Forced emotes - worse than ever

[Dworin]

At the very least, let's put an end to that whole *Oh, those poor verbally abused forced emote users" foolishness. The deed can be advanced legitimately, though maybe it takes longer, by casting the emotes in a mutually agreed upon setting. But casting the forced emotes on strangers who do not want to be disrupted by the forced emote amounts to a violation of rule number one, whether Turbine GMs enforce the rule or not.

No matter how responsibly you *think* you are acting, if you are casting forced emotes on strangers who don't want to be disrupted by them, then don't claim innocence as though you are just playing within the rules. You are not.

[SalionOfBrothers]

My statement still stands. As someone who is opposing society and the governing body, you should be the one to change your reactions, not other people to change their actions.

I see you live in England, so perhaps things are different there. Here in the US, if you do not like something allowed by the governing body, you work hard to get the governing body to change things. Therefor the reason for these threads.

[Rampagingdeath]

<snip> But casting the forced emotes on strangers who do not want to be disrupted by the forced emote amounts to a violation of rule number one, <snip>

In the strictest sense it does not, as intended by Turbine, forced emotes are not an exploit or hack, they are there because Turbine put them there, using them - even if it's in a way which some find unacceptable - is using them as intended by Turbine. If the reality was any different then Turbine would be taking action in response to the reports that people say they've been making would they not?

[Furrbawl]

Putting someone on your ignore list is an acceptable reaction.

Being verbally abusive to someone (as advocated by some people in this thread) isn't an acceptable reaction.

Why not?

In my opinion, using a Forced Emote on me when I am crafting is being abusive. Why is one player allowed to be abusive and the player being abused is not supposed to react?

[SalionOfBrothers]

Why not?

In my opinion, using a Forced Emote on me when I am crafting is being abusive. Why is one player allowed to be abusive and the player being abused is not supposed to react?

The attitude seems to be, its ok for the emoter to be abusive, but not the emotee. We are just to stand (or lie) there and take it. You know do as I say instead of as I do. They have no consideration or empathy of others

[Dworin]

In the strictest sense it does not, as intended by Turbine, forced emotes are not an exploit or hack, they are there because Turbine put them there, using them - even if it's in a way which some find unacceptable - is using them as intended by Turbine. If the reality was any different then Turbine would be taking action in response to the reports that people say they've been making would they not?

It is a violation. Any action taken by player "A" which prevents player "B" from playing and enjoying the game as intended by Turbine is a violation of rule number 1. As to why Turbine doesn't act, or why the GMs don't enforce the rules, you'll have to ask them.

[manstan]

"Instead of putting your energy into discussing issues amongst yourselves start talking to Turbine and their community managers Sapience and Celestrata. They are the ones whose task it is to bring forth issues of the playerbase to the actual game developers and thus they are your address to turn to." Glenwin

Go back to one of my earlier posts where I said "I don't argue to change my opponents opinion but to sway the opinion of the reader". Whom do you think those readers are?

"The best way to get a response is to send them a PM." Glenwin

Wouldn't that be like running up to a fireman battling a blaze to tell them the building is on fire?

Take in to account many people just like to argue; well more like impromptu debate. As heated as this thread may read I doubt many of us are really worked up about it. {Yes, in high-school I did have several awards for this debate category}

"We don't need Turbine to change the policy on griefing. We just need Turbine to start enforcing their existing rules." Gripn

Agree

"Here in the US, if you do not like something allowed by the governing body, you work hard to get the governing body to change things." SalionOfBrothers

That only works in theory. I could site a good example from the town I live it but this might get lengthy with out it.


" If the reality was any different then Turbine would be taking action in response to the reports that people say they've been making would they not?" Rampagingdeath

No. Like politics there is a lot more to it then you see.

Recently While playing my female elf gaurdian, I had to jump to the prancing pony via milestone, then needed to grab a horse at the west side stables. I often have my characters walk in town. Practically from the start some dufus newbie decide it would be fun to run circles around my walking character. They did this from the prancing pony to the stable, where I left them.
Was this person in violation of rule 1? I think so. It was quite annoying.
Was it greifing? I wouldn't call it that; I would call the person doing it quite a few things though.
Did I say anything in chat? No, this was obviously some one screaming for attention and I wasn't about to give it too them.
Would I have done anything in retaliation if I could have? Depends, it would have been hilarious if my character could have stuck their foot out to trip them.

[Beorthnoth]

I see you live in England, so perhaps things are different there. Here in the US, if you do not like something allowed by the governing body, you work hard to get the governing body to change things. Therefor the reason for these threads.

As we sometimes say here in England, if voting changed anything, they'd ban it. But we're an old and cynical nation, while you still have a reservoir of idealism still to lose

[whheydt]

In the strictest sense it does not, as intended by Turbine, forced emotes are not an exploit or hack, they are there because Turbine put them there, using them - even if it's in a way which some find unacceptable - is using them as intended by Turbine. If the reality was any different then Turbine would be taking action in response to the reports that people say they've been making would they not?

Not necessarily. Turbine has been known to leave widely known exploits in their games so long as the exploits don't actually break anything. It's a matter of priorities...which fixes are *needed* and which fixes are merely nice to have, and budgeting developer time accordingly.

To some degree, Turbine can influence player choices through judicious use of their disciplinary measures. Word gets around, "Don't do that or you'll get banned," is--for most people (there are always exceptions)--a pretty effective message. This is why some of us file harassment tickets more readily than others. If Turbine would actually enforce Rule #1 (as cited in this thread) against people that use forced emotes on the unwilling, there would be a lot less of it even without sterner measures like code changes....probably.

Another major factor to these threads is to raise the priority for getting a permanent and *effective* fix for this problem, in the form of an "opt out" option.

I have no doubt that, by now, the Forum moderators are heartily sick of dealing with these threads. One can only hope that they--and their managers--have realized that these threads aren't going to stop, nor will people cease creating new threads, unless and until something permanent and effective is added to LoTRO. This makes the threads--as a thorn in the moderators sides--just another lever to move Turbine to make the "opt out" a higher priority fix.

Really, in many respects, these threads are a means to transfer the players annoyance with the forced emotes to being an annoyance to Turbine, with the intention being for Turbine to remove both our annoyance and their own by either providing an "opt out" or just removing the forced emotes altogether.

--W. H. Heydt

Old Used Programmer

[Hessli]

Glad you brought that up. Since Turbine intended for me to be able to /dance at a concert, yet player "A" can come along and knock my character to the ground with a forced emote, effectively stopping me from playing and enjoying the game as intended by Turbine, doesn't that mean player "A" is in violation of rule number one? Of course it does.

Turbine's intended gameplay includes you receiving forced emotes from other players, regardless of situation.

So no, person A is not in violation of the rule. If anything you are the one breaking it as you aren't respecting them for playing the game as Turbine intended.

I can absolutely see why people don't agree with Turbine's intended gameplay in this instance, and support them with lobbying against them to change it.

But the "player As" are just following rule #1 and playing the game as Turbine intended, so do not deserve criticism.

[Dworin]

Turbine's intended gameplay includes you receiving forced emotes from other players, regardless of situation.

So no, person A is not in violation of the rule.

Turbine gives player "A" the tools but does not tell him how to use them, except not to use them to prevent another player from enjoying or playing the game as intended, as per rule number one. So yes, player "A" is in violation of rule number one.

You're desperate. It doesn't look so good.

[Hessli]

Turbine gives player "A" the tools but does not tell him how to use them, except not to use them to prevent another player from enjoying or playing the game as intended, as per rule number one. So yes, player "A" is in violation of rule number one.

You're desperate. It doesn't look so good.

They are told how to use them, they are even given deeds to use them without restriction to encourage use of them on anyone in any situation.

You're wrong.

[Lestache]

Turbine gives player "A" the tools but does not tell him how to use them, except not to use them to prevent another player from enjoying or playing the game as intended, as per rule number one. So yes, player "A" is in violation of rule number one.

You're desperate. It doesn't look so good.

One of the tooltips for one of the festival skills reads, "If you're going to act like a hobbit, I'm going to slap you like a hobbit!"

Presumably it'd be okay to use that one on anyone who acts like a hobbit. Since "acting like a hobbit" is rather open to interpretation, I'd encourage people to only use that skill on hobbits, just to be safe.

[Hessli]

One of the tooltips for one of the festival skills reads, "If you're going to act like a hobbit, I'm going to slap you like a hobbit!"

Presumably it'd be okay to use that one on anyone who acts like a hobbit. Since "acting like a hobbit" is rather open to interpretation, I'd encourage people to only use that skill on hobbits, just to be safe.

I'm guessing dancing at a music festival could easily be considered "acting like a hobbit".

[Dworin]

They are told how to use them, they are even given deeds to use them without restriction to encourage use of them on anyone in any situation.

You're wrong.

You are wrong, there is an obvious restriction: Rule number one.

If you're right, (and you are not- You are blatantly and obviously wrong), then rule number one is useless, because it specifically says to player "A", "While playing the Game or on the Game website you must respect the rights of others to play and enjoy the Game world as intended by Turbine."

/dance is every bit as much a part of game as the forced emotes. If player "A" disrupts /dance with a forced emote, he is using a tool given by Turbine to violate rule number one.

So which is it? Either Rule number one means what it says, or rule number one is useless.

[Hessli]

You are wrong, there is an obvious restriction: Rule number one.

If you're right, (and you are not- You are blatantly and obviously wrong), then rule number one is useless, because it specifically says to player "A", "While playing the Game or on the Game website you must respect the rights of others to play and enjoy the Game world as intended by Turbine."

/dance is every bit as much a part of game as the forced emotes. If player "A" disrupts /dance with a forced emote, he is using a tool given by Turbine to violate rule number one.

So which is it? Either Rule number one means what it says, or rule number one is useless.

I've already explained why you're wrong. If you don't understand it, I'm afraid I can't explain it any more simply than I already have.

[Dworin]

I've already explained why you're wrong. If you don't understand it, I'm afraid I can't explain it any more simply than I already have.

I totally understand that your argument is illogical and wrong.

[Hessli]

I totally understand that your argument is illogical and wrong.

Then you don't understand

[Korrigan]

I will just post to support this millionth thread about this problem.
Seriously, Turbine - there is a significant part of your player base which is utterly annoyed by that nonsense - and of course, that's what the griefers enjoy. Time to make your ignore list work as intended - and make it so that someone ignored cannot affect you in any way, not even with those forced emotes? That would fix it for everybody, and actually makes sense, since that's what an ignore function should be about.

[manstan]

"Turbine's intended gameplay includes you receiving forced emotes from other players, regardless of situation." RossMcColl2

How would you know what Turbines intentions were? That is just your belief based on your bias. In my experience people do a lot of assuming of intent without any more then their own bias to go on.

"But the "player As" are just following rule #1 and playing the game as Turbine intended, so do not deserve criticism." RossMcColl2

That is a catch 22 argument. You hitting me with an emote when I don't like it violates rule 1. You not being able to hit me with an emote also violates rule number 1. It can't be both and nether, but it is.

"They are told how to use them, they are even given deeds to use them without restriction to encourage use of them on anyone in any situation." RossMcColl2

Yes and no. If I give you a gun it isn't with the intention of you going out a shooting up the neighborhood, even though you can. What stops you is having enough sense not to. If anything Turbine over estimated peoples common sense.

"I've already explained why you're wrong." RossMcColl2

No, you have explained how you think he is wrong, that doesn't actually make him wrong. Absolutes will hang you every time.

"If you don't understand it, I'm afraid I can't explain it any more simply than I already have." RossMcColl2

No you have explained why you think he is wrong, once again your beliefs don't make people wrong. Rule number 1 applies to and can be used by ether side equally, so right and wrong are purely a matter of perspective.

"Then you don't understand" RossMcColl2

I understand you think your bias makes it a fact, when it actually doesn't.

[SalionOfBrothers]

After seeing RossMcColl2's attitude about forced emotes. Which amounts to:

Turbine made em, so I have to use them, even on strangers that do not like them being used on them.

I have changed my position from having a toggle, to a complete removal from the game. If we have people with zero courtesy and zero empathy in this game, that they will not even consider how others feel, then the emotes need to be removed completely, just on the off chance that a furture bug would allow thier wanton use on people in the future.

[Hessli]

How would you know what Turbines intentions were?

So turbine have provided all players with the ability to force emotes on other players, with item and deed rewards and wording that tells you to go out an use it (even as above, telling you to use it on hobbits who are acting like hobbits). Add to that the fact that nobody that anyone knows of has been punished for simply using a forced emote (regardless of situation), and that no devs have replied to this thread.

If from that you think from that that Turbine's intended gameplay regarding forced emotes is still ambiguous, then you are ignorant and wrong.

[Dworin]

After seeing RossMcColl2's attitude about forced emotes. Which amounts to:

Turbine made em, so I have to use them, even on strangers that do not like them being used on them.

I have changed my position from having a toggle, to a complete removal from the game. If we have people with zero courtesy and zero empathy in this game, that they will not even consider how others feel, then the emotes need to be removed completely, just on the off chance that a furture bug would allow thier wanton use on people in the future.

Yep. The sense of entitlement makes me ill. Not only do the forced emotes give them the authority to violate rule number one, they are entitled to have their fun at my expense. That's how I see their argument: illogical and indefensible. *shrug*

[Isharra]

http://lorebook.lotro.com/wiki/Skill:Practical_Joke

The picture there says it all. I will add that it would be nice if some animations overrode these festival item animations, however. For example, return music mode stance to the override list and add /dance and its variants. Heck, throw in crafting stances if they aren't already on the list.

Also please fix jar o' bugs if you haven't already. I only have a handful left and would dearly love my bag slot to be freed up. Kthx <3

[Abiyah]

Typical example, someone claims that the D.R.A.G.O.N. causes them to have headaches because of the sudden flashing, not light of the rising dawn or epic conclusion or a whole host of other ingame skills that produce sudden bursts of bright light but D.R.A.G.O.N. does, after that revelation doesn't achieve anything it goes quite for a month or so and then it rises to 'they give me seizures' that's what you're dealing with.

Understand, though, that Light of the Rising Dawn and Epic Conclusion can be anticipated by someone who suffers seizures. D.R.A.G.O.N. can't be anticipated, unless one is always in-game on the edge of their seat looking for and anticipating an FE being used on them. That scenario doesn't fit into my definition of a fun time in a game.

And I wont by the "it accidentally went off all on it's own" story. lol

Kinda like holding a handgun, and then having to tell the judge, "Well, I didn't intend to shoot it, it just went off."

Seriously, Turbine - there is a significant part of your player base which is utterly annoyed by that nonsense.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. It is well past the time for Turbine to take this issue seriously, and provide some feedback to the community on it.