Originally posted by Kyleran Not sure why a more obvious solution doesn't have more traction. Strong, active moderation by the people who run the game.
And if we ever find ourselves wondering "what happened to great communities from days of yore", you've just answered the question.
Active moderation is expensive. Strong+active moderation is enormously expensive.
You can't do either with 1:50000 staff ratios. Never could.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Yup you can't moderate general behaviour even if you could afford the costs. Ultimately it's the environment and happiness of the population that determines behaviour. Games that do not reward selfish behaviour for example (e.g shared loot tables) help
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Allowing people to flag positive (only) comments that adds to a score that contributes to a users 'valued member' profile would work IMO. The score deteriorates over time, but you cannot negatively score someone.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Originally posted by Bladestrom Allowing people to flag positive (only) comments that adds to a score that contributes to a users 'valued member' profile would work IMO. The score deteriorates over time, but you cannot negatively score someone.
Kind of like the honor system. I think this is a good direction. Directing players to say what they think is or who they think is good, instead of having them solely focus on who is doing or being bad.
Originally posted by eyelolled Make more sandbox games. Eliminate hostile player interactions. Eliminate chat.
Some but not all of this sites problems would go away if there were a greater diversity in gaming options. Namely more games like EVE, there are plenty of options when it comes to games like WOW. A few well made games that focus on player interaction/community as well as conflict like EVE, would go a long way toward appeasing many of the individuals posting here IMO. Not trying to speak for people, only offering an observation.
Please don't bring EVE into this. EVE's community is one of the most hostile, intolerant ones I've ever been a part of. Oh sure, they're all nice and sweet as long as you 'toe the line' when it comes to political / religious views. However, should you even hint that you believe something contrary to those views, you will be ostracized immediately. Not just that, but station camped, threatened with death, etc. In fact, I was forced to reroll because I let it slip in general chat (very amicably, and just in casual conversation with people whom I thought I knew) that I held a differing opinion.
Sad thing is, I'd formed gangs with some of these people. When I was new, they gave me money and helped me out. Yet they turned on me the second I voiced a differing opinion, without any hope of reconciliation.
Granted it's not the same as sexism / racism because I choose my own beliefs, but I sure as hell shouldn't be getting death threats because of them (unless I were a Klansman or something, although even then it's extreme).
The most damnable thing of all is that I filed tickets with CCP, and presented them with the EVEmails I got threatening my life. What did I get in return? "Oh, use the ignore function"
Yeah. Thanks a fucking lot, CCP.
How about not condeming EVE because of YOUR bad experience either. Despite it being a PvP game where you can run into nasties...like ALL PvP games, there are PLENTY of nice people. Just depends on who you allow yourself to fall in with. I did a lot of 0.0 space time and met some of the nicest and most helpful people.
Who were you with? Goon Squad? Would explain a LOT.
Originally posted by Bladestrom Allowing people to flag positive (only) comments that adds to a score that contributes to a users 'valued member' profile would work IMO. The score deteriorates over time, but you cannot negatively score someone.
Originally posted by Bladestrom Allowing people to flag positive (only) comments that adds to a score that contributes to a users 'valued member' profile would work IMO. The score deteriorates over time, but you cannot negatively score someone.
Kind of like the honor system. I think this is a good direction. Directing players to say what they think is or who they think is good, instead of having them solely focus on who is doing or being bad.
This is not a honor system. If I would voice my opinion that would go against the mainstream idea poeple will not vote for me. Even if it's the best developed and writted opinion around. Yet an unfounded opinion everyone agrees with would get the votes. It would not make the community better, but it would shun those with different opinions and changes are trolls wlll just give points to other trolls. So they even have more points then the guy who discusses extreamly well, but has an different opinion.
Look at Youtube for this. Half the "top" comment are troll post or jokes that are copy pasted around youtube. An other example of this system is Chatroulette.
Decided to try out the new system they implemented. Got one conversation that laster just longer then 10 minutes. The other conversation lasted less then 10 second before they clicked me away. My account got blocked duo to to much bad feedback. If I was called "hotBlondy" and had an image of a good looking women you bet I would not get my account blocked. So I am really against a unregulated system like this.
Also then what? You still have the same "Toxic" elements. They will not rate as good, so then we just disregard the opinion of EVERYONE with a low rating?
Part of why small-scale PvP becomes so elitist and, in LoL's case, toxic for newcomers is because of the skill demand in matches. If one guy fucks up, the whole team may lose. Thats 1/5 in LoL - 20% of your team.(*)
In large scale PvP, no one hardly ever notices if you fuck up. You're just a drop in the sea, your effort is barely measurable. No one holds you accountable. Then again, the downside is that since your contribution is so small, you won't have a chance to "carry" either: There's fewer heroes.
(*) Part of LoL's problem is that you can also lose the match within the first 5 minutes and likely you'll have to wait for atleast another 15 minutes before you can start a new one. Often more than that, because somehow some people think they can win even if the situation is hopeless and refusing to concede the match hence leading into longwinding one-sided matches. A lot of frustration is born this way. And the chat is one place to vent that.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Originally posted by Bladestrom Allowing people to flag positive (only) comments that adds to a score that contributes to a users 'valued member' profile would work IMO. The score deteriorates over time, but you cannot negatively score someone.
It doesn't. Players have already abused a similar system in LoL. It actually improved the community for a week or so, but then it quickly devolved into what it was before. You can grind it up through your friends to a point you give no value to a player who has "friendly" or "teamplayer" tags on their name.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
You can't change the world, but you can change who you game with.
I agree with this to a certain degree (despite the fact that being a soloist suggests some unflattering things about how I must see the rest of humanity). But one of the primary draws of an MMO (or an MMO forum) is that it puts us in contact with strangers - we're all here in this discussion right now because we want to hear and be heard, we want interaction. We just want it in a format we're comfortable with.
So although retreating into my like-minded niche is a solution vs the most toxic environments (I'm still feeling pretty drained from the UO community flamewars even years after I stopped playing), there's another side to the equation. We want to be around people, so how can games better introduce two random people with very different personalities and preferences and give them a world in which they can see each other as a friend, without asking one person or the other to simply assimilate to the other's way of playing/thinking.
I think our view of the gaming community is different from the community as a whole. Gamers who also participate heavily in forums are in the minority (trying to find source, I didnt just make that up).
I also think the more competitive a game is, the worse the community actually is. So if you actively play a game that is also an esport or competitive in nature, then your experience is going to be far worse than that of a person who plays a regular game.
Originally posted by Bladestrom Allowing people to flag positive (only) comments that adds to a score that contributes to a users 'valued member' profile would work IMO. The score deteriorates over time, but you cannot negatively score someone.
It doesn't. Players have already abused a similar system in LoL. It actually improved the community for a week or so, but then it quickly devolved into what it was before. You can grind it up through your friends to a point you give no value to a player who has "friendly" or "teamplayer" tags on their name.
+1
Such a system doesn't identify the best members of the community, it identifies those who are best at gaming the system.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by Bladestrom Allowing people to flag positive (only) comments that adds to a score that contributes to a users 'valued member' profile would work IMO. The score deteriorates over time, but you cannot negatively score someone.
It doesn't. Players have already abused a similar system in LoL. It actually improved the community for a week or so, but then it quickly devolved into what it was before. You can grind it up through your friends to a point you give no value to a player who has "friendly" or "teamplayer" tags on their name.
+1
Such a system doesn't identify the best members of the community, it identifies those who are best at gaming the system.
it doesnt matter, its not about finding the top dogs, they can do that if they wish. What it does offer is a route for genuine posters to genuinly +1 great posts. the author gets the benefit in this case, and why not!
i.e i abuse the system and get 1000 votes. So what, means nothing. However joe blogg posted a great post, and got a +1 for it = Auther of positive post feels rewarded and encouraged to contribute more. Myself with my 1000 votes, hey im going for a million - still means nothing, il end up feeling a bit foolish.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Sometimes you have to get mean to people before they straighten out. I've been guild master in several games, and an officer in just about any guild I join (I guess I'm just a natural leader...or I play way too much and I'm always online, so I get it by default lol). I've noticed over the years people tend to respond easier to negative consequenses instead of positive ones.
In my guild in SWTOR, we had a policy that if you were a good player, you got to get free gear and loot, and you also got to come on operations and such with the guild. Some people responded to this well, however, there were several that wouldn't behave themselves in order to get to do ops with us. They would sit in chat and complain while the "good" members got to go raid. This toxicity spreads and nearly killed the guild (lots of drama). We instituted new policies, with warnings, and temporary op bans, leading upto guild expulsion or even perma-ban. People were much better behaved upon the switch, and as far as I know (as of october) the guild is still doing great and thriving.
I guess to make the majority people behave and not be total idiots you have to treat them like the monkey and sloth in the following video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFqjX9dMJQQ
Why does it need improving? It boils down to whether there are people you like and you can play with. WIth large population, there is always some. Just quit when you meet people you don't like.
Originally posted by Bladestrom Allowing people to flag positive (only) comments that adds to a score that contributes to a users 'valued member' profile would work IMO. The score deteriorates over time, but you cannot negatively score someone.
It doesn't. Players have already abused a similar system in LoL. It actually improved the community for a week or so, but then it quickly devolved into what it was before. You can grind it up through your friends to a point you give no value to a player who has "friendly" or "teamplayer" tags on their name.
+1
Such a system doesn't identify the best members of the community, it identifies those who are best at gaming the system.
it doesnt matter, its not about finding the top dogs, they can do that if they wish. What it does offer is a route for genuine posters to genuinly +1 great posts. the author gets the benefit in this case, and why not!
i.e i abuse the system and get 1000 votes. So what, means nothing. However joe blogg posted a great post, and got a +1 for it = Auther of positive post feels rewarded and encouraged to contribute more. Myself with my 1000 votes, hey im going for a million - still means nothing, il end up feeling a bit foolish.
That only works if the points system means something to them. I can see where you are going with that, but you're talking about a system that would have meaning to very few people, and of those people it may sway the behaviour of a tiny fraction, if at all.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Sometimes you have to get mean to people before they straighten out. I've been guild master in several games, and an officer in just about any guild I join (I guess I'm just a natural leader...or I play way too much and I'm always online, so I get it by default lol). I've noticed over the years people tend to respond easier to negative consequenses instead of positive ones.
In my guild in SWTOR, we had a policy that if you were a good player, you got to get free gear and loot, and you also got to come on operations and such with the guild. Some people responded to this well, however, there were several that wouldn't behave themselves in order to get to do ops with us. They would sit in chat and complain while the "good" members got to go raid. This toxicity spreads and nearly killed the guild (lots of drama). We instituted new policies, with warnings, and temporary op bans, leading upto guild expulsion or even perma-ban. People were much better behaved upon the switch, and as far as I know (as of october) the guild is still doing great and thriving.
I guess to make the majority people behave and not be total idiots you have to treat them like the monkey and sloth in the following video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFqjX9dMJQQ
Based on what you said, you are not a natural leader, so rule that out. If you were, you would know how to communicate to each individual instead of setting up "policies" and if you can't both come to an agreement, you kick them out or shouldn't have guild invited them in the first place.
That is what a real leader does. However, I suspect I know why this isn't being done.
You can't change the world, but you can change who you game with.
I agree with this to a certain degree (despite the fact that being a soloist suggests some unflattering things about how I must see the rest of humanity). But one of the primary draws of an MMO (or an MMO forum) is that it puts us in contact with strangers - we're all here in this discussion right now because we want to hear and be heard, we want interaction. We just want it in a format we're comfortable with.
So although retreating into my like-minded niche is a solution vs the most toxic environments (I'm still feeling pretty drained from the UO community flamewars even years after I stopped playing), there's another side to the equation. We want to be around people, so how can games better introduce two random people with very different personalities and preferences and give them a world in which they can see each other as a friend, without asking one person or the other to simply assimilate to the other's way of playing/thinking.
I guess my point is bad people will be bad if they want to no matter what sort of system you have in place. People could find ways to grief in almost any game if they try hard enough. Developers will do everything in their power to make things safe and friendly, but at the end of the day it is a social problem that cannot be overcome by technical means. I've seen this before in my line of work where people think technology can fix social problems. It just can't! I don't know the solution, but I do know what the solution is not.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
I agree with this to a certain degree (despite the fact that being a soloist suggests some unflattering things about how I must see the rest of humanity). But one of the primary draws of an MMO (or an MMO forum) is that it puts us in contact with strangers - we're all here in this discussion right now because we want to hear and be heard, we want interaction. We just want it in a format we're comfortable with.
So although retreating into my like-minded niche is a solution vs the most toxic environments (I'm still feeling pretty drained from the UO community flamewars even years after I stopped playing), there's another side to the equation. We want to be around people, so how can games better introduce two random people with very different personalities and preferences and give them a world in which they can see each other as a friend, without asking one person or the other to simply assimilate to the other's way of playing/thinking.
There are millions of players. You don't need to make friends with any random players you meet. There are more than enough to make friends with.
The only thing games need to do .. is to make sure you can match up with random people quick, and that you can quit playing with them any time. So you can move on till you find someone you like.
Improving the MMO community is about as possible as improving the weed smokers community, or the gamblers community, or the porno watchers community, or the bar hoppers community. When the only thing that's holding us together is vice, how can we expect us not to show our own vices?
__________________________ "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it." --Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints." --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls." --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
Improving the MMO community is about as possible as improving the weed smokers community, or the gamblers community, or the porno watchers community, or the bar hoppers community. When the only thing that's holding us together is vice, how can we expect us not to show our own vices?
I feel like this should be written down in a book of good quotes somewhere. Thought I would let you know.
Improving the MMO community is about as possible as improving the weed smokers community, or the gamblers community, or the porno watchers community, or the bar hoppers community. When the only thing that's holding us together is vice, how can we expect us not to show our own vices?
Well... At least you didn't mix us in with politicians or banksters... ^^ I personally, wouldn't consider games to be a vice, but then I'm biased.
Improving the MMO community is about as possible as improving the weed smokers community, or the gamblers community, or the porno watchers community, or the bar hoppers community. When the only thing that's holding us together is vice, how can we expect us not to show our own vices?
Indeed! The industry has been working for years to attract more and more people from all walks of life. And now that there are millions of us involved we are finding that as a whole we don't like each other all that much because besides a penchant for self entertainment through gaming, we have little else in common.
Now on the subject of improving the community. The only person who's actions you have any control over is yourself. Don't like how the gaming, or any other community is going? Police yourself. Don't let yourself be sucked into fights you don't want. The main thing a person out to ruin your good time online craves is your attention. Deny them that and they starve.
Stop supporting bullies, see one of them abusing another player, refuse to play with them, and this goes for everyone, not just the poor person being attacked. If someone is obnoxious in chat, use the ignore feature, encourge others you know to do likewise.
If you are unwilling to do this and instead decide to try to beat them at their own game, you've just given them power over you and have lost. Not to mention every time you do this you are helping to make your community that much more toxic.
In short your community is what you make of it. Not what you let others make you make of it.
If you dont do stupid things while youre young, youll have nothing to smile about when youre old.
Comments
And if we ever find ourselves wondering "what happened to great communities from days of yore", you've just answered the question.
Active moderation is expensive. Strong+active moderation is enormously expensive.
You can't do either with 1:50000 staff ratios. Never could.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Kind of like the honor system. I think this is a good direction. Directing players to say what they think is or who they think is good, instead of having them solely focus on who is doing or being bad.
How about not condeming EVE because of YOUR bad experience either. Despite it being a PvP game where you can run into nasties...like ALL PvP games, there are PLENTY of nice people. Just depends on who you allow yourself to fall in with. I did a lot of 0.0 space time and met some of the nicest and most helpful people.
Who were you with? Goon Squad? Would explain a LOT.
Good idea too.
This is not a honor system. If I would voice my opinion that would go against the mainstream idea poeple will not vote for me. Even if it's the best developed and writted opinion around. Yet an unfounded opinion everyone agrees with would get the votes. It would not make the community better, but it would shun those with different opinions and changes are trolls wlll just give points to other trolls. So they even have more points then the guy who discusses extreamly well, but has an different opinion.
Look at Youtube for this. Half the "top" comment are troll post or jokes that are copy pasted around youtube. An other example of this system is Chatroulette.
Decided to try out the new system they implemented. Got one conversation that laster just longer then 10 minutes. The other conversation lasted less then 10 second before they clicked me away. My account got blocked duo to to much bad feedback. If I was called "hotBlondy" and had an image of a good looking women you bet I would not get my account blocked. So I am really against a unregulated system like this.
Also then what? You still have the same "Toxic" elements. They will not rate as good, so then we just disregard the opinion of EVERYONE with a low rating?
Part of why small-scale PvP becomes so elitist and, in LoL's case, toxic for newcomers is because of the skill demand in matches. If one guy fucks up, the whole team may lose. Thats 1/5 in LoL - 20% of your team.(*)
In large scale PvP, no one hardly ever notices if you fuck up. You're just a drop in the sea, your effort is barely measurable. No one holds you accountable. Then again, the downside is that since your contribution is so small, you won't have a chance to "carry" either: There's fewer heroes.
(*) Part of LoL's problem is that you can also lose the match within the first 5 minutes and likely you'll have to wait for atleast another 15 minutes before you can start a new one. Often more than that, because somehow some people think they can win even if the situation is hopeless and refusing to concede the match hence leading into longwinding one-sided matches. A lot of frustration is born this way. And the chat is one place to vent that.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
It doesn't. Players have already abused a similar system in LoL. It actually improved the community for a week or so, but then it quickly devolved into what it was before. You can grind it up through your friends to a point you give no value to a player who has "friendly" or "teamplayer" tags on their name.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
I agree with this to a certain degree (despite the fact that being a soloist suggests some unflattering things about how I must see the rest of humanity). But one of the primary draws of an MMO (or an MMO forum) is that it puts us in contact with strangers - we're all here in this discussion right now because we want to hear and be heard, we want interaction. We just want it in a format we're comfortable with.
So although retreating into my like-minded niche is a solution vs the most toxic environments (I'm still feeling pretty drained from the UO community flamewars even years after I stopped playing), there's another side to the equation. We want to be around people, so how can games better introduce two random people with very different personalities and preferences and give them a world in which they can see each other as a friend, without asking one person or the other to simply assimilate to the other's way of playing/thinking.
I think our view of the gaming community is different from the community as a whole. Gamers who also participate heavily in forums are in the minority (trying to find source, I didnt just make that up).
I also think the more competitive a game is, the worse the community actually is. So if you actively play a game that is also an esport or competitive in nature, then your experience is going to be far worse than that of a person who plays a regular game.
+1
Such a system doesn't identify the best members of the community, it identifies those who are best at gaming the system.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
it doesnt matter, its not about finding the top dogs, they can do that if they wish. What it does offer is a route for genuine posters to genuinly +1 great posts. the author gets the benefit in this case, and why not!
i.e i abuse the system and get 1000 votes. So what, means nothing. However joe blogg posted a great post, and got a +1 for it = Auther of positive post feels rewarded and encouraged to contribute more. Myself with my 1000 votes, hey im going for a million - still means nothing, il end up feeling a bit foolish.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Sometimes you have to get mean to people before they straighten out. I've been guild master in several games, and an officer in just about any guild I join (I guess I'm just a natural leader...or I play way too much and I'm always online, so I get it by default lol). I've noticed over the years people tend to respond easier to negative consequenses instead of positive ones.
In my guild in SWTOR, we had a policy that if you were a good player, you got to get free gear and loot, and you also got to come on operations and such with the guild. Some people responded to this well, however, there were several that wouldn't behave themselves in order to get to do ops with us. They would sit in chat and complain while the "good" members got to go raid. This toxicity spreads and nearly killed the guild (lots of drama). We instituted new policies, with warnings, and temporary op bans, leading upto guild expulsion or even perma-ban. People were much better behaved upon the switch, and as far as I know (as of october) the guild is still doing great and thriving.
I guess to make the majority people behave and not be total idiots you have to treat them like the monkey and sloth in the following video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFqjX9dMJQQ
Why does it need improving? It boils down to whether there are people you like and you can play with. WIth large population, there is always some. Just quit when you meet people you don't like.
You can't improve humans.
That only works if the points system means something to them. I can see where you are going with that, but you're talking about a system that would have meaning to very few people, and of those people it may sway the behaviour of a tiny fraction, if at all.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Based on what you said, you are not a natural leader, so rule that out. If you were, you would know how to communicate to each individual instead of setting up "policies" and if you can't both come to an agreement, you kick them out or shouldn't have guild invited them in the first place.
That is what a real leader does. However, I suspect I know why this isn't being done.
I will expand if you'd like.I guess my point is bad people will be bad if they want to no matter what sort of system you have in place. People could find ways to grief in almost any game if they try hard enough. Developers will do everything in their power to make things safe and friendly, but at the end of the day it is a social problem that cannot be overcome by technical means. I've seen this before in my line of work where people think technology can fix social problems. It just can't! I don't know the solution, but I do know what the solution is not.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
There are millions of players. You don't need to make friends with any random players you meet. There are more than enough to make friends with.
The only thing games need to do .. is to make sure you can match up with random people quick, and that you can quit playing with them any time. So you can move on till you find someone you like.
Improving the MMO community is about as possible as improving the weed smokers community, or the gamblers community, or the porno watchers community, or the bar hoppers community. When the only thing that's holding us together is vice, how can we expect us not to show our own vices?
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
I feel like this should be written down in a book of good quotes somewhere. Thought I would let you know.
Well... At least you didn't mix us in with politicians or banksters... ^^ I personally, wouldn't consider games to be a vice, but then I'm biased.
Indeed! The industry has been working for years to attract more and more people from all walks of life. And now that there are millions of us involved we are finding that as a whole we don't like each other all that much because besides a penchant for self entertainment through gaming, we have little else in common.
Now on the subject of improving the community. The only person who's actions you have any control over is yourself. Don't like how the gaming, or any other community is going? Police yourself. Don't let yourself be sucked into fights you don't want. The main thing a person out to ruin your good time online craves is your attention. Deny them that and they starve.
Stop supporting bullies, see one of them abusing another player, refuse to play with them, and this goes for everyone, not just the poor person being attacked. If someone is obnoxious in chat, use the ignore feature, encourge others you know to do likewise.
If you are unwilling to do this and instead decide to try to beat them at their own game, you've just given them power over you and have lost. Not to mention every time you do this you are helping to make your community that much more toxic.
In short your community is what you make of it. Not what you let others make you make of it.
If you dont do stupid things while youre young, youll have nothing to smile about when youre old.