forums.rs

Forums

Option to mute F2P guests?

Quick find code: 86-87-908-65778207

of 13
Lisaa
Jun Member 2014

Lisaa

Posts: 7,018 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Performs said :
if I run a members only pvm clan no f2p are going to be accepted to the clan, unless members have alts that go f2p sometimes that would be added to the cc not guests so it would just keep potential trolls out, My answer to you is this, particularly the recolored parts:

Fire Hawk154 said :
...we've never had the need to not let P2P or ex-P2P players guest around, even if they can never become a member of the clan. Why? Because they're just people looking for a talk.
I don't see any reason why membership status would affect whether you can or cannot talk to someone
. You may not be able to talk about a lot of RuneScape, but there's a million more subjects in the world that aren't affected in the slightest by membership status.......
I think it's fundamentally wrong to separate an entire group based on the misbehaviour of a select few
...... Some F2P players are bad, but
why the f*** does anyone in their right mind think it is okay to punish an entire group of people who have nothing to do with it, solely on their status?
@Lisaa_RS - Followed by @Runescape
FashionScapers - a 9000+ Member Discord Community | https://discord.gg/fashionscape

14-Apr-2016 13:34:37

Scret
Mar Member 2018

Scret

Posts: 25,434 Sapphire Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Support

For the people not supporting: Its not discrimination and you DONT have to use it in YOUR clans.
`*•.¸(*•.¸(`*•.¸+¸.•*´)¸.•*)¸.•*´
+«´¨`•°
SKILL SCHOOL
•´¨`»+
. .•*(¸.•*´(¸.•*´+`*•.¸)`*•.¸)*•.

15-Apr-2016 10:53:07 - Last edited on 15-Apr-2016 10:56:33 by Scret

Scret
Mar Member 2018

Scret

Posts: 25,434 Sapphire Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Fire Hawk154 said :
Dave Mercer said :
Would be a useful tool. especially for all member only clans. So all clans will benefit and doesn't sound like a big job to do.

My F2P skilling clan is a F2P only clan, yet we've never had the need to not let P2P or ex-P2P players guest around, even if they can never become a member of the clan. Why? Because they're just people looking for a talk. I don't see any reason why membership status would affect whether you can or cannot talk to someone. You may not be able to talk about a lot of RuneScape, but there's a million more subjects in the world that aren't affected in the slightest by membership status. It's also easy to make rules what to and what not to talk about.


I think it's fundamentally wrong to separate an entire group based on the misbehaviour of a select few, as that's what's happening here. It's pretty much "oh 100% of the bots start in F2P, let's remove all F2P from the hiscores and tell them years later it has become a members benefit" all over again. Some F2P players are bad, but why the f*** does anyone in their right mind think it is okay to punish an entire group of people who have nothing to do with it, solely on their status.

The real problem is a couple of people abusing the ability to make F2P accounts to spam clan chats. Those are the people who should be punished on their main accounts. IP-bans and anti-flood mechanics would already make a difference.

Peple dont create p2p accounts to spam and abuse chats, are you totally missing the point here?

No one is condemning the F2P community its just a fact that people create f2p accounts to spam chats, cmon people get a bloody grip.
`*•.¸(*•.¸(`*•.¸+¸.•*´)¸.•*)¸.•*´
+«´¨`•°
SKILL SCHOOL
•´¨`»+
. .•*(¸.•*´(¸.•*´+`*•.¸)`*•.¸)*•.

15-Apr-2016 11:03:53 - Last edited on 15-Apr-2016 11:05:41 by Scret

Fire Hawk154

Fire Hawk154

Posts: 9,001 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Scret said :
Peple dont create p2p accounts to spam and abuse chats, are you totally missing the point here?

No one is condemning the F2P community its just a fact that people create f2p accounts to spam chats, cmon people get a bloody grip.

I'm not missing the point, I just totally disagree with the embarrassing solution given. It's basic populist logic involving an "easy" solution that always harms a minority. Now let's formulate the problem and break it down to little pieces:
RuneScape players make multiple F2P accounts to spam clan chats.
1) Players can make a ton of accounts with ease
2) A newly made account can join a clan chat very fast
3) It's easy to spam a clan chat
4) A player can rejoin a clan chat after being kicked on a different account

Now we have 4 problems we can tackle and each of them will help reducing the problem of spammers massively, without having to put aside an entire group of players who have nothing to do with this misbehaviour.


Scret said :
For the people not supporting: Its not discrimination and you DONT have to use it in YOUR clans.
Discrimination is treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing is perceived to belong to rather than on individual merit.

If you want to block a lot of people from your clan chat solely based on the misbehaviour of a few other people who belong to the same category (F2P), you are discriminating.
Clan Europe Staff
|
Clan Cup Winners
|
Maxed Pure F2P

15-Apr-2016 11:38:19 - Last edited on 15-Apr-2016 11:56:36 by Fire Hawk154

Lisaa
Jun Member 2014

Lisaa

Posts: 7,018 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Scret said :
Its not discrimination and you DONT have to use it in YOUR clans. It is discrimination if the option to do it exists and clans actually use it, which several people here have said they would. I might be about to blow this out of proportions, but I'm going to use a really extreme example to prove a point.

If a sign outside a business says "Whites Only," then that's obviously discriminatory. By the standard you're using , you could argue that the "Whites Only" sign isn't discriminatory because you don't have to use that business and don't have to have the same sign on your store.

It's wrong, it's segregating people, and it's totally unnecessary. Don't block out a segment of the population because of your prejudice against them, just block out the actual troublemakers. @Lisaa_RS - Followed by @Runescape
FashionScapers - a 9000+ Member Discord Community | https://discord.gg/fashionscape

15-Apr-2016 14:08:25 - Last edited on 15-Apr-2016 14:10:07 by Lisaa

Esploratore
Apr Member 2006

Esploratore

Posts: 1,675 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
No support.

Blocking all F2P would not only prevent the ones who cause trouble from entering but every F2P. That's not right.

More specific report options related to clans is a first step to discouraging trollishness. The system needs to actually consistently punish those who get their kicks out of harassing and attempting to make others miserable. We'd have fewer problems with troublemakers if they knew there were actual consequences for their behaviour.

This has been an issue for at least seven years and probably was going on before that, too. It will continue as long as the trolls know they can get away with it. But banishing all F2P from clan chats isn't the best answer.

Edit: I realize this is asking for a mute option. I've always viewed not being able to talk In a CHAT as being equivalent to not being able to enter. Someone who is muted isn't able to fully participate.

15-Apr-2016 16:29:29 - Last edited on 15-Apr-2016 16:37:21 by Esploratore

Sicariu
Feb Member 2011

Sicariu

Posts: 9,648 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
I normally don't like to get involved in situations like this, but I feel I need to say something.

I feel the term "discrimination" is being used out of context here, and just want to ask,

To those against this suggestion:

Do you really think its discriminatory for a P2P only clan to restrict F2P players from Guesting?
Is it discriminatory to restrict F2P players from joining a P2P only clan too?
There are P2P only clans who use that standard of "P2P only" for clan members and Guests
There are P2P only clans that kick members who lose their membership status. Is that not ok?
Most clans who don't allow F2P Guests already treat them as KOS. Is this an issue?
What do F2P players miss out on by not being allowed to Guest/Speak in P2P only clans?

Disregarding activeness, there are currently 122,604 clans listed on the HiScores, so plenty of other viable options for choosing a clan to join or guest in exist.

As a Leader in a P2P only PvM clan, I see the perspective of why this would be wanted, but I don't support this solely because I feel it would be a waste of development time.

The time spent implementing a system that toggles F2P from being allowed to Guest/Speak in a Clan Chat should be spent on the Guest White-List that's been suggested multiple times.

A White-List would be of a greater benefit to clans who have regular Guests and need to deal with ruthless trolls where locking the CC is not an option. ~ Sicariu
Leader of
No Sigil No Sleep
- founded 1 April 2013
Need Clan Help ?

15-Apr-2016 16:42:12 - Last edited on 15-Apr-2016 16:50:16 by Sicariu

Scret
Mar Member 2018

Scret

Posts: 25,434 Sapphire Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Fire Hawk154 said :
Scret said :
Peple dont create p2p accounts to spam and abuse chats, are you totally missing the point here?

No one is condemning the F2P community its just a fact that people create f2p accounts to spam chats, cmon people get a bloody grip.

I'm not missing the point, I just totally disagree with the embarrassing solution given. It's basic populist logic involving an "easy" solution that always harms a minority. Now let's formulate the problem and break it down to little pieces:
RuneScape players make multiple F2P accounts to spam clan chats.
1) Players can make a ton of accounts with ease
2) A newly made account can join a clan chat very fast
3) It's easy to spam a clan chat
4) A player can rejoin a clan chat after being kicked on a different account

Now we have 4 problems we can tackle and each of them will help reducing the problem of spammers massively, without having to put aside an entire group of players who have nothing to do with this misbehaviour.


Scret said :
For the people not supporting: Its not discrimination and you DONT have to use it in YOUR clans.
Discrimination is treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing is perceived to belong to rather than on individual merit.

If you want to block a lot of people from your clan chat solely based on the misbehaviour of a few other people who belong to the same category (F2P), you are discriminating.

If you dont like it then dont use it? lol, it will still be a useful thing to have.

People just want to help stop spammers not discriminate against f2pers get a grip.
`*•.¸(*•.¸(`*•.¸+¸.•*´)¸.•*)¸.•*´
+«´¨`•°
SKILL SCHOOL
•´¨`»+
. .•*(¸.•*´(¸.•*´+`*•.¸)`*•.¸)*•.

15-Apr-2016 16:42:22 - Last edited on 15-Apr-2016 16:45:30 by Scret

Electric
May Member 2023

Electric

Posts: 2,922 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
The only issue here is that OP's thread and point is poorly worded and constructed, and is what's causing a lot of misunderstandings in the process. This is because he is approaching the problem from a generalising angle with an attempt to create a solution which blocks a whole group based on an issue with a few individuals he is facing, and the whole thing as a result is coming off to some as discriminatory. I'm sure if the title was 'Option to configure chat joining requirements' instead, the reaction would've been different. Also, what's the purpose in joining if they are muted? They can either join or not, but there shouldn't be selective muting based on a group rather than an individual basis.

It's not discriminatory to be able to configure joining and entry requirements. Using the analogy above, the same could be said about an F2P player walking up to a gate and trying to enter it, only to be met with a 'this area is for members only' message. It's just specified members' territory, which also extends to chats and clans based around these members areas, items or activities.

If we're really tackling or assuming it's a discrimination issue, then the problem lies in clans having and enforcing strict P2P entry requirements in the first place (which could also be said about total level requirements, combat requirements, gear requirements and the list goes on). A simple option or toggle to support that only makes it technical and easier to apply said/selected requirements, but isn't the problem itself (if such a problem existed). It wouldn't be an option that all-inclusive clans (P2P & F2P, or P2P who don't mind F2P) would be interested in.
Progressive
|
Portables
|
PvMing FC
|
SAPK

15-Apr-2016 16:50:48

Quick find code: 86-87-908-65778207 Back to Top