Many thanks to Kozlodoev for helping me see the flaws in the system.
It seems the main focus of this is the problem of people using multiple accounts to boost a rating or something like that. Why not use the same method the Powers on t2t to define MP? allow each log to be rated only once per IP address? I don't know what this entails, so bear with me if this is too arduous a task, but it seems that would allow a more balanced rating system. If someone wants to go to their friends house and abuse the rating system, he cares about the MUD to damn much anyway.
Just my two bits.
I apologize. It seems that expecting people not to act like scum is out of the question, as has been so thoroughly demonstrated here.
The implementation of the ratings system was probably the least thought out addition to this page. There was no way in hell that the frequenters of the log page would have the maturity to judge each log in a fair and impartial manner and anyone who thinks so is fucking stupid... i.e. Tevildo. Throw the ratings out. They add nothing to the page except boring commentary from asshat number 1 accusing asshat number 2 of using multiple asshat characters to change the overall rating score of a certain log.
Frankly, without ratings, you could just read the log, think to yourself, 'Wow, I really liked that log and I don't give a fuck what anyone else thinks about it.' But, turns out, we have ratings and you are unwillingly subjected to the opinions of retards and I don't like retards. Well, I don't mind the ones with cerebral palsy because everytime I see one of those retards walking down the street it looks like he's just dancing, and well, when I see someone dancing all the fucking time it just puts a smile on my face. Fuck, that's hilarious.
I would assume that the guy who created the ratings cares, and would prefer legitimacy to stupidity. Me and my craaazy ideas.
I feel like Orcoron and I were separated at birth. Who the fuck needs rules? Also, to touch on Tevildo's very first post... who the fuck cares about ratings? I've heard enough of your douche-baggery.
It is up to the moderator to block accounts without chars behind them - we basically have no policy on it. That should probably change.
If you people want to contribute, I propose you talk about how it should be rather than stating how it was and calling me liar - obviously this log wouldn't exist if everything was going well.
[new] Date: 07. Feb, 2008, 16:23:51 By: Vermond
You don't. You get an account, the char suicides/gets nuked, you keep the account.
Lie, ecidon blocked a lot of accounts of mine saying 'this char no longer exists'
Your guess is as good as mine, it was Nicuramar's decision. However, considering it doesn't harm anyone and that it is his site, I don't see the point of complaining - If you still wish to discuss it, I'd prefer you did it on a comment thread related to them, since it can very easily hijack the constructive discussion I'm hoping for here.
By talking to a Moderator to see if that makes sent to create. I predict whining!
That's not what I meant, Vermond. I was referring to 'The Society'.
What happens if you depart then?
Well, to answer my own question, as I have personal experience: You get to keep the account.
No problem, I knew everybody was dying to hear the answer of that question, but noone dared asking.
You don't. You get an account, the char suicides/gets nuked, you keep the account.
'Let people who only rate 1 or 6 be automatically blocked'
First, what if someone rates only those logs which 'truly' deserve a 1 or a 6? And second, I absolutely like Vermond's idea on ratings. Controlling them makes no sense: people are supposed to give their opinions in numbers, which makes it subjective by definition. Ratings are not anonymous. Who is to decide if the log is too good to get a 2 or too bad to get a 4? Upon what basis?
And a sidenote, although related to the rules:
How do you get an account without having a character?
'Let comment threads automatically expire when they get too old or too large (and therefore assuredly tangential)' They already expire after 10 days, I'm trying to get something similar done for ratings.
'Let people who only rate 1 or 6 be automatically blocked' Don't think that one is easy to code/moderate.
About manual sweeps of non-existing chars, I think the manual sweeper would then have to decide who falls in the old-player-that-has-quit and who falls into the just-another-alt category, which could easily become a tool for abuse.
Regarding time, it took me half an hour to track and block 10 chars due to the rating abuse, if I have to manually legend people on mud to find out if they exist, and do it on all accounts, it would probably cost me 4-5 hours if not a weekend.
I think if the aim is to prevent multi-ratings, the best way to do it might be just blocking whoever rates with many alts, which is what we are doing now - so what we should really discuss is: do we want to prevent multi-ratings, if so why? Please let us know what you think.
PS: I believe the fact that we're considering getting rid of 'unclear/unneeded' rules will not affect the way we enforce those that remain, so there is no risk of what you term 'Tulkas-like' enforcement
I wasn't suggesting something automated. A manual sweep once or twice a year would almost as good, and not incredibly labor-intensive. F'rexample, it took me all of five minutes to determine that 879 of the 1766 accounts here don't have corresponding live characters.
I'm in general agreement with everyone else; nobody wants the possibility of Tulkas-like enforcement here (or anywhere, really). The best preventative is to create objective boundaries rather than subjective ones. Let comment threads automatically expire when they get too old or too large (and therefore assuredly tangential). Let people who only rate 1 or 6 be automatically blocked. Manual intervention is only called for when harassment, destructiveness, or blatant QI is involved.
I was going to suggest a person posting a mudsex log put something like PG13 down in the title.. but then I remembered some of the weapon emotes in this game.
If they're old enough for combat, they may as well be able to read logs.
No Vermond, but really, that's not going to happen is it?:P
Loosen the rules. This is not a full time job, you are not getting paid and you can't follow everything so every time you try to enforce something, it looks personal. Also, if there are too much rules, a new site can spring up and take over, there's no monopoly.
We don't want their parents preventing them from visiting the site, do we? :(
Total deregulation! Unless the place is being used as a medium for real life harassment with potential real life consequences 'Im going to bash you' not 'You're a loser with no life' then whatever. Though I find the idea of people posting mudsex logs a bit weird, sure! Why not? Underaged people here? Not your responsibility. It's their parents job to monitor what they see online.
To clarify: It is possible to moderate ratings and block people who vote with multiple accounts, even though it requires MP knowledge, but it is pretty much impossible to give an automatic rating block to all accounts with non-existing chars
'How big a project would splitting comment-and-rating blocks into two separate matters be?'
Nicuramar doesn't have a lot of free time, we've been aiming to do that for a long while - it can take a few hours or a year.
About multiple votes per typist - I think Kozlodoev had a good argument a few logs back, would be nice if anyone would paste or he could argue for it again. But while not allowing people to vote with multiple chars is okay, I'd pretty much rule out outright blocking accounts with no chars since it takes too much effort / is too complex, which is exactly the way we're trying to steer away from.
I'd say part of the problem is account proliferation. Yes, there's arguably a need for players who no longer exist to maintain their accounts here, but do they need to have the ability to rate stuff? Unlike age-weighted votes on the mud, there's no compelling reason to allow multiple votes per typist. That can't be easily controlled in regards to current alts, but past alts are a different matter.
How big a project would splitting comment-and-rating blocks into two separate matters be?