Jump to content

Norse_Harold

Lobby Moderators
  • Posts

    441
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    10

Everything posted by Norse_Harold

  1. How do you know why go2die retired from the forum? I think that it is plausible that lobby moderator response time was at least part of the reason, but go2die's last two posts on the forum before retiring were complaining about the difficulty of getting a mod signed for publication on mod.io. (For the record, I think that go2die gave up too early. It looks like user1 is trying to improve right now. But, he's not the only person who has needed to improve, in my opinion.) And, improving the lobby moderation is not something that only involves user1. There are aspects that are outside user1's control, such as improving the legal terms, and whether or not email addresses are collected. Many of the features suggested above, such as showing account age to all users, preventing spoofing of rated games played and rating, and indication of whether an account is "verified" or "unverified", would also involve changes to the 0 A.D. client, which is not (solely?) user1's responsibility. Can we please act more like a team here instead of just pointing fingers at each other?
  2. If there is no one with the official role in WFG of drafting legal terms, then the word responsible is still appropriate. It means who has accepted the responsibility for this task? If collecting email addresses is not the course of action that WFG wants to take then what solutions are being implemented to ensure that bans are effective? Here are some ideas from others, as well as from me. Improve the rate limit for new account creation per IP. Someone said that an IP can create 1 account per hour. Consider adjusting this to, for example, 1 account per month. I think that Gmail allows 10 email addresses to be created from a certain IP before they require a mobile phone number to be attached to a new account. Make account age public for all users to see. Also, make rated game record and rating unspoofable. Regularly scan for weak passwords, and lock accounts with weak passwords. Ban them if there is no password reset capability. Allow free registration without an email address, but establish a policy where all new accounts are "unverified" and have limited privileges. Allow "verified" users to host games that are only open to other "verified" accounts. Changing an account to "verified" requires 3 referrals from existing "verified" accounts, which will lose their own "verified" status if they commit fraud, and also requires an email address and dossier to be filled out. The purpose of the dossier is to have consistency of individual identity across duplicate accounts. Allow use of aliases in order to protect players from bullying or targeting, but require that the aliases are tied to a "verified" account in order to make rule enforcement effective. What's happening with the status quo is that the cost of player misconduct and easy duplicate account creation is being externalized to the player base, especially those players who regularly host games. This still has an impact on WFG, of course, as it causes players to consider leaving or at least withdrawing support for WFG. Case in point: go2die's retiring from the WFG forum yesterday.
  3. How difficult or easy is it to justify the usage of an email address for an online account? Who is responsible in WFG for drafting this language?
  4. Gurken Khan said: Exactly. So, a path forward with making walls more realistic is through modding and/or an alternate game mode. Once it reaches critical mass then players might like to play it sometimes in multiplayer. I would like to see walls actually block projectiles, and offer much more offensive and defensive benefits. I read somewhere that castles could be successfully defended with 1/6th the number of troops as those who were attacking. Of course, siege warfare is the logical counter to this, and that can usually only be broken by a counter-attack by an allied army.
  5. Okay, thanks for the clarification. I think that the player base isn't aware of this policy. Ideally it would be stated in the terms that users read before connecting to the lobby. I'll take this opportunity to announce again that I have rules for the games that I host, and most of the players who have joined my team games seem to like this. What we have is, in my opinion, a bad combination of zero-cost new account creation (no email address, no effort required) and infinite duplicate accounts allowed. Sevda/Yekaterina has multiple times suggested mitigations, such as establishing a primary account for each player, and allowing duplicate accounts that are tied to that account. That way, admins can identify who the primary user is. Others have suggested tasks that are necessary for new accounts to be allowed to join games, such as play several rated games, or complete a training mission. But, as it stands now, bans are completely ineffective on players who can change their IP addresses or use VPNs, and therefore player misconduct (verbal abuse, cheating, smurfing, griefing, ddosing, etc.) is very difficult to control. I see several statements related to GDPR in the Privacy Policy. We can start collecting email addresses now, right?
  6. Click Settings, Video. Ensure that the base (canvas resolution) and output (scaled resolution) are correct. The base canvas resolution needs to be the same as your monitor resolution in order to play and stream with 0ad in full screen mode. The scaled resolution can be lower if you want to downsample the video stream in order to save CPU and/or bandwidth while streaming. Then click Window Capture, then (at the top) Edit, Transform, Fit to Screen. This should cause the red box to expand to the full video frame. You also probably want to add an Audio Input Capture (pulseaudio) for your microphone, and Audio Output Capture (pulseaudio) in order to capture all audio output. Then click Edit, Advanced Audio properties to tune the recording volume and other settings.
  7. I've looked at the code in DllLoader.cpp, but I don't see yet how I can have the complete path output to the console. The base filename is passed to dlopen(); doesn't really make sense to me yet. It looks like it's calling dlopen on merely the filename. That's a relative path that implies "search the current working directory for the file". You could control the current working directory before that point in the code with a bash script or C++ calls. Or, ensure that the installer places the library in the appropriate directory.
  8. Consider setting, and exporting, the LD_LIBRARY_PATH=[absolute path to directory containing libraries] or LD_PRELOAD=[absolute path to specific library] environment variables in a shell script that is called before the pyrogenesis binary. See the manpage for `ld' at the documentation for the switch -rpath-link=dir for a description of the library search path order. But, I haven't worked with AppImages before, so there might be reasons to not do this. Also, you can use strace or ptrace to watch what directories are being searched for libCollada.so. Search paths for shared libraries are configured in /etc/ld.so.conf.d/* If you change the ld.so configuration then don't forget to run ldconfig as root to update the cache. However, changing such configuration might be an even worse idea, as it could have unintended effects on other binaries and libraries.
  9. Good points, smiley. I agree. I think that jurisdiction, governing law of a contract, and which local laws were infringed are actually 3 separate, but potentially mutually affecting issues. Anyway, the pros advise adding a Governing Law clause to legal terms for online services. Who in the Wildfiregames team decides on that?
  10. Could you please include a note about whether these free games are time-limited for claiming the offer but then permanent ownership and use, or else time-limited for playing it even after claiming the offer.
  11. Absence of (obvious) evidence is not evidence of absence. It's possible that the vast majority of users are apathetic about enforcing rules because rule infractions are so rampant. Think fragile state syndrome, despotism, etc. I have noticed many times that users have complained about smurfing in text chat but not in the forum. Here are recent examples, either in lobby or in-game chat About a week ago, in-game chat, Spanish translated to English: (Anonymous): Deanhernandez is the smurf that f____s us In April, 2022... Norse_Harold: we're trying to find out who ProphetMuhammad (741) is a smurf of ProphetMuhammad (741): ProphetMuhammad (741) is NOT a smurf ProphetMuhammad was presumably relatively skilled, but claimed to be accurately rated at 741. The reason this is a problem is because it creates a significant imbalance in a team game. Then players feel like they wasted 20 to 50 minutes playing such a team game. There are more examples, I'm sure. I haven't written them down. I think that creation and enforcement of rules against smurfing can be done primarily by game hosters. Hosters should be asking every unfamiliar player what their skill level or rating is, somehow remembering their stated skill levels, and punishing users that have lied about their skill levels. I think that lobby moderators only need to be involved if there is evidence posted on the forum demonstrating behavior that is defined as a violation of the lobby terms. I define a smurf as "a player who claims to have a significantly lower skill than the player's actual skill". I consider a player who tells the truth about their rating, despite being pseudonymous to NOT be a smurf. I think that some users are not careful about the terminology they use when describing a problem, and some people have used the word "smurf" to complain about duplicate accounts. It's a separate issue and shouldn't be called "smurfing" in my opinion.
  12. But not everyone is in the US and we can just age restrict the lobby meanwhile let USA's children beat up the AI. Although the lobby server is located in Germany, the jurisdiction of the enforcement of the lobby's legal terms is probably the US. This seems like an opportunity to improve the legal terms further, by adding a Governing Law clause. Anyway, I think that one or more admins of the lobby is located in the US, therefore US law is applicable to the conduct of those admins. Therefore, they can't legally collect data on persons under 13 without parental consent. Therefore, the Privacy Policy, Terms of Service and Terms of Use restrict lobby users to 13 or older. Anyway, Germany probably has a similar law to COPPA.
  13. Yes. Another possible cause is an undersized CPU heatsink for the TDP (thermal design power) of the particular model of CPU. When modern CPUs overheat, they temporarily run slower, due to a function called "thermal throttling". It can be detected with software such as Intel Xtreme Tuning Utility (XTU).
  14. In what part of this quote did I say "it's a lot more efficient." ?
  15. Not entirely sure why. I think this game is perfectly appropriate for anyone; young children can play the Pony Ascendant mod and no blood mod. I agree that the single-player game is appropriate for young children. The lobby and lobby-hosted multiplayer games are not, though. Read about the US law COPPA about collection of information on users under 13. Also, "online interactions" can have significant impacts on psychology of young users, due to cyberbullying, frequent use of profanity, impressionable young minds following bad examples. Young users sometimes don't know that they are friends with and/or mimicing psychopathic behavior until a significant amount of time has passed.
  16. Intel i9 gen 11: Passmark score depends on the specific model Intel i9 gen 11: Mersenne score depends on the specific model. i9-9900K @ 3.6 GHz gets 10.43 to 22.44 depending on parameters used NVidia RTX 3060 Ti: 11700 3DMark 10 score And, if you're running a benchmark and the temperatures are within the maximum rated operating temperatures, then the PC will likely "take off due to the fans going crazy", and it's normal. If one doesn't consider it normal then it's a noise optimization problem. What would not be normal is if the temperatures are outside the maximum rated operating temperatures, or else the temperatures and/or fan speeds are too high for the load placed on the system. Some people break their CPU heatsink mounting tabs, which would cause that symptom.
  17. This really depends on the exact nature of the offense and how much evidence is provided by the reporter. What if the key evidence is not present in the lobby chat log, because it occurred in-game? What if there was actually a fight between two users, both of them broke rules, and only one of them clicked the report button? What if the users need to be interviewed in order to sort out the story of what happened? Any report should be investigated in order to find out the truth instead of just operating like a robot and ignoring potential pitfalls. Also, responsible moderators should be verifying the information in the report in order to prevent abuse of the report button feature for false accusations, and in order to verify that there is not duplicate punishment for a single offense.
  18. @Wendy22 Can you please record video of correct multiplayer functionality (normal amount of lag) and video of incorrect multiplayer functionality (too much lag), so that we can evaluate the symptoms? I have a suspicion that you've upgraded your hardware based on the assumption that it would magically improve the normal amounts of lag that are present with 0ad team games. There are opportunities for making the network code more efficient and less laggy. But, lag during a team game depends on the weakest link in the chain: the player with the slowest hardware and/or the highest latency and packet loss. Reducing lag is a team effort.
  19. Testing for hardware defects involves knowing what the correct functionality looks like, performing experiments and making observations to catch incorrect functionality. Ideally a wide variety of software is used, and components replaced with known-good components in order to eliminate variables. Each experiment should be performed in a controlled manner, meaning that only one variable is varied, and there is a control group (a properly functioning hardware configuration) to compare with. One can use stress testing or benchmarking software to hopefully make it more likely that one will discover incorrect functionality.
  20. I don't think that it is necessary to study an Internet protocol like XMPP in order to implement an idea about adding a button that allows users to report misconduct in the lobby. EDIT: Knowledge of XMPP is necessary in order to add private messaging functionality to the 0ad lobby client. PM functionality is necessary in order to discretely inform an admin about the misconduct. However, if the user is eventually banned then I think that the concept of "no secret evidence" from the sixth amendment of the US Constitution should be applied. That is, if the only evidence that indicated a bannable offense was provided only by a witness, then it should not be kept secret, so that there is opportunity for the accused to effectively appeal in case of a false accusation. In order to add a report interface, it would be necessary to study JavaScript and XML, since they are used by the user interface of 0ad. But, knowledge of C++ might be necessary as well in order to enable a lobby bot to notify an admin when a player clicks the report button. Adding a report button for users to click would make lobby moderation slightly more efficient for moderators, because then moderators would not need to inspect every message. But, if no one is available at the time that the "Report" button is clicked, because there are only 1 or 2 lobby moderators, and they are not able to be interrupted most of the time due to their real-life responsibilities or else they are asleep during peak hours of certain time zones, then the main problem is a lack of staff with lobby moderation privileges. An additional problem is users who aren't motivated enough to report misconduct on the forum, an activity that would still be necessary at times, even if we had a large number of moderators.
  21. Okay, this is great. I've been thinking for a while that delegation of moderation duties to multiple people is necessary in order to improve the community atmosphere, by enforcement of the rules, in the lobby. In order to provide guidance to the people who have volunteered to help with moderation, could you make a list of examples of conduct that should receive a kick and report for possible ban, and conduct that should not? Here is a suggestion. Suggested list of example offenses that at minimum should receive a kick and definitely should be reported for possible ban User's nickname or room name does not comply with ToU, e.g. has profanity, felony crime suggested, impersonates an admin, etc. User says more than 3 swear words, possibly with modifications to bypass the profanity filter, in the span of 5 minutes User says something insulting more than once in the span of 5 minutes User is too young to sign up for a lobby account, based on the user's statement(s) about their age. Thirteen is the minimum age according to the Terms of Use Probably many more examples can be listed Question: Is the conduct of a user, while in a game listed by the lobby, covered by the Terms of Use? It's not lobby chat, it's in-game chat. I think that there is an argument to be made either way, as the network packets with potentially ToU-violating speech aren't flowing through a WFG server at that point, although there is authentication through the lobby in order to connect. Can the Terms of Use be clarified to make a statement on this issue, please? Also, where should we report potentially bannable conduct? Do you want a PM, forum post with a mention of your name, or message via other communication system? Ideally there is a way to establish quick enforcement, but I know that those with banning admin capabilities are busy, which is probably why we're seeking more assistants.
  22. Can you copy/paste the exact link to the youtube video where you found this build, please?
  23. Based on the logs, it looks like the game is using the dedicated graphics hardware. Consider checking for CPU thermal throttling, mass storage device bad sectors, network packet loss, or custom build inefficiency (e.g. maybe debugging is enabled).
  24. At first, I thought that he was referring to the .torrent file. But, later in the post he says, "remove the issue from the executable installer please". So, that leads me to think that he probably meant that he downloaded the installer via bittorrent. Also, VirusTotal has no detections for either of the .torrent files, including for Symantec's protection software. Symantec is the company that makes Norton antivirus and internet security products. 0ad-0.0.25b-alpha-win32.exe.torrent https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/e75e1b9becb74edeb58ab8851a39e1adc0b21879f10c2ad75dd0c4f1d1d83078 0ad-0.0.25b-alpha-osx64.dmg.torrent https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/968147694127a441925290fd6a0f0048e553aea32a4847c37cb493de7f8a0084?nocache=1
×
×
  • Create New...