Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 76
# 31
04-23-2013, 11:56 PM
Don't change a thing. People really need to start taking responsibility for their actions. Don't invest so much into a fleet with people you don't really know or trust. Pretty simple.

Then for God's sake have the balls to live with your consequences without crying for someone else to come fix it.

Maybe this would happen less if there was less regulation and more accountability on the individuals who allow this to happen to their fleet.

I think we would have better, stronger fleets as a whole if it wasn't so common to just willy-nilly join fleets and be instantly be put in charge. There was a post in another thread where a person actual claimed to have a 400+ person fleet with open leadership roles they were willing to give a stranger.

Wonder if this is the guy now crying about losing his fleet now???!??!?

If you build something so important to you, learn to protect it. I am glad Cryptic does not interfere when someone willingly gives up power to his fleet.

Help rebuild the Romulan Star Empire to glory. Click the banner to join today.

Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 426
# 32
04-24-2013, 06:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hayabusafury View Post
Don't change a thing. People really need to start taking responsibility for their actions. Don't invest so much into a fleet with people you don't really know or trust. Pretty simple.
The ultimate problem with this perspective is that, well, this is the internet. If you limited people to only interacting with people they actually know and trust, that kind of defeats the purpose.

There are plenty of reasons to suggest that fleet restrictions shouldn't be changed, but this isn't a good one. It's like saying "We don't need police, just use better locks on your doors"- it ignores the fact that the purpose of having a society is to create rules to manage social behavior.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 383
# 33
04-24-2013, 07:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by squishkin View Post
It's like saying "We don't need police, just use better locks on your doors"- it ignores the fact that the purpose of having a society is to create rules to manage social behavior.
No, it's like saying "Don't call police because someone is in your house, you self gave him/her keys." or "Someone has stolen all my money from my bank account. It's not my fault that I gave him credit card and PIN.".
Sorry for any mistakes, english isn't my primary language.

"Dear players we have for you new useless event and only-one-map-use-divices, and much more new "content", but we can't repair glitch in chat system which make mutes on private channels permament. So deal with it and give us your remaining money."
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 426
# 34
04-24-2013, 07:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkratasco View Post
No, it's like saying "Don't call police because someone is in your house, you self gave him/her keys." or "Someone has stolen all my money from my bank account. It's not my fault that I gave him credit card and PIN.".
So if you leave your doors unlocked, it's okay for people to steal from you?

The truth is, of course, it's not. Society does not accept that premise. Just because someone is trustworthy does not mean that they are somehow bereft of protection, or that they should be bereft of protection. After all, we as a society generally try to encourage altruism and trust.

I don't understand this "well if you trusted someone then it's totally your fault and we shouldn't do anything about this!" That seems to defeat the purpose of having a society with rules and structures.

Why do people take the idea of "personal responsibility"- being responsible for your actions- and twist it into the idea that "personal responsibility" makes you responsible for the actions of other bad people?
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 383
# 35
04-24-2013, 10:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by squishkin View Post
So if you leave your doors unlocked, it's okay for people to steal from you?
Leaving door unlocked and giving some one keys to them are two completely different situations. It's not that someone has hacked your account, promote himself to Fleet Leader and than kick you out from fleet. It's similar to situation when you own a company, sell 50% + 1 stock to other person and then cry that this person can overrule all your decisions or even fired you.
Sorry for any mistakes, english isn't my primary language.

"Dear players we have for you new useless event and only-one-map-use-divices, and much more new "content", but we can't repair glitch in chat system which make mutes on private channels permament. So deal with it and give us your remaining money."
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,906
# 36
04-24-2013, 12:58 PM
Something clearly needs to be done, any system that can be abused, will be and in fact, is being abused, saying otherwise is just sticking your head in the sand and selfishly saying "well it hasn't affected me personally so why change it?". These same people are usually the first to come crying in shock and horror when the bottom drops out.
We either need direct access to a system of human arbitration and I pity the poor souls with that job or some mechanism built into the system that minimizes the potential for damage.
Call it a nanny state mentality if you will but that is far better than one where anarchy prevails.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 277
# 37 Fleet Protection System
04-25-2013, 08:40 AM
Given the large rash of fleet thefts recently I would like to propose a system that offers some level of protection in the event that an account is hacked or a fleet master goes 'rogue'.

1: The first level of protection would be this: an officer of the highest rank cannot be kicked without the consent of 2 other ranking officers.

This would apply to higher up ranks only, and would be bypassed in the event of an account being inactive for more than 3 months.


2: If more than 10 people are kicked in a 24 hour period by a single person a fail safe will kick in blocking all further kicks until 4 senior officers vote to allow its bypass.


3: The Fleet master/founder can be fore ably removed by a vote of no confidence if more than 70% of members vote to do so.


I am not a coder so I do not know how difficult such things would be to implement. I would also suggest the system doesn't kick in until a fleet is of a certain size.

At the moment things are arranged heavily in favor of the founder(s) of a fleet and does little to acknowledge the contributions of its members (the very people who build it) which can be wiped out if an account is hacked or a founder simply decides they want all the resources for themselves.

Its time to even things up a bit. My solution may not be the best I'm willing to admit, so lets open the floor and hear some more idea's, perhaps the best ones will be picked up and implemented by cryptic
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,041
# 38
04-25-2013, 08:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by equinox976 View Post
Given the large rash of fleet thefts recently I would like to propose a system that offers some level of protection in the event that an account is hacked or a fleet master goes 'rogue'.

1: The first level of protection would be this: an officer of the highest rank cannot be kicked without the consent of 2 other ranking officers.

This would apply to higher up ranks only, and would be bypassed in the event of an account being inactive for more than 3 months.


2: If more than 10 people are kicked in a 24 hour period by a single person a fail safe will kick in blocking all further kicks until 4 senior officers vote to allow its bypass.


3: The Fleet master/founder can be fore ably removed by a vote of no confidence if more than 70% of members vote to do so.


I am not a coder so I do not know how difficult such things would be to implement. I would also suggest the system doesn't kick in until a fleet is of a certain size.

At the moment things are arranged heavily in favor of the founder(s) of a fleet and does little to acknowledge the contributions of its members (the very people who build it) which can be wiped out if an account is hacked or a founder simply decides they want all the resources for themselves.

Its time to even things up a bit. My solution may not be the best I'm willing to admit, so lets open the floor and hear some more idea's, perhaps the best ones will be picked up and implemented by cryptic
I don't like it number 3 more so I am fleet master and if you don't like my rule your welcome to leave

and again with kick system trolls ppl trolls
swimwear off risa not fixed
Quote:
Originally Posted by macronius View Post
This! Their ability to outdo their own failures is quite impressive. If only this power could be harnessed for good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valoreah View Post
It's not their fault you feel trolled by the new ability to be immune to your disco ball, sorry'boutit.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 421
# 39
04-25-2013, 08:51 AM
make sure your leadership protects their passwords and it isnt a problem. Your solutions come with their own problems


1: The first level of protection would be this: an officer of the highest rank cannot be kicked without the consent of 2 other ranking officers.

This would apply to higher up ranks only, and would be bypassed in the event of an account being inactive for more than 3 months.


Hacked leader promotes two other officers up in rank, those three kick the old leadership.


2: If more than 10 people are kicked in a 24 hour period by a single person a fail safe will kick in blocking all further kicks until 4 senior officers vote to allow its bypass.

First person kicks 10, invites another account, they kick 10, invites another account, they kick 10



3: The Fleet master/founder can be fore ably removed by a vote of no confidence if more than 70% of members vote to do so.

Someone with invite permissions can either flood the roster with the numbers to have the no confidence vote or kick members to get the no-confidence percentage up


Your suggestions and most suggestions I see on this topic give 'hackers' and thieves more methods to choose from. If these suggestions were implemented I would be forced to take away invite and kicking permissions from my officers and regular members
Community Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,198
# 40 Thread Merge
04-25-2013, 08:53 AM
There was an existing thread on the topic of Fleet Protections, so the new thread was merged into this one.

Please try to post in existing threads when the topic is the same. Granted, sometimes easier said than done as in this case.
Volunteer Community Moderator for the Star Trek Online forums -- My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. If you wish to speak to someone on the community team, file a "forums and website" support ticket here, as we are not able to respond to PMs regarding moderation inquiries.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
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 02:33 PM.