Jump to content

mactrent

PC Member
  • Content Count

    157
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

92

About mactrent

  • Rank
    Gold Novice

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. And the fact remains, when the bot does it, it is not. As noted in the original post, the vast majority of moderation actions are done by the bot. Perhaps most of those are warranted, and perhaps most of the unwarranted ones are only a brief kick and not a suspension, but it's not perfect, and mistakes will be made. The question is whether and how to improve on it. Reasons have been stated for why making [part of] the bot's configuration public might be an improvement, and reasons have been stated for why making [all/a large part of] the bot's configuration public might be damaging. Seems to me there's quite a bit of room for more transparency there without risking the stated downsides, but that's my opinion. That's how it should be, but this whole update to the chat moderation system became necessary because that was not always [perceived to be] the case, perhaps especially in recent months. The perception is important, so making visible changes is important. --- The fact that the changes to moderator selection, oversight and retention have stopped short of letting [some particular] old moderators go does not mean there wasn't improvement. The fact that there was improvement doesn't mean there's no room for more. Airing the past's dirty laundry in public has been tried, but DE has yet to respond to that, so it seems like a non-starter; we can only try to make sure future infringements of the [newly/slightly clarified] moderator code will be reported and acted on. Toward that end, I'll echo that the requirement for an opinion to be 'constructive' is just a little too broad to allow a moderator to disrespect a player for holding it. Let's place that particular bar a little bit higher, shall we? --- It seems important to note that the chat moderator page prohibits the moderator from doing certain things, such as using 'Any racist, sexist, homophobic, or transphobic terms', which puts the onus on the moderator to make blah-self aware of those terms. That's perfectly reasonable for a community representative. This same onus is on the players themselves in regards to race (where slurs and stereotypes are explicitly actionable), but not to this: ...so: if you're attacking individual players, you're gonna be moderated (duh) if you're making more broad malicious statements, against 'people that do/think <x>', you're gonna be moderated if you're knowingly bypassing the filters to try and say things that you know are slurs, you're gonna be moderated BUT if you just straight up say something that is considered (by whom?) to be a sexual slur, that's NOT on the human-moderation list That's a pretty big oversight, especially with recent events, to just gloss over. Please don't just leave it at "we said it's non-exhaustive" in regards to this. I think that 'sexual slurs or pejoratives' should also be on that list if there's gonna be moderation based on them (outside the context of attacks or almost-spellings). If that moderation is handled by a bot, instead of humans, that only solidifies the point. "Modified at our sole discretion" shouldn't mean "configured to enforce additional rules we didn't bother to tell you about." "Nezha is gay" is a useless and annoying thing to say, but doesn't match your current guidelines as actionable. "Traps are gay" is a stupid and hurtful meme, and should absolutely trigger the bot, if not human moderation. "A Gay Guy Plays" is the name of one of your partners, not a slur. "You are gay" is often meant as an insult, but "I am gay" is a neutral statement about oneself. If you're gonna have the word trigger the bot across all contexts, then at least include [potential] sexual slurs in the list of actionable items. Humans being over-zealous in defining what a slur is, is a problem. The bot being similarly over-zealous, with no feedback and with the only faintest idea of context, is a much bigger one. If you solve the problem of slurs by not addressing it, and secretly changing the bot, you do so at the cost of severe damage to your credibility.
  2. The sarcasm is unwarranted and unhelpful. You're on XB1, which probably has different norms, but practically nobody uses voice chat here on PC. Clan-mates use Discord or similar. Randoms using voice chat are extremely rare, and even more rare is for someone else to respond to them in kind. Usually if there's one person talking, there are at least two who only answer via text... which nobody banned from chat can read.
  3. I know random is as random does, and thanks for reducing some of the potential pain, but this particular change hasn't helped me at all. I have probably all the gyromag and even repeller systems I need from doing these bounties repeatedly (mostly the orb fight, feedback on that below), and I still don't even have enough Atmo systems to rank up to Hand with the Vox Solaris. And which rank do I have to be in order to buy them using my toroids (standing) in the first place? Bingo. Maybe make them available at different ranks, so that buying the systems you need for the next rank with standing is always a viable option? It gives a solid, achievable grind forward, with any drops you get from the bounties feeling like a bonus or boost, rather than a hard requirement. --- I do quite like the orb fight as it is now; the bounce-shields are easily avoided with constant vigilance, the staggers feel fairly reasonable, and I can usually avoid the need to hunt down a Fluctus-wielder to replenish my arch-gun. I still go with Nezha to protect myself from procs and staggers, and so that I can pop my arch-gun in the middle of the battlefield with relative safety. Regarding arch-gun ammo, I'm sure it's impossible to ensure there's always an enemy of a certain type available, with players mowing down so many of them in a short time. Possible solution: if my arch-gun is on cool-down when the orb is vulnerable, then highlight any arch-weapon ammo in the area, in case my teammates have already killed the muckers. Also, if there's a direct way to tell whether the orb's damage vulnerability type has been reset by a fellow Tenno rather than the damage or time maxing out, that could be a boon for saving communication in pub squads. I haven't been able to detect a difference in the visual effects while playing solo, but perhaps I just missed it?
  4. I think what various responses in this thread are missing is that the Tenno on Windows 7 pre-Service Pack 1 are running a version that doesn't get security updates anymore, just like Windows XP. Windows 7 with Service Pack 1, which is a free update that fixes far more things than it breaks still has security and stability updates for at least another year. I can think of no valid reason why a networked computer should have Windows 7 without SP1. Relatedly, DE is looking to end Windows XP support SoonTM, which will open the door for broader use of newer Windows APIs.
×
×
  • Create New...