Forbid Passwords to GLFF

[Almagnus1]

While not officially supported, there are certain chat channels (like GLFF) that gaining a password will cause the server community to fragment because someone decided to be cute. This causing forming a group (of which I have formed many from GLFF) to increase in difficulty because you must dedicate more of the few channels you have to the GLFF fragments just to keep a handle of what's going on - forcing you to drop channels used to keep in touch with friends and what not if you want to have a shot at forming a group.

After seeing this happen for a second time on E, I would really appreciate it if the devs will form a list of the names of the highest population channel from each server, and modify the game code to forbid those channels from ever having a password, thus protecting the general server population from the trolls who are using the channel system against us.

Thoughts/suggestions/flames/trolls?

[Crell_1]

While not officially supported,...

After seeing this happen for a second time on E, I would really appreciate it if the devs will form a list of the names of the highest population channel from each server, and modify the game code to forbid those channels from ever having a password, thus protecting the general server population from the trolls who are using the channel system against us.

Thoughts/suggestions/flames/trolls?

No. All user channels should be treated equally.

This would raise these channels to the status of official channels. Instead, if you want a /global channel. Propose an official /global channel.

[Sapience]

Because GLFF is a user created chat channel there is no way to do this. This is a question of players adapting a tool we've given them to a specific purpose and then one or two peopple stirring up trouble.

The password option was added because the intent was that players would create private channels for expanded groups of friends.

All that said, it doesn't mean an official GLFF global channel can't be investigated. While I'm not always going to talk about things like this (meaing what the council is and isn't doing), it's a question that we are discussing now with the Players Council.

Much depends on the amount of engineering changes required to make this work and the potential halo effects of doing it (would it draw gold farmers back tot he game if they had a default global channel to spam? Maybe).

So we'll look at it. I can tell you nothing will come of the discussion in time for Update 11, we're too close to final approval and this would require some significant changes to implement.

[dietlbomb]

I agree. Each server's glff is a de facto official channel, and this clownery shouldn't be tolerated.

Edit: Engineering and 'tech' aren't required. Just direct the server's GMs to boot the clowns off the game when they do this sort of thing.

[Frisco]

Popular doesn't = "de facto".

User chat channels are like the wild west. They're almost all unmoderated for content, and any attempt at self moderation is shouted down loudly.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

[dietlbomb]

Popular doesn't = "de facto".

User chat channels are like the wild west. They're almost all unmoderated for content, and any attempt at self moderation is shouted down loudly.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

I didn't mean popular. I meant de facto. As in promoted by Turbine and populated by GMs who monitor the chat and occasionally respond in channel.

[bohbashum]

would it draw gold farmers back to the game if they had a default global channel to spam? Maybe

never thought of that :/ thought that was the simple solution to this.

could it be possible to make a chat channel in the LFG social panal? or revamp the social panal?

I personnaly don't like the InstanceFinder as it's not social and players can't chat, maybe revamp that to have a global chat box where you can link your group and not self-made text

something like: "<instance name> <group size> Need <choose possible classes>"

clicking on the players name will start an IM session. sounds like a hurdle but I guess it's an option

[Rampagingdeath]

I didn't mean popular. I meant de facto. As in promoted by Turbine and populated by GMs who monitor the chat and occasionally respond in channel.

Lets get this straight, you want Turbine to employ 87 people (assuming 8 hour shifts) to monitor global chat channels on 29 servers 24/7 to kick off someone who puts a password on a user created chat channel?

Good luck with that.

[Bolt78]

a channel where the only chat would actually be for people globally looking for a fellowship? It's so crazy it just might work! I would love to see a way for it to become official to the point that the "if you don't like what I'm saying just leave because this is a user channel" defense thrown out the window when you are really just in this channel to look for a fellowship, not to watch raging and stupidity about anything and everything.

[dietlbomb]

Lets get this straight, you want Turbine to employ 87 people (assuming 8 hour shifts) to monitor global chat channels on 29 servers 24/7 to kick off someone who puts a password on a user created chat channel?

Good luck with that.

They already employ these people. GMs are monitoring chat channels on all the servers right now. They kick people off the servers for manifold reasons all the time. I don't understand the challenge here.

[Crell_1]

They already employ these people. GMs are monitoring chat channels on all the servers right now. They kick people off the servers for manifold reasons all the time. I don't understand the challenge here.

Glff/unite/(whatever the foreign equivilent is) are already monitored channels. The problem comes to enforcement. Generally +GMs have many other things to be busy doing. That's why people could advertise 'Anyone For <redacted> Exploit farming' with apparent impunity.

[Lothirieth]

Nice to hear this is being considered.

(would it draw gold farmers back tot he game if they had a default global channel to spam? Maybe).

Just give players the ability to report (like right click on a name) and have one of the report options be 'gold selling'. I'm sure players would be more than willing to help police that as they are in other games.

[Crell_1]

Just give players the ability to report (like right click on a name) and have one of the report options be 'gold selling'. I'm sure players would be more than willing to help police that as they are in other games.

We already have this ability.

[Almagnus1]

Because GLFF is a user created chat channel there is no way to do this. This is a question of players adapting a tool we've given them to a specific purpose and then one or two peopple stirring up trouble.

The password option was added because the intent was that players would create private channels for expanded groups of friends.

All that said, it doesn't mean an official GLFF global channel can't be investigated. While I'm not always going to talk about things like this (meaing what the council is and isn't doing), it's a question that we are discussing now with the Players Council.

Much depends on the amount of engineering changes required to make this work and the potential halo effects of doing it (would it draw gold farmers back tot he game if they had a default global channel to spam? Maybe).

So we'll look at it. I can tell you nothing will come of the discussion in time for Update 11, we're too close to final approval and this would require some significant changes to implement.

I got a dev responose! SWEET!

Ok, now that that's out of the way....

I really don't mind that it'd take a while, as long as this clownery gets brought to an end. That said, you could always force the channel to be Premium and VIP only, so the F2P accounts cannot interact with it to help mitigate the gold farmers.

[Crell_1]

I really don't mind that it'd take a while, as long as this clownery gets brought to an end. That said, you could always force the channel to be Premium and VIP only, so the F2P accounts cannot interact with it to help mitigate the gold farmers.

That'd turn the channel from something that could unite the community into one that segregates the community based on account-type. I'd be adamantly opposed to such a restriction.

The existing rate-limiting is sufficient.

I would however-suggest that it's defaulted to 'off'

[Lestache]

I applaud whomever did this. You have my support, mysterious GLFF ninja.

[Lothirieth]

We already have this ability.

Thanks. I couldn't remember what this game precisely had (too many different MMO's features blurring together? :P) as I think I've had to report all of one "person" (actually was a bot) and couldn't remember what process I used.

I don't see how gold selling should be something that should stop this then.

[Mephistophelis]

Because most gold farmers are bots, it would be sensible to simply limit a 'Global' channel to those who are level 10 or above, or at the very least only be limited to Premium/VIP players. It's very easy to become Premium, because you just have to purchase something from the LOTRO store. If a gold farmer were to be stupid enough to actually purchase something from the LOTRO store, it would be easy to track them down through their personal/financial details since gold farmers are also responsible for a lot of other bad things, such as hacking and cheating. Because GlobalLFF has virtually replaced LFF and Trade, and possibly OOC/Advice altogether, it's literally the unofficial channel for every server for all channels. Instead of naming a Turbine-designed channel as GlobalLFF, it should just be named Global which can have a filter like all other channels for players to interact through. The power of this channel is exceptional, and the fact everyone can see what you write tempts many people to troll away and advertise whatever. These are the dangers that must be taken into account with a Global channel.

If you were to inspect the city-wide trade channel on WoW, and the Global LFG channel on Aion, you would notice that there is endless spam which could cause a player to be fatigued. A Global channel will also destroy the purposes of all other channels, thus rendering them useless to some degree. Having not said that, the potency of a Global channel is already at hand and so there's not much point in trying to destroy its monopoly altogether, but rather to implement it as an official game feature. For this reason, I would only exercise certain restrictions. It could be monetised like on Allods Online through the use of loudspeakers which you can purchase, who knows?

[djheydt]

Proud to be a 2013 Lotro Player Council member - my ears are always open but for the 907th time - I CAN'T GET FLYING GOATS PUT INTO GAME.

Bravo, sir or madame. I + rep you now, quick, before the forums revision takes it away.

[dietlbomb]

All that said, it doesn't mean an official GLFF global channel can't be investigated. While I'm not always going to talk about things like this (meaing what the council is and isn't doing), it's a question that we are discussing now with the Players Council.

Off topic: can you give us a reason to care whether you are discussing this with the player council or not? I still have no idea what the Player Council is supposed to be for. According to the announcement:

Members of the Player Council shall …

• Serve for the calendar year in which they are elected. Participate in private chats and other scheduled events with the LOTRO Team.
• Provide feedback to the LOTRO Team as requested.
• Comment, from time to time, on aspects or elements of upcoming changes before they have reached an Alpha state and prior to their testing on the Palantir private preview server.
• Participate, from time to time, in the Palantir Private Preview Program (and be subject to the rules of that program as well).
• Assist the Community Team in identifying suggestions and recommendations from the community that match the goals set for the Council.
• Make suggestions and recommendations in accordance with goals set for the council by the LOTRO Team.
• Participate in and help design focused feedback surveys for the council and the general community.
• From time to time, be asked to help draft a report on the council’s activities for publication to the entire community.
• Recommend players to participate in the Small Council.
• Be guaranteed access to all Beta tests during their term.
• Be provided with a Turbine Point stipend on a quarterly basis.
• Be provided a private discussion area for interacting with the LOTRO Team.
• Courtesy invitations to player parties or other similar events that take place during their term. (travel and other expenses associated with these events are the responsibility of the individual).

As far as I can judge, the Player Council has absolutely nothing to add to this discussion. This has nothing to do with beta tests or focused feedback.

Some griefer took over a popular de facto official chat channel, and anyone who logs onto that channel using the password should be booted from the server until order is restored. Am I going to hear that someone on the player council is in favor of this sort of behavior?

[whheydt]

Some griefer took over a popular de facto official chat channel, and anyone who logs onto that channel using the password should be booted from the server until order is restored. Am I going to hear that someone on the player council is in favor of this sort of behavior?

I'm going to use your remarks to show why the scenario you propose isn't that simple and to suggest a, possibly feasible, technical means to deal with this problem on the rare occasions that it occurs.

After either the servers have been restarted, or a channel has had no one in it for a period of time, the channel doesn't actually exist. The first person to join the channel also creates it. Now, whether deliberately or accidentally (and one can easily see accidental means for this to happen) the first person to join the channel uses a password, then the channel is created with a password. If others manage to join the channel (the password is known or guessed), then the channel will persist in the created state (with OR without a password). Thus, booting the character that created the channel with a password on it will not remove the password.

What probably should be done is either give the GMs a procedure telling them to contact a DBA or systems programmer if they get tickets that one of a small selected list of user channels is password protected. Such a person should be able to remove the password by hand or force-delete the channel and recreate it without a password. Alternatively, develop a tool that drops a channel and re-creates it, with the procedures specifying that it is only to be used on the restricted list of channels.

What this amounts to is: Don't build some grand over-arching chunk of tech that will be used so rarely that building and maintaining it costs more that a manual process invoked on an "as needed" basis.

[dietlbomb]

If others manage to join the channel (the password is known or guessed), then the channel will persist in the created state (with OR without a password). Thus, booting the character that created the channel with a password on it will not remove the password.

Why can't the GM boot everyone who is using the password? They're just as guilty.

[Frisco]

They're not guilty of anything. They were the ones who created the channel, they can place a password on it if they like. Being mentioned in one player-created guide doesn't make /glff an official, semi-official, or even "de facto" official channel. It's still a userchannel no matter how popular.

The biggest injustice here is that we've gone 6 years without an official global channel.

[Roberto_the_First]

As far as I can judge, the Player Council has absolutely nothing to add to this discussion. This has nothing to do with beta tests or focused feedback.

Unless, of course, the LOTRO team has requested feedback on an official global channel. Then it falls under bullet two of the list you provided.

[Almagnus1]

I would dearly hope that Turbine has given GMs the ability to wipe/recreate chat channels with a given password. Unless they give an official solution that completely side steps this, this problem has the possibility of arising every single server restart across all the servers, and the GMs need some way to undo the damage that a griefer is doing.

Also, I would **hope** that chat channel creations are logged, and the logs can be grep'd to find out who created GLFF with a password after the reboot. And then that person gets perma-banned, to send a very clear message that this form of mass griefing is not acceptable, and it costs them everything. Turbine also needs to be vocal about the banning (witholding the player name), so others get the message. Sometimes a few heads need to be cracked to send the message because people are too dense for words >=(