Right to participate in GM polls

[Coolkid 782]

How about ingame requirements ? and/or ingame vote-/system/box/bot ?


-lvl : X
-in game time: Y hours
-vote cost: Z gp

for example

lvl 20
in game time 50h
vote cost 1000 monsterpoints or GP or ...

This wouldn't work. Someone would be able to bot/fight to level 20 and be afk for the rest of the 50 hours. Also forcing someone to pay to vote..that doesn't work. Maybe looking at the date that someone started and basing the ability to vote on that?

[Johanne Laliberté]

Hi,

I agree with Coolkid 782 about the participation ingame in hours and more than 80 levels to get the ability to vote in GM polls. I'm ingame about 1 year and 2 months, 98 level then it will be a good idea!!!

I don't want to write and speak in vain, I have just 6 posts and with this one 7 and I hate to do spams, so it will be easier than 20 spams!

Would you tell me why it's so difficult to change the rule?

Thank you for your attention at this present.

Best regards,


Johanne Laliberté

[Crush]

Does the server log the registration date? I am not sure about that.

[Chicka-Maria]

Hi,

I agree with Coolkid 782 about the participation ingame in hours and more than 80 levels to get the ability to vote in GM polls. I'm ingame about 1 year and 2 months, 98 level then it will be a good idea!!!

i dont agree with the amount of levels since there has been people on tmw for about 3 years or more now who are still between level 70-80. But i do agree with the amount of time a person has been playing for, or when they registered. But i supose this also wouldnt stop sockpuppetry?

Regards,

[Jenalya]

Does the server log the registration date? I am not sure about that.

I don't know if account registration date is somehow saved, but the game_rules function saves the time a character starts to play:

Code: Select all

    if (TUT_var == 0)
        set TUT_var, gettimetick(2);
    return;

If I remember correctly this was introduced shortly before the Towel Day last year. All players that were created before that change still have a very low value in that variable from the previous use of it.
It has been used in several events to prevent people creating lots of new characters for doing an event several times, e.g. like this (chiefHelper.txt from the Christmas event 2011)

Code: Select all

    if ((BaseLevel < 30) || (gettimetick(2)-TUT_var < 3*7*86400)) // player must be created at least three weeks ago
        goto L_NoHelp;

Regardless of that I don't think that the registration date alone would be sufficient as voting criteria, since it'd be easy to create lots of characters and just wait for them to reach the age when they are allowed to vote.
Something like a certain amount of hours in game and/or a level might be a better idea, but leaves the question of how to measure/where to save the hours spent in game and it's open to just let your char logged in while being afk to get the amount of hours that's needed.
Also it doesn't prevent sockpuppeting since many people have several alts.

[OnymA]

How about an activity counter ?for example every hour you play you get the chance to push that counter up via npc or i dunno how....

with about 10? 100? 500? 1000 ? "counterpoints" you would gain the ability to vote,

also you could use that counter to award active gameplay for example for 1000 points you would get a present like a lollypop, a special "Activity-hat" or a special item like a coffe bean wich would give you the ability to kick or kill afk-players

the ability to kick or kill afk-players would work this way. when a person was inactive for 10-30 minutes he would get a message, and about 20 seconds time to react to it, when the player is afk and doesn't react he would be killable/kickable, dead players cant participate in the activitycounter(quest?).
Only those with the coffe bean would have the ability to kill or kick

This would remove a possible afk-gain-vote-power-abuse. Or could reduce it...

how about an ipcheckbot for/against sockpuppets removing votes ? Or you get a bigger votepower with every point so it would be unnecessary to create an army of voters, but those who play less would have a disadvantage

Since i am not a programmer and too lazy to learn that stuff i have no idea how to...or if thats possible...

*just wants to kill*

[Chicka-Maria]

Platyna, please lock this thread, and suppress GM polls too; this is just nonsense.

2. You will show you cannot handle this, then this forum will be deleted.

17. If this forum will turn into a flame war cave, people posting here will act unreasonably and will break the rules on massive scale, forum will be closed down. So use it wisely.

in Game and Forum rules:

3. No spamming/flooding (including trade spam).

Hi nard,
though i agree with you that rules should be applied i do not see any of rule 17 around this part of the forums..Neither rule number 2 being broken. Sure people post their opinions on polls/forums and sometimes it can end up in debate with other players, but i dont see a flame war or unreasonable acts. I could be wrong though. Also for the polls that havent been locked yet and are still going and have been for a while, i dont think they should all be locked. Alot of new people join the game and meet the people running and it gives the new people a chance to get to know the person who has been running for GM for a while and still vote for for them. As for people who quit the game I agree those polls should be locked because there is no use for them.

Regards,

[Edit: moved post here because i thought it would be more appropriate]

[Nard]

Monsterpoints are a good activity indicator...if they were not reset with getting the reward. I think skills (focusable ones) are too.
Perhaps could it be possible to cross reference with a forum account too; to limit the alts problem.

[Nard]

i dont see a flame war or unreasonable acts.

There were in the past may I remind you your preceding poll ?( ). And spamming/flooding is against the rules in forum as in game.
I do think that such advices (or nominations?) such as "I vote for John Doe because I'm in a good mood this morning" or "+1" are spam and don't bring anything to a debate about someone's GM abilities. I think the elementary respect for the person whom I post about requires that I say what I think; or I have to shut up. Perhaps the 20 posts rule has to be removed, I don't know; but at the moment it exists and has to be followed with no spam. As I answered to mrgrey:a GM shoud agree with that shouldn't he/she? XD

Edit: moved post here because i thought it would be more appropriate]

You are absolutely right.

[Nard]

Nard: I'm not a big fan of this topic either, but that's at the discretion of Crush afaik, and I respect that. During my poll, a lot of newer players or players without forum accounts began posting a lot to vote, and some didn't like this as it seemed mostly like forum spam. This topic is, while not a great solution, at least a temporarily usable one.

I agree with you and respect Crush's decision too, I am sure that he took it because he did not find a better solution; I have no immediate better one to propose

Lastly: Your request to suppress the GM polls seems a little selfish - the players who have polls running currently wouldn't appreciate their votes being useless, and you've not provided one good reason why they should be suppressed/closed down. I can see your point about this topic to some extent (about the spam topic that is), but wanting the GM polls closed over this is unnecessary - it's not like checking for sockpuppeting in polls is impossible, after all.

I don't see anything selfish in that, I have strictly no interest in keeping or suppressing the poll. More I asked to close "mine" for this reason: I just think it becomes meaningless and unnecessary; a single troll or unjustified affirmation can make several voters to change their vote, thus inverting the tendancy. And I quoted 3 rules that are broken by the spammers; whatever the difficulty to apply these rules, they exist and have to be applied (a GM shoud agree with that shouldn't he? XD) . I just think that, if the poll was suppressed (not the forum), the threads could be more interesting to follow (not sure though).
I don't even imagine that the polls could be stopped immediately and such a decision have a retroactive effect. The actual polls could run until ... (by the way until when?). Passed polls are closed as soon as the result is positive and the other ones run with no limit; this allowed some players to spam-vote on polls started two years ago, for or against players who retired from the game.
An intermediate solution could be to keep the poll, and interpret it as what it is: a poll and not a vote (rule 6 could be adapted to GHP's feelings and needs). Now a poll has to be limited in time to have a significance. Sockpuppetting would become far less useful then .
A vote would suppose a time limited discussion (1 month?), a list of regular voters before the beginning of the discussion, and a short time limited voting period (a couple of days?) to limit frauds to the minimum.

*moved from: http://forums.themanaworld.org/viewtopi ... 3&start=75

[mistergrey]

A time limited poll would fail very badly, for this reason - while we have a fair amount of players, some leave, most new players aren't familiar with the forums, and the problem is that its very rare that in one month enough players to reach a successful poll are online and actively participating in polls.

Chicka's previous poll was not a flame war either - when it comes to discussing a potential GM, even when you're being totally nice, a negative comment can sound insulting. As well, there are always those who will be very mean about it, and even exaggerate to make the candidate look bad. There is a line where this becomes unacceptable... but, since these are critical debates, a certain amount of unpleasantness is unavoidable.

I like some of the suggestions for criteria to vote, but sadly, most of those are just as annoying/full of problems as the current voting system on the forum. Monster points wouldn't be a good indicator, as many people have several alts that grind for long parts of each day, and surely some of those know how to use a proxy ip. Same goes for hours in game, really.

It's an unavoidable fact that one comment can influence the other voters... but this is why there are discussions rather than Just polls. Players are given the choice to share the candidate's good traits, or bad traits, and explain why they think people should vote yes/no. Even the mean or trolling posts can gain someone votes, by how well the candidate answers to them.

[Nard]

A time limited poll would fail very badly, for this reason - while we have a fair amount of players, some leave, most new players aren't familiar with the forums, and the problem is that its very rare that in one month enough players to reach a successful poll are online and actively participating in polls..

Your second poll was a very sort one after the long previous discussion...

[jessyb03]

A time limited poll would be great if there was a way for the community to know about what's happening without looking at the forums. There are a lot of players, specially non English speakers, who have no clue about what's happening outside the game.

In my case, I check the forums almost everyday even when I don't play just to keep up with how things progress.

Hope you guys can find a solution to this!

[Nard]

I'm glad to see that the "spam yourself to 20 posts" thread has been removed, though it will not simplify moderators and admin's task.
I still think that actual GM polls are just polls and not fair election, thus time may have come for GHP to think about new rules set for G.M. nomination.
At least, voters list should be closed just before an election to avoid strong spamming.

[Sunako]

How about ingame requirements ? and/or ingame vote-/system/box/bot ?

-lvl : X
-in game time: Y hours
-vote cost: Z gp

for example:
-lvl 20
-in game time 50h
-vote cost 1000 Monster Points or GP or ...

I as well like this idea very much. First off, it would be similar to the Easter event that just transpired, that effectively nullified the new creation of alts simply for the purpose of getting holiday items with the age and level limit.
The age requirement would force the character to be in-game for a certain period of time, while the level requirement would force the character to interact on some level with the community, and would therefore allow the voter to get to know the candidate and community a little more. I'm not sure if we should base the time requirement on how many hours actually spent in-game, some people play fast, some people socialize more and I'm not sure how difficult it would be in implement a time-in-game counter like this, since so many characters have already been created, while the character age counter is already coded and implemented.

--Sun