Perhaps I am just defending it because I'm used to it, but I'm comfortable with it and feel it keep a separation between rooms and the system. I guess now that the pager is a bit more of an exclusive thing, your system makes more sense, but when the pager was open to all, nothing stopped anyone from going crazy on it, if the chat environment didn't allow it.
I honestly feel the best system is one that allows people to host their own servers, and not allow /tells through servers. This kinda puts the spammers on a per server issue. Someone spamming? Just ban them, problem solved, nobody in the server has to deal with them. My personal feeling is that the mutes or gags are just silly in the first place. If someone is creating trouble, chances are they would find a way anyways. If they are just muted, then they could just spam logins/outs. The easy thing to do is to ban them on a timed ban using a mix of Crispy's full ban and Wiznet to ensure they don't come back till their time is up.
Nothing stopping you from starting up DBChat. I'm sure it'll get a lot of users, too. ;) And actually I've been a little annoyed that most of the chats listed here weren't downloadable at all, so you might as well make one that IS downloadable.
| |
Foomer wrote:
Nothing stopping you from starting up DBChat. I'm sure it'll get a lot of users, too. ;) And actually I've been a little annoyed that most of the chats listed here weren't downloadable at all, so you might as well make one that IS downloadable. Actually, there is something stopping me. Laziness. | |
Danial.Beta wrote:
So in NChat the whispers aren't handled globally? Like you only see a whisper in the specific window of the room it is sent from? That doesn't sound very global thinking, at least not global thinking like allowing people to be in multiple rooms at once. Nope, they're plenty global. But you can't whisper someone if you're muted in a room they're in unless they have the 'accept pages from muted chatters' option enabled. | |
But what if they are in multiple rooms? Seems like your system would be a pain if someone is in 5 rooms, and one of their friends is muted in any one of them it, it kills communication.
| |
Danial.Beta wrote:
But what if they are in multiple rooms? Seems like your system would be a pain if someone is in 5 rooms, and one of their friends is muted in any one of them it, it kills communication. Not if they have the 'Accept pages from muted chatters' option disabled. | |
At this time I choose to play the experience card next to the duh card. Aside from the aforementioned opt-out being inherently bad design, I have had considerable experience both with all-out and opt-out systems, and have several years of experience not just running a chat but having designed one from scratch--that in turn was designed to correct troll problems that existed in a totally unmoderated chat we had before. All-out is quite effective. Remember, anyone who gets gagged usually is gagged for a reason, and anyone still talking to them probably also belongs on the gag list. On the flip side, I've experienced opt-out in every BYOND chat I've visited and every frelling one of them has proven that system to be a complete failure. One reason I started designing DreamChat (which remains unfinished yet due to time constraints) is that frankly, I'm the only person in this community to start a chat with actual experience doing so before, and doing so in a way that kept trolls to a minimum and encouraged civilized conversation. I've had success at chat design. Xooxer merely emulated IRC, which is layers upon layers of bad design choices, and others have since emulated him. The only reason I think you're defending opt-out is that you're used to it; it doesn't suck any less for that.