Attn: Community. We need to discuss and update the anti-griefing rules

[Belrindor 663]

We need new anti-griefing rules. Badly.

 

I figured this needed it's own thread, where it can be calmly discussed and a real solution found.

The only thing constant is change.

Or it would be if we actually embraced the idea that rules were meant to be adjusted according to actual need, and not be a rigid, static, useless collection of largely unenforced text.

It does not much good to have things on the books, if they are never actually used to much real effect.

 

The current rules are as follows:

 

 

Play Nice Or We Will Rip Your Heart Out (griefing)

Definition: Activities that are not constructive and with deliberate intent to do harm to others.

A ) You may not block access to deeds, merchants, or structures not belonging to you.

B ) You may not call guards to kill penned animals on deeds you are not a citizen of. (They ain't hurting you!)
C ) You may not steal deeds from the original mayor or residing citizens.

 - resident citizens on democratic deeds may vote a new mayor for any reason.

D ) You may not intentionally create player traps. (i.e. Using siege shields to trap other players)

 

At a minimal, I kindly suggest appending the rules in the following manner:

 

 

E.) You may not intentionally engage in fraudulent activity or theft. This is self explanatory.

 

 

The key here being that it would give the GM team ground and leeway that would cover

 

• Unintentional fraudulent activity (new player, or what not) would just get a warning, whilst repeat habitual offenders...
• Intentional fraudulent activity, would get the full weight of the rule in their faces.

Please feel free to discuss and comment below, but please do so in a civil manner.

 

Edit and Addendum: Friendly Reminder. This isn't a pissing contest. Please discuss the issue, not each other. If you don't like the idea, feel free to attack the idea. But it's the IDEA that should be weighed and measured. In other words, message, not messenger, please.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Belrindor

[Brash_Endeavors 4,735]

There used to be a Code of Conduct for the PvE Freedom servers. 

 

Wurm decided it no longer wanted to be in the role of making people play nice.

 

http://forum.wurmonline.com/index.php?/topic/100588-freedom-code-of-conduct-removal/

 

So now we have an upsurge of bad behavior and populations dropping as people just quit in frustration.

[Belrindor 663]

I've always been of the mindset that the best people to help set policy for something are those who will have to live under it's effects.

 

We have a mature, balanced and intelligent close-knit community here.

 

We can and should be able to come up with something that is fair and equitable and which will benefit all.

[Brash_Endeavors 4,735]

I did not mean to discourage you. I would like it if Wurm decided that it was a mistake to drop the Code of Conduct.

 

Rolf has before reversed decisions when he decided he had made a mistake..

 

Basically, dumping the CoC just meant "you can Player Vs Player all you want as long as its only emotional / mental fighting and no weapons are actually used."  But it is all the same thing is it not?

 

I don;t think that is the environment most of the PvE players want but I could be wrong about that.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Brash_Endeavors

[bangzuvelis 549]

hmmm....

• we all would probably agree that people stole, steal and will always steal. It is in human's nature to wish for better and acquire it with any possible methods. 
  
• 
  

   

  
  

  
  

  
  

   

  
  

  • Unintentional fraudulent activity 
    

   

  
  

  (Edited for formatting.)

  
  

  
  

  
  

   

  
  
  

that is an interesting one... in my opinion these two words dont come together... (please correct me, i might be out of date), however i do understand that unintentional here stands for those people who just tick box "agree to T&C's" without reading and do not even have a clue that such activity is bad... 

• we are a very and i mean very small community (please forgive me if you do not think we are a community and you are here just to sit in the corner due to the stressors in RL). We need to make sure to inform each other about thieves ourselves and locations they are based, rather than to expect something from someone else.
  
• And last but not least - we have deeds and houses. That is the best we have to protect ourselves at the moment, I guess...
  

[bangzuvelis 549]

me personally, would never steal something worth few bucks even if i knew i will never get caught. i mean would you? will 10 s change your life?

[Shiraek 464]

I'd support this change.

 

Surprised it's not in already really, an doubly surprised I've got a post in this thread before PVPers saying PVP is the answer

[akaedis 429]

These rules are only in place to make the game be played as INTENDED, NOT To protect your valuables and scammers/bad behaviour. 

 

If you want proper behaviour, Or anti scamming, Then do what the game encourages you to do. Build an empire, Construct and deal out punishments yourselfs. GM Intervention is only necessary/meant to come into play when something isn't working as intended, IE harrasment, Exploits, Bugs, Etc. Not when "oh! someone stole my crates!"  

 

I don't ever seeing this change, And im glad it doesn't since it gives the players all the cards and doesn't allow the GM to determine who's morality they see is best/who's side to take. This way they remain neutral and everyones happy, If you make a bad trade, That's your fault. 

[Belrindor 663]

@bangzuvelis

 

I don't know if you were following the last thread in regards to thievery, but the silvers were deposited as payment into a box, and then stolen from the victim's deed, due to an exploit of a game mechanic that allows someone to retain the ability to pick it up, even on someone else's deed. So no, the deed does not protect you in this case, especially if you have no idea about that faulty mechanic and how it can be used against you.

 

And yes, unintentionally fraudulent would be someone who didn't know what was expected of them on Freedom. Mostly geared towards new and inexperienced players and first time offenders.

[bangzuvelis 549]

@bangzuvelis

 

I don't know if you were following the last thread in regards to thievery, but the silvers were deposited as payment into a box, and then stolen from the victim's deed, due to an exploit of a game mechanic that allows someone to retain the ability to pick it up, even on someone else's deed. So no, the deed does not protect you in this case, especially if you have no idea about that faulty mechanic and how it can be used against you.

 

And yes, unintentionally fraudulent would be someone who didn't know what was expected of them on Freedom. Mostly geared towards new and inexperienced players and first time offenders.

i think i missed it... thanks for the update.

[Belrindor 663]

These rules are only in place to make the game be played as INTENDED, NOT To protect your valuables and scammers/bad behaviour. 

 

If you want proper behaviour, Or anti scamming, Then do what the game encourages you to do. Build an empire, Construct and deal out punishments yourselfs. GM Intervention is only necessary/meant to come into play when something isn't working as intended, IE harrasment, Exploits, Bugs, Etc. Not when "oh! someone stole my crates!"  

 

I don't ever seeing this change, And im glad it doesn't since it gives the players all the cards and doesn't allow the GM to determine who's morality they see is best/who's side to take. This way they remain neutral and everyones happy, If you make a bad trade, That's your fault. 

You are missing the point entirely.

 

Construct and deal out punishments ourselves? You mean like seek revenge against the griefers? Oh, wait... we can't do that. It's GRIEFING.

[Belrindor 663]

I'd support this change.

 

Surprised it's not in already really, an doubly surprised I've got a post in this thread before PVPers saying PVP is the answer

 

Aye, this has zilch to do with PVP. This is about a ruleset that affects Freedom Servers, and Freedom Servers ONLY.

 

i think i missed it... thanks for the update.

I should have linked the thread in the OP, but I didn't want to contaminate the discussion unnecessarily. Oh well.

 

http://forum.wurmonline.com/index.php?/topic/121193-warning-do-not-trust-bruhamoff-or-anyone-associated-with-him/

[froggy25 81]

99% of players do not need any rules to behave. The remaining 1% does not abide any rules.

 

Still, some people need a little guidance into the right direction.

[Belrindor 663]

99% of players do not need any rules to behave. The remaining 1% does not abide any rules.

 

Still, some people need a little guidance into the right direction.

Very true. It's not at it's core about getting people to abide by rules. It's about providing the infrastructure to get rid of them if they don't.

[akaedis 429]

You are missing the point entirely.

 

Construct and deal out punishments ourselves? You mean like seek revenge against the griefers? Oh, wait... we can't do that. It's GRIEFING.

 

Actually, Its not. You have full right to go dig a trench or dish out a punishment to another player, It is entirely within your right to. Aslong as you are not exploiting, using bugs, Or similar. The rules are great aren't they hehe

 

Only thing you can't grief in that manner is heritage sites and highways, their off limits. Everything else is free game.

[Belrindor 663]

@akaedis. Did you read the rules as stated in the OP? Serious question.

 

Because you are here advocating griefing, in an anti-griefing thread, right after the rules on griefing were laid out in the OP.

 

Seriously dude, the community needs a resolution to this. Please don't troll the thread.

[Belrindor 663]

There used to be a Code of Conduct for the PvE Freedom servers. 

 

Wurm decided it no longer wanted to be in the role of making people play nice.

 

http://forum.wurmonline.com/index.php?/topic/100588-freedom-code-of-conduct-removal/

 

So now we have an upsurge of bad behavior and populations dropping as people just quit in frustration.

 

I remember this, I read it (the Code of Conduct) when I first started playing about a year and a half ago.

 

I remember 'legal enclosures' going away, but I had no idea the Code of Conduct went with it. Talk about epic fail.

[Cista 428]

I am writing this before I am sure what the verdict is in the last row to grace the forums, but here is my opinion at this point:

 

You cannot define theft or fraud in a meaningful way in Wurm. Actual thieving does not exist on the Freedom servers, because for someone to take your stuff, you need to freely give it to them first, or leave it at the roadside or whatever.

 

Other cases and discussions have clearly shown that the GMs want simplified rules, hence why they removed the code of conduct, and made it apparent that if you set your deed permissions so that people can take your stuff, that is your own responsibility. They added explicit warnings on deed settings after the last debacle. This was to make it absolutely clear that they will do absolutely nothing next time someone steals something from a deed.

 

It is less than a year ago they removed the CC and they are not going to start muddling the water with opaque rules now is my guess. They do not want to be involved in every trade gone bad and every row between villagers.

 

With respect to the last case, you can argue that the mechanic should be changed so that people should not be allowed to pick up things (coins) from a deed under such and such circumstances. That is a whole other discussion. It is a mechanics issue.

 

But we don't need rubber-band paragraphs in the rule set that will allow forum warriors to kick people from the game whenever they feel wronged. For example, I leave my saddled horses standing around at random places in the countryside when I log out, everybody knows that. Sometimes people pick them up. Should I then be bestowed the power to have such a horse "thief" being banned from the game? Of course not, the idea is ridiculous.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Cista

[Wossoo 1,915]

Dealing with problems related to the Code of Conduct would often take days or weeks to piece together everything that happened and in the end it very often came down to a "he said she said" kind of deal about issues where GM were being used to push certain agendas and so on.

 

It was also pretty regular that FCC cases involved GMs picking up the pieces for silly mistakes players had made.

 

It was taking GMs away from being able to respond to support tickets and instances where people broke the proper game rules.

[akaedis 429]

@akaedis. Did you read the rules as stated in the OP? Serious question.

 

Because you are here advocating griefing, in an anti-griefing thread, right after the rules on griefing were laid out in the OP.

 

Seriously dude, the community needs a resolution to this. Please don't troll the thread.

 

Whether im advocating it or not, Im pointing out theirs no rules and their should never BE any rules regarding what should be deemed Griefing or Thievery simply because the game rules are intended to push towards game played as intended, NOT towards protecting your crates. 

 

If i was to troll the thread, i would put in a far different reply than this, Go look at challenge discussion board if you want my troll posts. xoxoxo Zibens.

(Sorry for off topic but anyways)

 

If your just gonna ignore everything i say and reply to my post as a flame/troll post, then promote im just another thief trying to encourage thievery, Your not gonna get anywhere any time soon with any of the discussions. 

[Cista 428]

Dealing with problems related to the Code of Conduct would often take days or weeks to piece together everything that happened and in the end it very often came down to a "he said she said" kind of deal about issues where GM were being used to push certain agendas and so on.

 

It was also pretty regular that FCC cases involved GMs picking up the pieces for silly mistakes players had made.

 

It was taking GMs away from being able to respond to support tickets and instances where people broke the proper game rules.

 

 

Exactly as I thought.

 

In the future it will be

" We are very sorry that your corbita is stuck on the bugged-out border between Independence and Deliverance and you are swimming in shark-infested waters for hours. Unfortunately all staff on duty are involved in an emergency where somebody on Xanadu picked up some piles of dirt  that someone else had left on the ground not far from their deed. We are investigating into what the mindframe of the perpetrator was when he picked up the piles of dirt - it is a very interesting and complex case. We will be back to you as soon as possible".  

 

Nuff' said! 

Edited April 5, 2015 by Cista

[Shiraek 464]

I guess ultimately this comes down (yet again) to what's permissible in game via game mechanics being out of whack with what the community perceives as acceptable behaviour.

 

The only really permanent fix is to bring the former in line with the latter.

 

Most games which allow sales between players have a form of escrow in between mediating it, which minimises scams. Even games which allow scamming (EVE Online for example) have a system of escrow.

 

Wurm also has this system but it doesn't apply well to ships, deeds etc.

[Lordterrabyte 139]

I personally think this post is a knee jerk reaction to this: http://forum.wurmonline.com/index.php?/topic/121193-warning-do-not-trust-bruhamoff-or-anyone-associated-with-him/

 

Now if the trading system was to add writs or forms of ownership for vehicles things like this wouldn't be able to happen and if these were allowed to be on personal merchants then people would be able to trade fairly without needing to be online at the same times and it would take the opportunity for this type of activity away completely regardless of knowledge of game rules or terms and conditions etc you can make copper keys to vehicles and containers already and reprice them according to the value of container contents for personal merchants but this whilst allowing use of vehicles doesn't give ownership (mainly aiming this at boats and ships tbh for server crossings but is also relevant for carts and wagons). People who allow strangers on deed know the risks, or at least should have an idea anyway so I think its mainly trading scams that are the bigger issue and this would allow for people to sell bulk items with vehicles too although to be fair I think a new setting which allows you to view but not take vehicle contents would be a good idea if this was to be completely scam proof for both parties (yes you can count items in a ship, not sure about carts and wagons but that's only really a guide)

 

just my thoughts anyway.

[Mordraug 2,542]

Actually, Its not. You have full right to go dig a trench or dish out a punishment to another player, It is entirely within your right to. Aslong as you are not exploiting, using bugs, Or similar. The rules are great aren't they hehe

 

Only thing you can't grief in that manner is heritage sites and highways, their off limits. Everything else is free game.

 

Dude... if you get griefed way things are now, if the griefer's experienced he'll dodge around it to disguise it as something else... second you go back and retaliate, even if doing the exact same thing that was done to you, since your ******intent****** was to give that player a bad day, 3 seconds later you're reported for griefing with a GM chewing on your head.

 

Guess you've been lucky to not catch that end of the stick, but a lot of people haven't had said privilege.

[Leroy 315]

You know what... as a 100% freedomer, I fully support the pvpers "handle it yourselves" answer.

All we need now on freedom is a mechanic in the code that allows us to permit more than sending stern, non offensive words.

Perhaps like snipe in chat, if 15+ deeds kos an individual it flags that player for a month... have the system scale? Give us a bit of law abiding mob rule.