<< Back to General Forum   Search

Posts 1 - 30 of 158   1  2  3  4  5  6  Next >>   
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 17:11:06


Mercer 
Level 34
Report
A growing number of players are offending other players with the use of usernames, language, and graphics. We are exploring ways for Warlight to begin reviewing age appropriateness that will scale beyond the current system of reports and banning players.

First thing we would like to do is not ban anyone. However our abuse policy makes it clear that “disseminating or transmitting statements or material that, to a reasonable person, may be ... obscene, ... grossly offensive, vulgar..." is not allowed.

We have some ideas on how to handle mature content while not banning someone from playing the game and we would like feedback on this before implementing. Just make it clear it's just a pending idea and not actually happening as of yet. This is just a starting discussion at this point.

Proposed Rules:
1. All players start at a rating of "E" for everyone.
2. Players can be reported for obscene language or graphics (same as today).
3. A players council made up of players from the game will review the report.
4. If the player is deemed obscene, they will be marked as “M” for mature.

When forming a game. The game maker will choose “E” or “M” for the game rating.

Playing games under the new Rules:
1. Anyone can opt-in to see “M” content.
2. Games started by “M” players will only be visible by opt-ed in “M” viewers/players.
3. “M” players will not be able to join “E” games.
4. Tournaments, ladders, public forums are rated “E”.

Any player can appeal their “M” rating, but it will not be appeal-able on the third and final time.

If you like the idea, please upvote for it at http://warlight.uservoice.com/forums/77051-warlight-features/suggestions/7201540-content-ratings-for-players-games

Edited 3/12/2015 17:38:14
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 17:19:07


Lawlz
Level 40
Report
This is a really cool way of rating. +1 for creativity
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 17:48:37


Judeburger 
Level 59
Report
This sounds like a good attempt at a fair system. It is certainly better than banning anyone who crosses some arbitrary line, and it allows some enforcement of etiquette. While I personally prefer a system such as this to err on the side of being too permissive, you would be hard-pressed to find a site on the internet that allows any and all content. Even 4chan has rules and enforces them with bans.

The suggestions I would like to make are:
-Transparency for the player council, so the community can be privy to the decision making process even if they are not directly involved.
-An appeal process, so that a player who has been rated "M" can present arguments that they have cleaned up their act and deserve to be rated "E" again. (edit: I see you already thought of this)

I appreciate that I will still be able to call players a silly bitch when they are, in fact, acting like a silly bitch without fear of being banned from the game entirely.

Edited 3/12/2015 17:49:27
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 17:56:32

DanWL 
Level 62
Report
Voted.
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 18:03:11


Master Turtle 
Level 61
Report
I find that the Vulgarity and crudeness of most things occur on the Forums and not In Game. How will this solve the abuse on the Forums?
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 18:17:31

Alcarmacil 
Level 36
Report
I really like this suggestion, it's certainly a big step in the right direction.
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 18:25:02


Mudderducker 
Level 57
Report
Good idea but Other things are needed more than this, not necessary I think for now. People on this game are causers of their own abuse, perhaps a statement rather than this. We do have blacklists and reports already. "M" and "E" sound silly, would need an alternative. Does not have my vote for now.
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 18:28:36

Alcarmacil 
Level 36
Report
I also still like the suggestion others have made, that I should be able to hide games on the "Open Games" list (just for my login, of course), by blacklisting the game creator. That would allow me to police my own content, without having to wait for a decision from the panel. I agree, banning from the site should be a last-resort -- but I think I should have a bit more control over the content I see from my login.
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 18:34:19


Red Menace
Level 55
Report
put me down as a B for badazz muthafvka
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 18:35:13


Eklipse
Level 57
Report
This doesn't seem to solve issues on the forums. If someone's name/pic/clan icon is offensive or vulgar will the "M" rating keep them from posting? Otherwise this new system doesn't solve anything.
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 18:40:20


Richard Sharpe 
Level 59
Report
Sounds good to me, though I wonder if a multi-tiered system would be better. E, PG-13 and M? Something to that effect?

Interesting that the ladders will be off-limits to Ms.

As for the forum, I would imagine that it would have tiers similar to the open-games wherein the Ms can only post on certain topics/boards while being able to view all boards/topics. Meanwhile the Es can only view the E-rated boards/topics and post in all of them.

Edited 3/12/2015 18:42:39
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 19:12:25


King C******* V 
Level 58
Report
I love how LAWLZ is okay with this when he is a racist Nazi. How will he spread his "trolls"?
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 20:02:59


Lawlz
Level 40
Report
"M" and "E" sound silly, would need an alternative.
I'm like 100% they got this from the ESRB rating system. PEGI sounds even more ridiculous
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 20:13:18


Mudderducker 
Level 57
Report
Oh so this is American, that's why... so you are basing players maturity by age limits for games. Sounds great.

The European rating system (PEGI) use the: U, PG, 12, 15, 18
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 20:18:17


Bane 
Level 60
Report
and all of those sound like a rating system for ikea furniture.
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 20:20:32

Fizzer 
Level 58

Warzone Creator
Report
Tournaments, ladders, public forums are rated “E”.

My concern is that being rated M will be viewed as a punishment, since it excludes you from all tournaments, ladders, public forums, and talking to E players. We would basically be splitting the community into two.

Edited 3/12/2015 20:23:44
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 20:26:54

TBest 
Level 60
Report
Why make it such a complicated system?

I would simply have a "M" games that can only be accessed by checking a box saying "I am 18 years or older and am willing to see content that is rated mature"

Also I don't see why it is needed to exclude "M" players from the rest of the community, I am sure that they can limit themselves when being in public / "E" places, if they have a place were M content can be expressed.


Specifically, I disagree with
3. “M” players will not be able to join “E” games.

as that is in practice seems to be the same as suspending a player from the site. Even players who don't really mind M content will probably create games "E" as that is the largest player base. Instead I would make it possible to block "M" players from joining your game, using the prerequisites system. (Same way you can have only Members join a game, and prevent Members from joining a game.)

Edited 3/12/2015 21:07:54
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 20:27:33


Ineffable 
Level 60
Report
I like this idea
however you could change it a little instead of M games and E games I would just hide the text of M players automatically using the same mechanism that is used on BL players

but back to the current proposal it is not perfect but any step that can help me avoid unwanted content is a step in the right direction
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 20:35:20


Scotty 
Level 56
Report
Good theory - really. I like it.

To be practical, it would need
    * to be supported by the creator and time - it probably touches more than just a few things in design
    * a council that is active enough to handle the requests coming in, probably with ebbs & flows, etc.

If you can get that - great.
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 20:38:43


Lawlz
Level 40
Report
Scotty, mercer works directly with fizzer. He wouldn't have said anything if they weren't considering implementing it.
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 20:42:01


Richard Sharpe 
Level 59
Report
Ineffable, the problem with just hiding the text is that player names/images are often the problem and not what they say. Unless the game is now going to alter names then I don't see that aspect being resolved.

TBest, age is immaterial. This isn't a matter of limiting mature content to those legally old enough to see it. It is about limiting mature content to those willing to see/abide it. There are plenty of players who are well older than 18 who don't want to see the garbage spewedn by some on here.
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 20:53:10


shyb
Level 59
Report
why not an option to "mute" content from M players (including somehow censoring a player/clan's name and picture)? that way they don't have to be excluded from games, and their content doesn't have to be viewed by anyone that doesn't want to be exposed to it.
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 21:03:50


[FCC] Aura Guardian 
Level 61
Report
Would "E" players still be able to enter "M" rated games?
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 21:07:26

TBest 
Level 60
Report
@Richard Shape,

My point is that if you don't want to see 18+ content then you don't check the box, regardless of whether you are legally able to or not. Also anyone under a X age, in my opinion, shouldn't be able to view mature content. Currently the only practical way for a webpage to know the age of a person is to ask.

PS. I edited "I am 18 years or older" to "I am 18 years or older and am willing to see content that is rated mature" on my previous post to make it more clear.

Edited 3/12/2015 21:08:31
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 22:12:58


szeweningen 
Level 60
Report
Unless there is a pressing law issue, I sincerely believe that these kind of things re generally dealt by the community itself via exclusion of some players from events etc. IMHO working to make a complicated system that'd regulate things like that is a waste of resources and time considering how many other things demand attention.
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 22:13:42


Odin 
Level 59
Report
Making games off-limits for trolls, assholes and idiots is already easy by blacklisting and putting prerequisites. I don't see an urgent need to improve this.

The forums, however, are currently in urgent need of some sort of clean-up. For the last few months, some people have spammed them with threads that are of no interest to the WL community. I don't mean threads that are off the topic of the game of WL, but threads that are repetitive, have no content in them whatsoever, or are made just to talk BS.

I don't get offended if a player is named Hitler of Stalin, but I don't like to read a forum where 80% of the posts are moronic BS. Please consider making a daily thread/post limit, especially for newer and non-membership accounts.
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 22:19:56

Hennns
Level 58
Report
+1
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 22:35:45


Mudderducker 
Level 57
Report
+2 to Odin and Sze, exact thoughts of mine.
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 23:00:25


Thomas 633
Level 56
Report
Sounds good to me, though I wonder if a multi-tiered system would be better. E, PG-13 and M?

This way, people can say if they want to listen to people who are G, M, or probably an MA rating for some people. Also, how do you rate a meme?
Content Ratings for Players/Games: 3/12/2015 23:02:05


Thomas 633
Level 56
Report
also, I am not 18, but I am fine with seeing 18+ stuff (sexual at least, the violence is a bit strong)
Posts 1 - 30 of 158   1  2  3  4  5  6  Next >>