/report and even more exciting!!!!!

[Under the moon]

What is needed, folks, is for /report to go into the chat files on both reporter and reportees client, and record the last five minutes, not the next. Unless I am mistaken in my understanding, it does not do that. Giving someone a warning, then expecting them to continue their misbehavior makes no sense, unless the person is a true idiot. Anyone who knows of the time limit will simply be on their best behavior for the duration, then go back to their rudeness/trolling/vulgarness.

Example:

Vulgartroll says: You are a [insert random bad words, as the filter is quite weak]!!

Niceguynewb: /report Vuglartroll

Warning sent to Vulgartroll. Chat recording started. GM watches.

Vulgartroll says: Why sir, I do not know what your problem is. I think you misunderstood my words. Perhaps we can talk it out over a mug or two at kada's?

Time runs out on the /report as does the politeness.

Vulgartroll says: Niceguynewb! You little [more bad words and some not very nice threats.]

Niceguynewb: /report Vulgartroll

Vulgartroll says: Please stop following me, Niceguynewb. I do not wish to speak with one as rude as you.

GM tells Niceguynewb: Stop report spamming please. There are other people that really need our help.

Niceguynewb leaves game forever.

Now, though not a likely situation, it could happen. An automatic delve into the chat logs would fix this.

[Karyuu]

Moon, I don't think you know the extent of true idiots. Expecting people to go on with offensive behavior after a warning is far from crazy, and they can stop for a minute and then start up again. It's much safer to just continue the log for some time, to make sure that the point was taken. If not, the GMs then have a better understanding of the person's mentality.

There is no reason to get the log of the person doing the /report. The chat going in and out of the target's client will be saved.

*edit* To clarify, report will be rectroactive - meaning that it will get a hold of the chat some time before the command was activated, and then continue some time afterwards. I thought that was already pretty clear.

[Raven Poeffie]

I'm a supported of fair-play in games and if there is the option to report people who spoil the game, I will use it.

As of now. We have the opportunity to work together on this game. (or at least debate about the things they'll add) and it would be  if we helped create a report system other games would be yealous for!

[Nilrem]

This is an interesting debate.

As a matter of fact, I agree with Kerol. The system has to be tested, keep in mind that there has been a bugged report function, and as I've been able to see in the BT, seems that some harassments have been happening around lately, fortunately with the new version the report functionality will work again. Testing is needed in order to see if it works or not, we cannot expect to cover all cases. There was a harm being done, that required urgent action. The action has been taken. Let's see if it works. Does it have room for improvement? Surely. Once there's found a flaw in the report system, there's out there a coder (in this case Bereror) that will be more than willing to improve what he wrote in order to prevent that exploit from happening again, the best system might not be the one sounding like that, but we'll all agree that the best system is that one that, amongst all tested, works better.

We've, as it's been stated before, a cache on the server (RAM memory) that stores the last 50 texts said by each char online (between tells, chat and auction) this has the advantadge that noone can alter the logs, as has been stated before.
I'll try to put pro/cons regarding the two possibilities that have been discussed in here.
Which log use to actually create the file to be stored in HDD for further review of the ones in charge of dealing with harassment, the reporter (one that calls the /report function) or the reported?

Reported being used:

Advantages:

As Seytra mentioned, if that person has been openly harassing other persons before, and after the encounter with the actual reporter, even if those persons do not use the /report function, all of those actions will be stored.

Disadvantages:

Has been stated already, one can use the report function to simply send all that other player was saying, telling, etc. And this indeed affects privacy, as you don't know the report is fake till you actually read it. It's true that actions can be taken against those who exploit the report function in such a way, but, then again, the "privacy invasion" has been already done.
It might seem really stupid, as "why anyone would use /report in such a way?" but then again, "why anyone would join a game to harass people?" Just for the sake of annoying another one... if that is true, using /report on another person is also a way of annoying that person, regarding precisely "privacy".
This is indeed a very touchy disadvantage, an important one, I'd say.
This way, anyone decides when your "privacy is violated".

Reporter being used

Advantages:

Harassed: Since the reporter is the one that took the offense, it is sure that, if you use the reporter log, you'll have in there all the things that lead to cause that offense.

I am the one that decides to put "my privacy" avaiable. This also adds to a rational use of the report command.

Harasser: If you partner with someone to harass another player in game, since your log is the one sent, that will be spotted by the person reading through the log.

Disadvantages:

Harassed: The reporter is the one that exposes himself/herself in terms of privacy, it's true, and indeed can be seen as if that's unfair, since he/she is the one offended. This is absolutely certain.
But, if there has been harassment, and you're using the report function cause you've been harassed, I'm sure that the desire of that being solved, goes above any possible "privacy" issue that may be in your 50 previous talks, or in your next 5 minutes.

Only your harassment will be reported, and not those that might affect others. This, however, can be sorted out if the report function is allowed to be known by other players and they use it accordingly.

Harasser: As stated above, perhaps your agreement with other partners to harass, or cause a bad reaction from someone and then try to exploit the report function could be caught, but, for that being so, you'd require that "agreement" to be done in game. Having that agreement outside of it (using IM service of any kind) would break that advantage.

Comment:

With all this said, the log reporter form seemed good enough to me, at least, it deserved the chance to be tested, to my eyes.
Still, I tried to suggest and think of a way to keep as much as possible the privacy of the reporter (and even reported) as it's certainly an important issue.

When you call the report function, the server can know who called it, and also who is the reported one. With that information at hand, it may be possible to filter the text file, to only keep those entries that contain the names of the chars involved (reported and reporter) and that should be enough as to save the player's privacy.
This assuming that the private conversations you were having weren't with the reported, as it usually is the case.
This would require some more coding, but I think it would be the best solution (at least to my eyes, and on "paper" so to say).

This option, though, has a flaw, that is if someone else added to the harassment, and you don't use the report function on him/her, that person will be filtered out of the final resulting file. Anyway, I think this would be a minor issue in exchange of keeping the reporter "privacy" as much safe as possible.

I see that, when I hit "preview" on this, a warning came to me saying that lots of posts have been done while I was typing this. I haven't yet read them, I tried to put my ideas in here as well ordered as I could, I hope they're of some use.

Edit: typo.

[Myrthe]

what you could do is have a temporary log of everything everyone has said, but that delets itself. so it would only keep the last 5 things or so that people have said. then, when someone reports a person the logs saves the chat for that moment and a GM can review it later.

[Dales Lierin]

uhm...has everyone forgotten the /ignore command? i have found it quite useful rather than reporting everyone that i just don't care to hear from.

[Myrthe]

uhm...has everyone forgotten the /ignore command? i have found it quite useful rather than reporting everyone that i just don't care to hear from.

exactly what i said in my last post...except i didnt realise there was an ignore command. if people dont want to hear cursing, then just use /ignore...

if they expose themselves to profanity and then cry about it later then thats their on fault.

not saying that the people who are flaming ppl are bad, but thats what happens in multipayer games and if they are consistent flamers then the GMs arent stupid and theyll hear about it one way or another...

[Dales Lierin]

perhaps i should clarify...i said "for people i didn't care to hear from"  ...i was not referring to general cursing and extremely rude behavior.
ignore only works for one's self, it does not preclude one's ability to destroy the environment for several players

[DaveG]

Myrthe:  That's exactly what the thing does...  Why isn't anyone understanding this?...

Nilrem:  My god... how can you type so much about this issue?...  Learn to be a little more concise.

Please people, stop trying to use the word "privacy" when talking about this.  You have none here, in any way, shape, or form.  Additionally, the logs are only viewable by GMs and devs.  It's not like you're leaking conversations out to the public each time you use the command.

[Myrthe]

allim trying to say is that instead of using the report command every time someone uses profanity against you, sve the GMs some time and just ignore the person.

[Bereror]

I implemented the new reporting and the chat history system so I feel responsible for explaining, how it is done currently. Everything can be changed if the majority of good players and GMs feel it needs to be done.

The current (new) system records everything that you say or hear others saying/telling you. If you feel offended, you issue the /report <player-name> command and last 50 messages that you said or heard will be stored to a log file on the server. The system will keep recording what you hear/say during next 5 minutes. Another /report <player-name> will extend the reporting time for another 5 minutes (from the moment when you issued the command).

I tried to make the system functionally equal to sending your chat logs from your own PC without the ability to modify them. It is what you heard and what you said. It should give a good picture what was going on there.

I agree 100% that reporting the chat history of the person being reported is a better way if only good players are going to use that function. But it is possible to pick a victim and use "report <victim-name>" without any reasons. Now your private chat would be stored into a log file on the server and made available for GMs to read it. You did nothing wrong and GMs are carefully chosen, but it is still your private chat that was stored there.

I have never been into a situation where I had a need for the /report command. But I have talked with people who did and I will do everything needed to stop actions that may need the use of the /report command. If it requires giving up some privacy, I don't care.

[DaveG]

Myrthe :  Yes, people do need to learn to ignore these morons.  However, bad harassment problems do need to be reported so they can be dealt with.  One of the main reasons GMs exist is to deal with these things to maintain an in-game environment people actually want to play in.  If these people are hindering that, they need to go.

You did nothing wrong and GMs are carefully chosen, but it is still your private chat that was stored there.

I have never been into a situation where I had a need for the /report command. But I have talked with people who did and I will do everything needed to stop actions that may need the use of the /report command. If it requires giving up some privacy, I don't care.

I'm not understanding at all where people are getting the notion that there's a privacy concern here.  Who cares if some GM is reading some text you already said in public?  It's not giving up privacy; you had no privacy to begin with.

[Seytra]

It always confuses me when people start talking about privacy and rights on our server.  You have none.

A privacy statement would be highly required if we start talking on such a basis.

You only have an expectation of privacy in a private place.  (which includes private communications)  This is our server, not yours, so you have no privacy.  We can do whatever we want.

I am very well aware of that. However, I had been under the impression that it was not the policy of the PS team to arbitrarily listen in on user communications. If I have been wrong assuming this, then, again, a very prominent warning would be the minimum I expect. Even if your email provider owns the servers you use, I think you wouldn't be terribly happy if they were just going to read your mail for fun.

Adding to that, as I have said on another similar occasion, it is of course true that one must not entrust confidential / truly private material to the internet without heavy encryption. Yet there is quite a bit of material that on one hand doesn't justify the effort, while OTOH it still isn't supposed to be in public view and thus should not be intercepted without good reason.

That being said, we're talking about logging public chat here so it doesn't even apply.

The OP explicitely referred to not only /say, but also to /tells, and /tell is the least public chat you can get in PS AFAICS.

Last 50 tell, say, shout and auction messages are stored to every character's chat history.

@Ralas / provocation: That's why I said

if the entire log, including what is received, of the offender was stored

. "What is received" refers to exactly that: what the offender's incoming messages, not just outbound messages, are, just as the OP stated:

This includes what the character says and also what the character hears.

.

@Myrthe: I'm sure that a lot of people can deal with that sort of thing appropriately. However, PS is supposed to be a family game, and also rudeness is bad behaviour. The fact that "it happens", especially "in other games" does in no way mean that it is in any way acceptable, and if it can be dealt with, then it must be dealt with.

Edit: the proposal of Nilrem and others of sayving both sides seems to have some merit as well. My proposal for /report is this:

When someone uses /report <XYZ> (also, for everyone else who afterwards uses /report on the same person, or multiple times), then the server should
- store the name of the /reporter, as well as the time the /report command was used
- store the public (/say, /guild, /shout, /auction, /help (and possibly /group, though one can find "private" RP in there)) chat of the reporter (incoming + outgoing, 50 messages back). There is no real privacy issue here, since all except /group can easily be considered public.
- store any /tell sent from the reporter to the reported, and vice-versa, within the 50 msgs back period
- inform the reporter of that fact
- store the full log of the reported (incoming + outgoing, including /tell) (50 messages back); this will serve to see if there are provocations: if anyone besides the reporter actually sends provoking /tells, then these will get logged on the receiver's end.
- warn the one being reported about that fact
- keep doing that for 5 minutes, renewing when a new /report comes in (again, storing /reporter name and time)

Also it would be possible to log the /tells of the reported one, but to only display them on request, so that actually viewing them is required only if there actually is evidence of abuse (in whatever direction). Tells sent from the reported to the reporter, and vice-versa, would be displayed by default, as they will be unlikely to contain private matters.

That way, it is ensured that no useless /reports are being conducted, that abusers automatically turn themselves in, that privacy is violated to a minimum extent only and that GMs always get as full a context as possible. The only thing this system does not catch is the case when a reporter sends /tells to someone else, encouraging them to send provoking /tells to the one reported. However, since the one sending the /tells will get caught, the likelyhood of that is small. Also, I suppose that if one willingly does such a thing, one is just as guilty, even if not doing it out of own accord.

An addition to the system could therefore be to also log /tells of the reporter that are sent to someone who also sends /tells to the one reported. However, I don't think that this will really do anything useful.

Possibly also introduce a "/report all" command that logs the reporters /tells as well, in case of being harassed in /tell, so that the reporter actively agrees to make available their private messages.

[Karyuu]

It's rather strange to continue logging the person who started the report, when that wasn't the guilty party. And he/she isn't going to follow the guilty party around, trying to "prove" to GMs that the behavior hasn't stopped after they walked away. If you're innocently reported, you lose nothing. The GMs read over reports, don't see anything wrong, and throw them away. If a GM abuses anything, they're gone from the team, and possibly from the entire community.

This is the best way to actually see what is wrong, instead of piecing together incomplete bits and pieces from various logs - which would happen if person A harasses person B, walks away, harasses person C, walks away, and so on and so forth. I don't want this extra workload on GMs, to pour over logs after logs that are all about the same person, when one log can suffice. It's the target's behavior that we need to monitor, not the person who felt offended, long after the harasser walks out of range.

Considering the very large and immediate benefits this system would bring, I honestly cannot find myself caring if a bit of "virtual privacy" is lost through accidental reporting.

[DaveG]

There's a very big difference between email and the PS server.  Email is yours; PS is not.  You don't have an assumption of privacy.  It's ours, and we can do whatever we want with it.  Techincally speaking, a free email provider could root through your email all they want, so long as they haven't agreed up front that they won't.  We made no such agreements.  That doesn't mean we're going to do all sorts of sneaky spying things, but we can.

I do, however, agree on the point that we should probably post a privacy policy somewhere stating this explicitly.