#set_flag_color color name and #view_flag_colors

[nathanstenzel]

We have many people in the game that we don't respect or don't trust or outright hate. Do we hate the others in their guilds? Not necessarily.

 

We have a way to red tag their guild, but do the others in that guild actually deserve it? Not necessarily

 

If a good person is in a bad guild or a bad person is in a good guild, should everyone in the guild be treated the same? No.

 

People are individuals. We should be able to judge them as such.

 

If we implement a system to let us put colored flags next to people's names, we can make a distinction between "I hate that guild" and "I hate that person".....or maybe it is love or neutrality or business related. Whatever.

 

If rank X (not sure if it should be 10 or 15 or what) or greater in a guild does the command,the whole guild would see it.

Anyone in the guild will see the flags they set and the flags the guild set.

If the person is not in a guild they will see the flags they set.

 

Opinions?

 

On a side note, I gave a few people a chance and the whole game turned against my entire guild for it. There was no way to warn about the individual person, so they had to warn against the entire guild. I have seen this happen to others too. Why turn your back on your friends when you can just warn about the individual. Why claim you hate your friend when you hate what he let in the door?

[nicktehbrick]

I think it's a great idea, especially when some people guild hop.

[Riky]

Well, That's a idea.

This sistem will help the ppls to make a difference between a 'bad' person and a 'bad' guild, and if there's a 'bad' person in a 'good' guild only this person will have problems: not all the guild.

But there's another sistem, if there's a 'bad' person in a 'good' guild the guild must remove him, and the ppls from other guilds won't have to red tag the guild.

Edited October 17, 2010 by Riky

[Caliphear]

I agree. There are guilds i have had to red tag just because of trouble with one individual or one or two ppl in guilds i like who's guilds have been red tagged. this would make it easier knowing dont attack this person but do attack that person in a red tagged guild. Or ppl guildless who are troublemakers. Would help new players who join the guild know who to avoid also.

[nathanstenzel]

Oh....and did I mention this might even follow after a name change if Radu likes that idea? (obviously, if he like something, he can make it happen)

 

Well, That's a idea.

This sistem will help the ppls to make a difference between a 'bad' person and a 'bad' guild, and if there's a 'bad' person in a 'good' guild only this person will have problems: not all the guild.

But there's another sistem, if there's a 'bad' person in a 'good' guild the guild must remove him, and the ppls from other guilds won't have to red tag the guild.

Well, they wouldn't even need to red tag that guild at all. If the person is red flagged and the rest of the guild sees it, they can BroD/hate/insult that person while being really nice to the rest. lol

[nathanstenzel]

To all my enemies:

 

Hate me? Want to kill me? Want your guild to kill me on sight? Ask for this to be implemented so you can BroD flag or PK flag me while not saying to harm the defenseless newbs that I try to teach and help.

[Rhonan]

Why not make the flags personal, then... rather than a guild option. A guild has a relationship with another guild. If you want to implement flags, implement them in the client as something where you personally flag a character however you want. Make up your own system of colors. That way the implementation can be general and not involve server code.

 

So, for example, if I get bagjumped by someone in a guild with whom I'm normally friendly, I can red flag the person, and I can inform my guild on our guild BBS. Other people can flag as they want. There may be someone in my guild who is friendly with the person and would not want to see a red flag by their name.

 

Implemtation is simple... a flag.xml (or whatever type) file that maps character names (or some other ID that doesn't change when the name changes) to flag colors.

[nathanstenzel]

Why not make the flags personal, then... rather than a guild option. A guild has a relationship with another guild. If you want to implement flags, implement them in the client as something where you personally flag a character however you want. Make up your own system of colors. That way the implementation can be general and not involve server code.

 

So, for example, if I get bagjumped by someone in a guild with whom I'm normally friendly, I can red flag the person, and I can inform my guild on our guild BBS. Other people can flag as they want. There may be someone in my guild who is friendly with the person and would not want to see a red flag by their name.

 

Implemtation is simple... a flag.xml (or whatever type) file that maps character names (or some other ID that doesn't change when the name changes) to flag colors.

I must say that this is something that I think needs server support. Part of this idea is to get away from Red tagging an entire guild to warn your guildmates about individual people. Some people never look at their forums.

[SolarStar]

Oh....and did I mention this might even follow after a name change if Radu likes that idea? (obviously, if he like something, he can make it happen)

 

I think it is not a good idea if the markers on a player follow someone when s/he had a name change. With the name change you gain some privacy back if you want to stay unknown for other players. Or those that are new owners of a character, they don't want to be associated with the old owner. If an outlaw if i call them that way here gets a name change then he is basicly unknown to everyone. But when this player continues to act like s/he did before, it is soon known to everyone i think who s/he is. So to follow a name after name change is not necessary.

[Dilly]

don't we already have enough ways of starting witchhunts in this game? Aren't people already confronted with every fart they let slip 5 years ago around the wrong people (oooh that guy, when he was a noob he serped my ratspawn, so 5 years later i still hate him with a passsion!!11!1!eleven)?

 

Allowing for personal 'flags', or whatever you want to call them will only make that worse.

 

Completely getting rid of the possibility to form alliances or set guildcolors would be a better idea, in my opinion.

[nathanstenzel]

don't we already have enough ways of starting witchhunts in this game? Aren't people already confronted with every fart they let slip 5 years ago around the wrong people (oooh that guy, when he was a noob he serped my ratspawn, so 5 years later i still hate him with a passsion!!11!1!eleven)?

 

Allowing for personal 'flags', or whatever you want to call them will only make that worse.

 

Completely getting rid of the possibility to form alliances or set guildcolors would be a better idea, in my opinion.

Is the haunting of that person's past worse or torturing the guilds that except them because of that haunting past worse?

If there was a timestamp associated with the personal tag, that would cause the flag to fade away if not updated, would that solve your objection?

[Dilly]

it wouldn't solve it, because I think if someone sticks to gamerules, that's all they 'must' do. Carry your personal grudges in your notepad for all I care, I just really don't see the need for this idea to be implemented.

[nathanstenzel]

it wouldn't solve it, because I think if someone sticks to gamerules, that's all they 'must' do. Carry your personal grudges in your notepad for all I care, I just really don't see the need for this idea to be implemented.

So you do not approve of red tagging guilds either, right?

[Dilly]

I do not see the use of redtag, or even alliances, unless you're running a large guild that is (partially) active in PK.

[korrode]

If a good person is in a bad guild or a bad person is in a good guild, should everyone in the guild be treated the same? No.

Who died and made you messiah?

"No." is not necessarily going to be everyone's automatic response to that question. Some believe that a guild harbouring a 'hated'* individual should be considered an enemy as a whole.

 

* I used "hated" in a loose gaming sense, I wouldn't say i've "hated" anyone in EL ever.

 

That said, I have no particular qualms with the idea.

[KoDdy]

i agree with that =P

[Usl]

While the use cases presented above are totally reasonable, I think individual colouring would make guilds (as a in-game concept) even more irrelevant. Having a single 'judgement' for a whole guild, actually makes the decision about which players to accept (from the guild's point of view) and which guild to join (from the player's point of view) an important one, because you know that reputation will be shared among all your guild members. This gives a sense of unity, or purpose, and possibly a policy to the guild.

If you have only a strictly individual reputation thingie (as embodied by the tag colour), there would be no sharing of a common 'good name' among guildies, which I think would be socially detrimental to the sense of community.

 

In short, I am in favour of having guild-wide tag colours applied to entire guilds, i.e. exactly the current system.

 

However, we could have a parallel system whereas each individual player can assign a colour or icon to another individual player. This could be done totally client-side, and it would be relatively easy to implement (i.e., the same mechanism we currently have for #ignores, with a file listing players and icons/colour). Choosing individual colours would have a slight side effect in that we must make sure that no confusion can arise with NPCs, bots, Gods & Demigods, Invasion creatures and PKable characters, so the choice of colours can be limited. If instead we go with icons, we could re-use the buff system (that is, the one used to display the various "shield" spells) and add more icons: heart, fist, bag, etc. It would clutter the display a little, but it has the advantage of being configurable already (i.e., size for such icons can be configured locally).

As for all local settings, it would not be saved on the server, so it would be up to you to copy the relevant files over to a new machine. Yet, this is not different that what we have now with Quickspells and such, so I think it would be acceptable.

 

If the idea has support and is approved, it could be implemented rather quickly, I guess.

[nathanstenzel]

While the use cases presented above are totally reasonable, I think individual colouring would make guilds (as a in-game concept) even more irrelevant. Having a single 'judgement' for a whole guild, actually makes the decision about which players to accept (from the guild's point of view) and which guild to join (from the player's point of view) an important one, because you know that reputation will be shared among all your guild members. This gives a sense of unity, or purpose, and possibly a policy to the guild.

If you have only a strictly individual reputation thingie (as embodied by the tag colour), there would be no sharing of a common 'good name' among guildies, which I think would be socially detrimental to the sense of community.

 

In short, I am in favour of having guild-wide tag colours applied to entire guilds, i.e. exactly the current system.

 

However, we could have a parallel system whereas each individual player can assign a colour or icon to another individual player. This could be done totally client-side, and it would be relatively easy to implement (i.e., the same mechanism we currently have for #ignores, with a file listing players and icons/colour). Choosing individual colours would have a slight side effect in that we must make sure that no confusion can arise with NPCs, bots, Gods & Demigods, Invasion creatures and PKable characters, so the choice of colours can be limited. If instead we go with icons, we could re-use the buff system (that is, the one used to display the various "shield" spells) and add more icons: heart, fist, bag, etc. It would clutter the display a little, but it has the advantage of being configurable already (i.e., size for such icons can be configured locally).

As for all local settings, it would not be saved on the server, so it would be up to you to copy the relevant files over to a new machine. Yet, this is not different that what we have now with Quickspells and such, so I think it would be acceptable.

 

If the idea has support and is approved, it could be implemented rather quickly, I guess.

That is what Rhonan said. So you two would rather have it be a client side thing that you make the judgement yourself and the guild has no power to tell you a particular person is bad.

I was hoping for you to be able to do that and also see what the guild's input.

[Aislinn]

I agree with Usl.

It puts responsibility on the guild to do it's homework when picking members, and deciding whether to keep them or not.

If somebody is "bad" by whatever standards the guild has, you get rid of him to protect the guild and it's reputation.

 

A guild is a family of sorts. The whole point of a guild is to work together, play together, be good or bad together. It's a group deal.

I just see this as one more way to avoid responsibility for anything. Gosh, sounds like real life spilling over into EL...

[Usl]

I was hoping for you to be able to do that and also see what the guild's input.

I would consider using #GM or a guild forum for that. "Guild's input" might be much more articulated than a single bit of information (e.g., "The guy has a feud with JLenkins32, but has helped Legolass recover a DB once, and in general is fun to have around for a chat, although I recommend not buying Pickaxes of Doom from him as in my experience they break more often." ...

[ProHibited]

So then one player in your guild is viewed as 'bad' by others and everyone starts pking your guildie. Then what will you do?

Just let your guildie get owned and not help? Then I cant see why that person is in your guild in the first place lolz.

[nathanstenzel]

People, did I mention this is Not just about putting a warning flag on the bad guys?

 

You could put a gold flag on a business partner.

You could put a white flag on a nice person in a bad guild.

You could play capture the flag.

 

There are many uses for this.

 

Any those not in a guild....you can't set a guild tag color for someone not in a guild.

[korrode]

rly dunt buy pickaaxe from doom as usl said et r bad