Make "IGNORE" function Account Wide

Discussion in 'General Gameplay Discussion' started by KrayzeeYou, Jan 27, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Artemiz Active Member

    Me think thous dost protest too much Mae. It sounds like a lot of effort to put one person on ignore and then sit in channel monitoring it non-stop and asking who is in channel talking that you are not seeing or toggling your ignore on and off constantly looking for toons that cut in and out to track someone down. If you are concerned that someone would go to that much effort to track you down or you would do that to track someone else down perhaps you should reconsider whatever you are doing to other people in game to warrant such devotion.
    aspekx likes this.
  2. Mae- Well-Known Member

    First off, your accusation that I would do that is laughable. I don't have a single person on my ignore list on any of my toons. Second, you clearly do not understand the mind of a stalker. It wouldn't even take HALF the work you stated to figure out any alt if they are determined, and determination is a common trait among stalkers.

    Am I worried about being stalked? Nah, not really. All my alts are publicly available, both through eq2u and in my own character profiles in game. This isn't about ME hiding alts, it's just about respecting the rights of all account holders to control alt information as they see fit. SOE has made it abundantly clear that they feel alts are not public knowledge, to the point that you have to actively log in each of your alts and mark a check box in your character window saying you want it linked with your other characters. I highly doubt that they would go against that very paradigm and release a command that would allow anyone, no matter how much work it takes, access to figuring out others alts.
    Charlice and Alarra like this.
  3. Wingrider01 Well-Known Member

    with the exception of a minor child everything you mentioned is against the terms of service for the game, you cannot share accounts between friends and relatives, the account can be banned for this if it is discovered
    aspekx likes this.
  4. Ynnek Well-Known Member

    Hehe,, ok, let's clarify the scope of the 'effort' and exposure here involved - some people are thinking of the hard ways, and overlooking the easy ones. There's no chat crazyness involved, no 'years of data collection' as someone implied. And no active actions exposing yourself. It really, really is both passive, and trivial....

    Log two characters into the game. One character does an /ignoreaccount <someone>, the other does not. Join the common chat channels, [optionally] park yourself in the ToV hub area and afk. Leave them there for 24 hours. (go to work, go to bed)

    The next day, any chat (and if you're in the ToV hub, any quest pickups, npc hails, broker visits, etyma purchases, etc....) done by any alt of that person will have been logged by one character, and not the other. Running diff log1 log2 will simply list all the ignored actions. And now you have a list of all the 'active' alts of that person for the last 24 hours.

    This takes about 5 minutes of thought, and 5 minutes of human effort. Is it perfect and all inclusive? no. But I'd wager it'll get you what you want more often than not. And given more than 5 minutes of thought, or 24 hours of lurking, imagine what you could do...
    Alarra likes this.
  5. Alarra Well-Known Member

    That's a very broad brush you're using, I think you are only referring to my shared accounts comment. Yes, it is against the EULA, but if it is a minor child then it is not and that is where it is within the guidelines. In terms of banning an account for sharing it with friends I highly doubt such an action would be performed nowadays unless it involved serious misconduct, the more likely recourse would be a strongly worded warning and escalation from there.

    Thank you Rotherian and Ynnek, you provided a clearer explanation in the ways that my posts were lacking.
  6. Torvaldr Well-Known Member

    That's an interesting and irrelevant heartwarming story of caution and tragedy. If the player wants to ignore a bad tank, that's their prerogative and they must deal with the consequences of that decision.

    I can say with a fair degree of confidence that anyone I've ignored in this and other games doesn't have 9 well played healers, decided to unsuccessfully level a tank, and as a result I exiled them from my group roster. I pretty sure most people that enter my ignore list have been gold spammers and people that say vulgar belligerent tripe repeatedly in chat. I put people on my ignore list I never want to interact or socialize with again. Even so, if I had ignored the tank, that would be my business, not yours, to deal with. In short I don't need you to protect me from my own decisions.

    Can you see how ridiculous it is to invent a highly unlikely scenario and then draw broad conclusions from it and apply it as though it was the common occurrence? Or are you saying that this highly unlikely situation is argument enough against the suggestion?
  7. Cloudrat Well-Known Member

    Ok, there should be but one person attached to each account.
    We are not Superman/Clark Kent superheroes with a need for a secret identity. Changing alts or clothes or identities should not allow someone to escape the repercussions of their behavior.

    If someone is actually stalking you, then the real life authorities need to be informed and jumping around alts will just exacerbate the problem.

    In spite of soe's mislead policy choices there should be global ignore.
    Svenone, aspekx and Sigrdrifa like this.
  8. Rotherian Well-Known Member


    Do you even read the entirety of posts before hitting the reply button? Or do you read a few lines and think that, from the first few lines, you know what the entire post says*?

    If you'd bothered to read the entirety of the post, you might have came across this line:

    That should have given you enough information to figure out that the purpose of that post was merely to correct a misinterpretation on Cloudrat's part about what Alarra seemed to be saying in the post to which Cloudrat responded. If Alarra believes I was overstepping my bounds, or that I misinterpreted Alarra's words, then Alarra would be well within rights to call me to task for that, since it was Alarra's post about which I was offering an alternative interpretation when responding to Cloudrat.

    If you will notice, Torvaldr, that your name doesn't appear anywhere in the paragraph above, nor in the post to which you replied. The only names mentioned in that post were:
    and
    Those names were put in the post deliberately to indicate the person toward whom the post was intended (as well as the person whose post I was interpreting), unless indicated otherwise - and since there was no point which indicated otherwise, there were no other people toward whom the post was directed. It wasn't a response to you, to R.J., or to anyone else other than was indicated. It was a response to Cloudrat, and to a lesser degree, to Alarra.

    Therefore, whether you** would or would not be in the situation described within the post is completely irrelevant to the clarification of interpretation directed toward Cloudrat. The entire purpose of the post was essentially to say, "Cloudrat, Alarra isn't saying A; Alarra is saying B." Since the point didn't get across with one healer, in the explanation I expanded it to all 9 of them. Other than that it was pretty close to what Alarra was stating. If you don't believe me, feel free to read the post in question here. It is only 6 lines long, so you may even make it to the end of the post before you feel the need to hit the reply button. :p

    ______________________________________________

    Of course, all of this departs from the main point of the thread. I offered what I believe is a suitable compromise in this post, but nobody has even bothered to respond to the part with the compromise***.

    * Which, btw, is sort of like thinking that you can surmise the basic plot of Herman Melville's Moby Dick from the line, "Call me Ishmael." :rolleyes:
    ** Or anyone you know, for that matter.
    *** Of course, that might be because it wasn't in the first sentence and some of the people with whom I'm dealing apparently don't have the longest attention spans in the world (judging from the available data - which, admittedly, may not be all-encompassing). :eek: :D
  9. Torvaldr Well-Known Member

    I, Ishmael, thank you Queequag.
  10. aspekx Well-Known Member



    once again i am really quite amazed at the level of paranoia being exhibited in this thread. i am sorry if anyone here has personally experienced an online stalker. that's not a good thing. however, it doesn't follow that b/c a miniscule percentage of the EQ2 population has perhaps experienced this in this particular game that we shouldn't have an /ignoreaccount option.

    anyone experiencing something unlawful, not just a violation of the EULA here, should be demanding that SOE intervene along with the appropriate authorities. and so far there's been no evidence forwarded that shows an /ignoreaccount option would increase incidents of stalking.

    then Ynnek adds that "given more than 5 minutes of thought, or 24 hours of lurking, imagine what you could do."

    well, ya what exactly could you do? make a list of characters/alts to harass ingame? but then what? hack your account? steal your CC# info? cancel your cable subscription? ruin your reputation?

    i really fail to see the level of harm that people seem to be reacting towards. where is this great evil thing lurking in the shadows for the moment we get an /ignoreaccount option so they can then prey upon the weak and ... again, do what?

    can we perhaps engage in arguments that are more realistic and not driven by an unwarranted paranoia?
    Charlice and Sigrdrifa like this.
  11. Wingrider01 Well-Known Member

    Aspekx more of a NOYDB attitude then "paranoia"
  12. Mae- Well-Known Member

    Again, it's no one's business who anyone elses alts are, aside from the account owner. SOE has made this it's policy since EQ2 was created, since the very first incarnation of EQ2Players.com. You were able to hide your alts, and these days, it is default to hide those alts.

    I'm so sick of the "You're so paranoid" responses to a perfectly valid reason to not want account-wide ignore. Yes, it won't increase the number of stalkers around, but it will absolutely give those that do exist a tool to use. It opens up a POSSIBILITY, no matter how slight, that alt information could be gleaned, something SOE has been against (based on the policies they have employed since this game launched) since the beginning.

    Look, this is not the first time this has been asked. It is either far more difficult than people want to believe (which is what I think), it goes against SOE's policies regarding account holders right to protect their information, or SOE simply doesn't want to do it. Whatever the reason, some time in the last 9+ years, they would have done it if it was possible. Look to EQN, one of the first questions they asked in the Round Table was about account-wide friends, which, if I recall correctly, had hundreds and hundreds of replies.

    I don't see account-wide anything coming to EQ2. The way I understand (and I fully admit I may be wrong) how it works, it would involve the platform team, which is the team that handles login information, etc. The same team that would be required for account linking that has prevented that from happening. It's not as simple as "Well if you can ignore a player, then you can ignore an account." It just isn't.
  13. aspekx Well-Known Member

    1. if all our decisions are made based on the fear of what might, perhaps happen, then we won't ever change anything. fear of what may perchance happen, is not a valid argument. if you have more solid evidence of rampant stalking occurring in EQ2 and how this might increase that or might endanger someone's life, then please offer it.

    2. there are plenty of things that SOE might have done with EQ2 years ago, but never did, and yet now they do. arguing from the history of EQ2 that because they have not done it they never will, just doesn't pan out as an argument.

    3. if you can offer something more substantial, then please do. otherwise this is just an endless repetition of you saying, No.

    (i apologize if the 'paranoid' comments got to you. honestly, it just seemed like the right word, i certainly did not mean it in a clinical sense.)
  14. aspekx Well-Known Member


    agreed, and i apologize for the term. i just tried to go back and use strikethrough to edit it out. but i forgot there is a timer on editing our posts. (leaving evidence that clearly i used the term, but that i would like to withdraw it.)
  15. Mae- Well-Known Member

    How is that any different than your endless repetition of yes?

    My MAIN argument against this is that it is far more work than it's worth. There really cannot be such an abundance of trolls who repeatedly create toss away alts to harass people that it takes up enough of your play time managing to warrant the (likely) hours of dev time it would take to make this feature available. It just seems a silly waste of time when normal ignore works in 99% of cases.

    A secondary, not nearly as important, but still worth mentioning, is that it does allow access to alt information, something we've been able to protect up to this point. But for some reason this is the one that people focus on.
  16. R.J. MacReady Active Member



    Mae, we all know you hate this idea of a account wide ignore. You seem to be greatly threatened by losing your audience who you said yourself about people who would put you on ignore "miss out on the awesome that is me"

    Can you just admit that you hate this change solely for the reason of the effect on your audience. Every other reason you have given is just pure speculation. You have thrown everything you can out there to see what will stick ..look at the last thing you wrote.

    If they have not done it yet ..It can't be done?? Really?

    You hate this idea and it's only about your ego.
    aspekx likes this.
  17. Mae- Well-Known Member

    I honestly feel sorry for you. You judge me without knowing me. I'm not a troll. Not even close. I don't have an "audience" nor do I care if people listen to me or not. I joke around alot and some people find it humorous, some don't. I don't purposely go out to insult and berate people, I don't do things solely to annoy others. I just chat with a heavy dose of sarcasm. If you can't handle a little sarcasm and joking in your life, it must be a pretty quiet and sad life. You need to lighten up and quit being so judgmental of others.

    Edit to add: I've said REPEATEDLY in this thread that my alts are not hidden. They're available through eq2u, and available in game by inspecting me and reading my bio. This change would have very little effect on me as if anyone wanted to ignore all my toons the info is readily available for them to do so.
  18. aspekx Well-Known Member

    on a final note here, Mae, i know you don't hide the alts for what appears to be your main account. however, if you were, it would not take anywhere near the trouble to discover who they were as an /ignoreaccount option might add.

    this is all publically accessible information. for instance, sorry Feldon, we find this list here:

    http://u.eq2wire.com/soe/alts/450974034366
  19. Mae- Well-Known Member

    Yes, that information is there because I purposely logged in each and every alt and checked the box to share alt information. It was a conscious decision on my part. Most people do NOT do this, so their alts are, by default, hidden.
    aspekx likes this.
  20. Sigrdrifa EQ2 Wiki Author

    Extra Credit created a video discussing not only online harassment in games, but also ways that game companies can reduce toxic behavior. Main points:
    • Players should call toxic abusive players on their bull poop. Remaining silent gives tacit approval of the behavior. If someone uses a racial slur, or expresses homophobia ("That's so [any offensive slang term for LGBT]!"), or indulges in misogyny ("Make me a sammitch"), call them on it and explain that it is unacceptable.
    • Game companies should limit toxic players to only communicating with people who have them on their friends list. Games automatically collect metrics, and this is a process that could be automated: if a person gets a bunch of /petitions turned in for abusive behavior, they should automatically be "muted", placed on /ignore for every player who does not choose to have the toxic player on their friend list. Extra Credit suggests automatically triggering this on people whom 10% of the player population have placed on /ignore.
    • Make toxic behavior negatively impact guild reputation or level. That would allow peer pressure to impact the haters.
    Juraviel, Alenna, Charlice and 2 others like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.