Funcom empower us to moderate our servers

[Narelle]

They can’t install Pippi because it is not just a heatmap mod. It provides a lot more than that and they will have to fully support that mod and make sure it works flawlessly. Have you asked its author if he even wants to sell his mod? What if they can’t agree on the terms?

Pippi takes all the info from the game.db. There are other admin map tools that can be used and I am sure Funcom is more than capable of creating their own script to extract the data they need from the database.

If they need to bring the servers for a weekly maintenance to wipe the spam, they should. Many games have scheduled weekly downtime for updates and maintenance.

[Mikey]

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

[dorizzdt]

the discussion is moot as the real ask of the day is “well if you can’t be bothered to do something, give us the power to do so”. There’s the flaw in the design.

Funcom for whatever reason isn’t clear to anyone really have made a stand to not get involved in servers unless …well…nobody is even clear on that “unless” part. There are reports of them getting involved sometimes but mostly not at all. When they do get involved, the servers been already wiped by a cancerous set of player and everyones just moved on.

So breaking the circuit, the question remains open as if Funcom don’t want to be involved, players clearly want them to involved…then whats the plan.

@Ignasi … whats the plan. Dynamic mesh protection system… we can all say outloud in a healthy way, this will not stop them no matter how far along the tech may appear to be…it just will not. You’re dealing with players who are smarter, more aggressive and focused on cheating here.

Whats the plan beyond a dynamic mesh protection system. What’s the plan beyond citing a vague highy subjective “Terms of Conduct” link - which by the way doesn’t cover you in the way you think it does.

For example: If you want to report an infraction in any of our official servers, please contact us via Direct Message in our forums.

The keywords are “If you want to” … not “you must” …so any discussions about cheating and so forth aren’t required by the author to follow the process… only if they want to. There are actually no terms covered in this forum that explicitedly forbid anyone from discussing cheating and various behaviours. Discussing is different from showing “how to” mind you. Discussions rarerly discuss how an exploit is used but the results of what happens (ie screenshots of them under the mesh etc). Lately the team has been over-reaching their moderation powers here at the mere sight of the word “undermesh”… but in actuality, no rules have been broken.

So whats the plan… 2.1 doesn’t appear to have Siptah in its sighs for the dynamic meshing. @Ignasi said so himself with:

• The above entails the Exiled lands. We have received very little feedback about Siptah, but based on our current findings, the feature is not in a good spot right now to enable so it will require more work.

Which i take to the meaning it won’t be released in 2.1 and sounds like at minimum 2.2 (which is end of year) or worse 2.3 …

In the meantime… whats the plan. I am seeing empty servers now, whats the plan?

Thats all we want… a plan… a simple best idea of they day plan from Funcom. No more obsecure links to other posts that don’t answer the question but give you the notion that somehow “thats the answer” when its just a dead end link. No more citing rules misintepreted as if to say “you did something bad” …or read this … i have read it… have you ? as i don’t think you have ?

No more go to this private process that results no action either.

What is the plan?

[NORfem]

What you would do, Can’t be written here. Neither what you have done. so step lightly.

And too OP, terrible idea.

[GodlyVoice]

I have no idea what you’re talking about

[NORfem]

Let’s leave it at that then

[Baiganx]

This could easily get abused. I’d just be happy with seeing more of a Funcom presence on some of these Off. servers, or reducing the number of Off. servers and increasing the allowed player cap on them.

[Taemien]

From the very link you provided:

There has been controversy over both the ethics and scientific rigor of the Stanford prison experiment since nearly the beginning, and it has never been successfully replicated.

And then you can read from that point further to see how much of a failure the experiment was. You also didn’t take the premise of the experiment into account when using it as an analogy.

To put it shortly, the Stanford Prison Experiment should not be used for any sort of comparison in an argument. It was a flawed exercise no matter which way you look at it.

There’s a lot of reasons and arguments to be made why self governing servers won’t work. But this is not one of them.

[Taemien]

There’s no debate to be had, I posted a fact. From your own link. If you didn’t want facts posted from your own source. Don’t post the content.

If you want me to retract my statement, retract yours.

[dorizzdt]

If you really want to get into the pscyhology in this space, may want to look into The Dynamics of Transference - Sigmund Freud.

It will blow your minds on how easily people cling to leadership for reasons not entirely because of merit. Emotional conditioning is something to be wary of.

[Ignasi]

Hey there,

We already offer the possibility to moderate your own servers via private hosting, either with rented servers or via the Dedicated Server launcher tool (on PC).
On official servers, that is not going to happen, however, as the legal and logistical implications of having players (or even employees) external to the company are too complicated to even start enumerating.