Ignore = inaudible ... and invisible?

[diafero]

Using the ignore list sounds like a good idea, and should be relatively easy backportable.

[Rabenschwinge]

I guess we didn't understood each other, as Gahlen said I indeed meant the shunned player and the player shunning him would be the only ones not to see each other. Sorry if I didn't explained it clearly enough.

Anyway, thank you Hoikas for doing this.

Ah, yes, I misunderstood what you wrote ^^
That makes sense and is a good idea, imho

[Gahlen]

I'm reading through today's posts on this topic over at MOUL (some of which are treating the thread as though it were a wish-list for stuff they've always wanted to change about the KI, the hoods, the chat function, etc. ... we really need to think about a better way for people to request features somehow, without the discussion going all over the place) and a couple of people have said that it would be good to have some way of knowing if an invisible avatar (/ignorer or /ignored) is present in an Age with you; the thought that someone could turn the tables on you and then hang around invisibly in your hood or in one of your private Ages without you being able to tell if they'd finally left is kind of creepy.

At the moment, I can see the generic location of an /ignored avatar in the Ignore List, but "so-and-so is online and exploring in the Hood Age" doesn't tell me whether he's in my hood with me or in someone else's. Is there a (simple) technical solution to this (like e.g. allowing invisible avatars to remain in the Age Player list at the left)?

A second question. Say we get this into the client: is it reversible? As in, if people think after a six month trial period, it really sucks, we could take it out again without too much hassle and revert back to the way things are at the moment?

[Gahlen]

Day 3 of the discussion at MOUL, and most people are turning out to be unhappy with the idea of making invisibility two-way. Question to Adam: Is this a major pain, or can that be changed relatively easily? It would make the issue of making invisible avatars show up somewhere in the left column superfluous. My question about reversibility still stands.

[Tsar Hoikas]

The changes should be easily reversible. We use version control for a reason, after all . One-way only invisibility is also doable, but the arguments I'm reading on MOUL aren't convincing to me. Sadly, I've not had enough time to write any sort of comprehensive response. It would be possible to add another tab for "ignored" players to the left hand list or to simply allow ignored players to appear in the age players list.

[Gahlen]

Version control, of course (doh). Sorry, not thinking this through. As for mutual versus non-mutual, I agree with you, I'm not convinced either. Nevertheless, if it comes down to a question of something that is my slight preference but someone else's major nightmare, I'll give in. There's no point producing an update that whole bunches of people won't accept.

If we don't get two-way invisibility through, do you or does anyone else have an alternative, easy-to-implement idea about Relto-spamming? At MOUL, lunanne suggested early on a command disabling clickability for one's own avatar. I assumed and still assume that this falls under "adding something to the KI (generally "not fun")". I don't suppose there's a simpler option?

[Tsar Hoikas]

We'd pretty much be limited to finding out why Relto spamming works and fixing that bug. Toggling clickability is a global action (the changes are propagated to everyone in the age). I'm not sure how involved it is inside the engine code, but I do know that touching engine code will definitely slow down the approval/porting process.

[Luna]

My reasoning was that is it only really matters for relto sharing, the fact that it was global would not be too much of an issue. And afaik it would not be too hard to implement.

[Gahlen]

Yes, I think you're probably right about it not being too much of an issue in gameplay. I'd be fine with this, but I'm a bit worried about the practicalities of implementation. Luna, are you in a position to look into this and verify that it wouldn't be difficult? Or is this something Adam would have to do?

[Luna]

I am not sure of how Adam is thinking of implementing it,but I added it myself as KI command at one point and I did not find it too hard, the engine already has a python function you can call.