-h*le who cancels his account has that same handle picked up simply doesn't hold water. Moreover, and more importantly, it IS an insult to those of us who are in the other 99.99999999% who are not provided with the basic tools to filter their own text buffers....its ok that we can't filter the crap?

Besides, if said player is such a big concern (this 0.00000001%'r), there is little to worry about. He will figure out pretty fast from those that don't squelch him that "he is an a-h*le"...or at least his handle represents that. He's going to get that anyway, squelched or not, because "he is an a-h*le". And if he has any sense, he'll change his name because he doesn't want to be "an a-h*le" by inheritance.

[bustr]

For as many people you want to believe are effected by your one person in question at any given time. That's only you and maybe 1% of the side you play on during the small percentage of time you play in any 24 hours together.

That leaves a whole other community of players you are unaware of. Along with the poor unsuspecting new player who happens to pick your perma squelched name after the problem player quits that will never know you exist or even care. Who then can never create meaningful game relationships with a self styled elitist class of players with a BS "A" list of who they deem are worthy to communicate in their presence. The requests for being able to turn off range VOX will create the same social problems.

Arguing in the abstract that when the problem player leaves, then the in group who perma squelched him will do the right thing upon his absence is blarney. You are arguing that the new innocent player has to await the whim of the in group to be heard when that is not what HTC is selling him. This is not a sustainable foundation for a health community unless one is modeling ours after a community in the Hamptons or in the south of France. In the case of this game, we are buying into the community in the MA with it's imperfections. Not into the Hamptons or Monaco to isolate our own imperfections, then use money to call a growling floater a rose by any other name.

This will ultimately create a cast system of "in groups" versus those who they deem just not cool enough to be on the un-squelched list. People like to self segregate to tell others they are not good enough to be one of themselves. It's a natural tendency that gets out of hand and very ugly quickly if tolerated. We already see this with how some of our squads have acted in the past and today.

[Vortex]

Online games have squelch functions as a standard Bustr, they do not create this elitist community you suggest. They are there for the right reason, to allow the player to enjoy his gaming experience. Massively Multiplayer games as a rule went to this format long ago. There is no valid argument from a customer retention perspective against it. You are arguing a false premise. A new player using an a-h8les handle is going to assume that players reputation and will understand that very quickly. Persistent squelches are not used by all, and the new player will not exist in a vacuum. Your argument, and the reason to not have a persistent squelch, now has fallen apart. The new player will find out very quickly from the community what they have done, and will make that choice to stay with the name or not. I DID NOT say that anyone will remove that name from their list upon the a-h*le players' departure. Do not put words in my mouth please.

It is a very bad business decision that does more harm than good. A format such as this that says to the average customer...."you are worth less to us as a customer than than the a-h*le that wants to insult". I'm a big boy, I can handle it (I can dish it out if I choose as well, I just choose not too). One can also look to direct resources to other games that actually allow you to control the infants. That is really the root of the frustration on this matter. The a-h*le is seen as being more important as a customer for HTC with this format, whether intended or otherwise, that is the net effect. Not the best format, especially when faced with why it is done in the first place.  

[Fulcrum]

With all due respect, I disagree with Hitech's thoughts on this as well. 

The chance of a new player choosing the exact same name of a previous player accidentally is very small.  In the 9 years I've played the game I've seen one player take another players previous handle and it was purposefully done (e.g. The Who / Midway Name War).  I gotta be honest....I didn't want to hear anything from either "Midway" (original or the fake) and a permasquelch function would have been great.

Also, if a new player takes the name of a very unpopular player...don't you think:

1.) Someone will make the person aware of it; or
2.) the new player will realize everyone dislikes him because of the name?

In both cases the new player could then make a choice to change his name or keep it.

 


Ful

[Scca]

HiTech has explained in the past why he won't do it.

Basically if "Bob" is a really annoying guy and many people put him on ignore and then he quits and a new guy joins and picks "Bob" as his handle all the people who had annoying "Bob" on ignore now have new "Bob" on ignore and new "Bob" is more likely to have a poor experience as people don't respond to his questions, comments or greetings and is less likely to become a subscriber.

Okay, fine. A compromise would be once Bob quits, remove Bob from the perma-squelch list.  If the same sphincter gets a new account, then those who want to can re-squlech him.  If we had at least this, I wouldn't have to type ".squelch midway" 4-5 times a night when he purposefully relogs because he's been squelched by so many. 

Just a thought.   

[kvuo75]

watching people like midway get on peoples nerves is one of the great things about the game! why would you squelch him??

[Fulcrum]

watching people like midway get on peoples nerves is one of the great things about the game! why would you squelch him??

Because he gets on my nerves. 

[Vortex]

watching people like midway get on peoples nerves is one of the great things about the game! why would you squelch him??

What I find is it is not as much a given player that ultimately gets on my nerves, although I would certainly prefer to not have to deal with them obviously, hence this thread.

No, the irritation is the fact that I am paying a company for a service, and that company is, in effect, taking the position that the "harasser" is more valuable to them than the "harassee".  I don't believe that is intentional or planned, but it IS the net effect.

[colmbo]

Along the same  lines I'd like to see a block for private vox…..something where you have to have permission to pvt Vox someone.  The reason being to block those ego-bruised know-it-all holier-than-thou internet bullies who think it's okay to come on private Vox and berate you for something.

Just something like a msg in the buffer that "player X request private VOX chat".

[Lusche]

Just something like a msg in the buffer that "player X request private VOX chat".

That even deserves its own, seperate wish thread! 

[Zoney]

Along the same  lines I'd like to see a block for private vox…..something where you have to have permission to pvt Vox someone.  The reason being to block those ego-bruised know-it-all holier-than-thou internet bullies who think it's okay to come on private Vox and berate you for something.

Just something like a msg in the buffer that "player X request private VOX chat".

I can understand where you are coming from, but for me personally, that would take away a fun part of the game for me.  The difference is that my PM's are always positive and meant to make friends and have a giggle with someone I just engaged.

I like the idea of a monthly squelch, reset at every tour, that way you can enjoy not listening to griefers and I can enjoy communicating with and making new friends.  Even the last line which Lusche agrees with might be cumbersome as many players assume a request for private vox is just another guy trying to give them a hard time.