Career Officer
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,116
# 51
02-27-2013, 06:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by logicalspock View Post
As for character and ship names, if you they are so offensive to so many people that you are being reported as often as someone who is constantly AFK or showing up in starter ships, you name is most probably in violation of the TOS in in any case.
How does this prevent someone from voting to ban a ship named the U.S.S. Jedi flown by Han Solo? Or the I.K.S. Serenity? Read through the forums sometime. There are folks out there who turn off player and ship names because they aren't "Trek". You can be sure there will be kick/ban votes made because of it.
Captain Kirk is climbing a mountain. Why is he climbing a mountain? Is he learning to fly?
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 765
# 52
02-27-2013, 01:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pyryck View Post
But what if you're in a group with 3 to 4 AFK'ers and you vote yes and the other player votes no then you're stuck with the run?

Try again.

ANY kind of voting system will be abused or used against you in the court of public opinion.

The simplest answer is to remove any penalty for leaving an STF. And lock any STF that has started from having an empty place filled.
In that extremely unlikely event just do nothing yourself and initiate the vote again later. The AFK"ers will eventually realize nothing is going on and probably start the disband vote themselves so they can try and leach elsewhere. I suppose Cryptic could also initiate an automatic group disband if everyone is doing nothing in the STF after a few minutes.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 867
# 53
02-27-2013, 01:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by valoreah View Post
How does this prevent someone from voting to ban a ship named the U.S.S. Jedi flown by Han Solo? Or the I.K.S. Serenity? Read through the forums sometime. There are folks out there who turn off player and ship names because they aren't "Trek". You can be sure there will be kick/ban votes made because of it.
You question presupposes that such a vote would have a statistically significant effect on whether someone gets a ban, which it should not.

Votes for things such as these should easily fall within the confidence interval of the null hypothesis (normal STF behavior) on a simple z or t table.
Career Officer
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,116
# 54
02-27-2013, 01:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by logicalspock View Post
You question presupposes that such a vote would have a statistically significant effect on whether someone gets a ban, which it should not.

Votes for things such as these should easily fall within the confidence interval of the null hypothesis (normal STF behavior) on a simple z or t table.
And you're more than welcome to pay the salary of the real human being who is absolutely going to have to sift through all that data to make sure the system is working as intended.
Captain Kirk is climbing a mountain. Why is he climbing a mountain? Is he learning to fly?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 104
# 55
02-28-2013, 12:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by logicalspock View Post
It is not complex at all. Even a liberal arts major who has taken the required basic statistics GE class should know how to program a simple hypothesis testing algorithm.

Tell you what Spock; you code it.

If it's so trivial that any LA major could do it, be my guest. When you're done, wander on back to this thread, post what you've written and let us all have a go at it.

After all, it's not complex at all.

It's been my experience that it is far easier to say something is trivial than it is to prove it is trivial by actually doing it. Having said that, I'll look forward to seeing it, what, Monday? Or is that too much lead time?

Last edited by hiplyrustic; 02-28-2013 at 12:40 PM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 867
# 56
03-03-2013, 09:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiplyrustic View Post
Tell you what Spock; you code it.

If it's so trivial that any LA major could do it, be my guest. When you're done, wander on back to this thread, post what you've written and let us all have a go at it.

After all, it's not complex at all.

It's been my experience that it is far easier to say something is trivial than it is to prove it is trivial by actually doing it. Having said that, I'll look forward to seeing it, what, Monday? Or is that too much lead time?
Clearly you are being facetious since I do not have access to either the source code of the game nor the statistical information that would be required to construct a workable system.

The actual functional code though is trivial and already available in the public domain. The work would be in integrating it into the existing source code, gathering the statistical information necessary to decide where your critical point is, monitoring the system for potential problems, and doing any debugging that needs to be done.

The actual functional code is trivial and not at all complicated like some people are falsely making it out to be. I have used similar code to analyze complex data sets before. Integrating the functional code into the actual source code of the game is a different matter which I could not comment on.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 53
# 57
03-04-2013, 06:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by logicalspock View Post
The actual functional code is trivial and not at all complicated like some people are falsely making it out to be.
One word. Goonswarm.

To explain, there are players out there who will happily skew any player-behavior-based game mechanic they can, especially if it results in sweet, delicious tears. Anything based on calculating norms and standard deviations of player activity would be ripe for such attention - all the more so if it's left on autopilot.

The metaguild Goonswarm is just the most infamous example, but there's no shortage of people who will gladly get together just to muck up the works of any hypothesis-testing, statistical analysis program.

Naturally, you could layer on conditions to "fix" each special case as the goons sniff it out. But, of course, that means human oversight to even detect the problem. Plus, once you're playing defense like that, it's worth asking if your system is actually worth defending, or if it shouldn't be scrapped altogether.

In fact, it's always worth asking if there isn't a simpler, more direct, less tamper-prone system that does the job well enough. Naturally, that requires the programmer(s) to keep in mind what the job actually is...
____________________

The gorilla formerly known as Kolikos
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,570
# 58
03-04-2013, 06:15 AM
I don't see the problem.

If all other players are required to vote "Yes" to a kick , then it would need 4 "dentists" or "goons" to kick a normal player.

And if you are in an STF with those, you should just quit the match anyway. So it would not be abuse.....
Lieutenant
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 53
# 59
03-04-2013, 07:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpalelena View Post
I don't see the problem.

If all other players are required to vote "Yes" to a kick , then it would need 4 "dentists" or "goons" to kick a normal player.
Not sure if you're referring to my post. If not, eh, I got time to kill anyway...

If I'm reading logicalspock right, what he's talking about is an alternative to the votekick system, where players who "vote down" a target just add a demerit of some sort to the target's record. Once the target accumulates enough demerits, he/she/it is banned from the queue for a certain amount of time. So it's not a 4-votes-you're-out system.

Given that the current chat ban system works on a similar basic model, and given the nature and number of complaints concerning abuse of that system here and in CO, the griefing potential should be apparent.

Again, if I'm reading things right, logicalspock is claiming that a sufficiently well-designed system will ignore "background noise" from casual griefing (e.g., people voting someone down for character or personal names, or even just nuisance effects). My argument is that the system, if automated, can be easily broken to the point of uselessness, and that there are people who will happily band together to do so.

Of course, if I'm not reading him right, I'd welcome clarification.

Quote:
And if you are in an STF with those, you should just quit the match anyway. So it would not be abuse.....
IMO a vote-kick system simply meets abuse with more abuse, but maybe that's another thread...
____________________

The gorilla formerly known as Kolikos
Career Officer
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 953
# 60
03-04-2013, 07:24 AM
As I have said from the start we must conclude if the abuse potential from vote - to - kick is worse than the current abuse by AFKr's

Thus far and looking at V2K systems in other games AFKing is the far lesser evil. If Cryptic could somehow come up with an original system that wasn't like what we see in the rest if the industry I could be swayed the other way but given their past track record on creativity and original systems I doubt it.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:26 AM.