Open Source Uru Plans, the GOW perspective

General debates and discussion about the Guild of Writers and Age creation

Re: Open Source Uru Plans, the GOW perspective

Postby J'Kla » Fri Dec 26, 2008 4:20 am

With UU because it was home hosted it had a shard owner. The owner had overriding authority the owner gave specific admin rights to trusted players an adimn could look at and change the game vault.

With remote hosting and shared ownership the clarity of the shard owner and appointed admins becomes an issue who do we authorise. There was no issue as long as we were in UU because the Shard owner became a benevolent dictator and if they did not like the situation they had the ultimate sanction of pulling the plug.

On D'mala and MO:UL this post of benevolent dictator was jointly held between Cyan and GameTap.
User avatar
J'Kla
 
Posts: 1003
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:16 pm
Location: Geordieland UK

Re: Open Source Uru Plans, the GOW perspective

Postby Chacal » Fri Dec 26, 2008 11:34 am

The hardest part of running a shard is running the box around the game, and running the game itself. Configuration, maintenance, manuallly managing it using Vault Manager.

Events occuring inside the game (operating special avatars, policing) are an entirely different thing. They can be delegated to different people.

I'm not familiar with special avatars and story in Uru, but the policing part I'm very familiar with, because I have been managing teams of admins (called resEngs in MOUL) on game servers for years. Although this was for action games (different crowd), the concept is the same. Here's a quick breakdown of the duties involved:

- write rules for players, tailored to fit the game experience wanted by the community;
- write guidelines and rules for admins, also tailored to the context;
an example of admin guidelines for BF2 servers Show Spoiler

- if applicable, write a procedure for players to apply for adminship (unless this is on invitation only, which is usual);
- carefully selecting admins according to whatever criteria are appropriate for the community. This is the hardest part. You must beware of people on power trips, with poor people skills, or with bad judgment. Try to hire people from all over the world to ensure proper 24h coverage;
- make sure new admins know the rules and guidelines and sign off on them, along with consequences if those are not followed. This is in case of trouble. It is very hard to fire an admin for "having poor people skills" if no specific rule is broken;
- make sure new admins get proper training;
- put new admins in a trial period during which they are monitored and they get feedback and advice;
- put in place a hierarchical system with growing responsibilities (such as: junior admins, admins, senior admins, head admin) according to experience;
- give proper resources to the admins: private forums, documentation, tools;
- manage the roster, making sure there is an admin presence on game servers at peak times, problem times, and as much around the clock as possible;
- monitor chat logs, game logs, forums to make sure everything is running smoothly. Play the game anonymously for monitoring;
- provide arbitration in case of conflict;
- receive player complaints and act accordingly.

This was a different context of course, a competitive environment where strict rules had to be enforced and frequent violations were the norm. Uru is more relaxed, using the same rules would be like launching the SWAT team on a knitting club, but the framework for managing teams of admins should be the same.
Chacal


"The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is an attribute of the strong."
-- Mahatma Gandhi
User avatar
Chacal
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Open Source Uru Plans, the GOW perspective

Postby Nalates » Fri Dec 26, 2008 1:41 pm

Chacal, great post. Thanks.

One of the RPG's I play in has a section in their forum for APPEALS. When a player feels the ResEng/Admin was wrong/unfair/unjustified and wants to have the whole thing reviewed, they post there. Admins usually respond with the chat logs. The top managers can review the situation and make a call. Of course good in-game admins usually are backed by management. But, it does give the management feedback on the kind of job in-game admins are doing and better insight into the player. I've seen a couple of players get added pentalies and others banned from the game because of their conduct in the review. Since everyone could read the responses in the forum, there was no misunderstanding why the admins/managers did what they did.

Your experience could give us an idea if this is something worthwhile or not.
ImageNalates - Guild of Cartographers
Guild Apprentice: GoW, GoMa - Liaison: GoC to GoMe, GoC to SL (Nalates Urriah)
MO:UL 00 379 343 - Author: Uru Maps Tech Data
Nalates
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:59 am
Location: California

Re: Open Source Uru Plans, the GOW perspective

Postby Chacal » Fri Dec 26, 2008 3:04 pm

Absolutely, this is an essential part of the interaction between players and owners.
what we used in one community Show Spoiler


The player rules included a section on how to appeal when you were kicked, banned, or felt you had been abused by an admin. The procedure involved making a post in the appropriate "Been banned?" forum, or using PMs in case of personal issues. A polite post would get you a polite answer and quick resolution.

Our admins had tools for responding efficiently to such posts: a searchable database of all kicks and bans indexed by player name (think of it as the criminal record for a player :)), a searchable database of chat logs, Punkbuster logs (for cheating offenses), Punkbuster screenshots, etc.

All of this seems scary, but remember most of it wouldn't apply to an Uru shard.

why this was a different context Show Spoiler
Chacal


"The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is an attribute of the strong."
-- Mahatma Gandhi
User avatar
Chacal
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Open Source Uru Plans, the GOW perspective

Postby J'Kla » Fri Dec 26, 2008 3:41 pm

We are going to have an issue just deciding who is top dog when it comes to shard admin issues.

As I said earlier UU it was the shard owner If he/she said a particular player or action was allowed then that was final. This sort of arbitrator of last resort needs to be a community wide respected voice. Someone with no axe to grind. Behaviour within a written age as far as game play could be called by the age writer. But for the Cyan parts and the chat interaction we really do need to have someone who can command the respect of the community.

I would suggest we need that sorted prior to asking people to join.
User avatar
J'Kla
 
Posts: 1003
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:16 pm
Location: Geordieland UK

Re: Open Source Uru Plans, the GOW perspective

Postby Dachannien » Fri Dec 26, 2008 5:32 pm

There seems to be a misperception concerning the US laws in force right now.

COPA was struck down by a district judge in 2007, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the decision in 2008, and the US Government was enjoined from enforcing the law.

On the other hand, COPPA is still in force. It regulates the kinds of information that Internet services can collect about children age 12 or lower. Essentially, if you operate a website geared toward children, or if you knowingly collect personal information (including e-mail address) from people you know to be age 12 or lower, you have several hoops you have to jump through. Most websites deal with this by either screening new registrants out by age, or by not asking for information that could indicate that a registrant is age 12 or lower.
Dachannien
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 5:14 pm

Re: Open Source Uru Plans, the GOW perspective

Postby Paradox » Fri Dec 26, 2008 6:40 pm

Dachannien wrote:On the other hand, COPPA is still in force. It regulates the kinds of information that Internet services can collect about children age 12 or lower. Essentially, if you operate a website geared toward children, or if you knowingly collect personal information (including e-mail address) from people you know to be age 12 or lower, you have several hoops you have to jump through. Most websites deal with this by either screening new registrants out by age, or by not asking for information that could indicate that a registrant is age 12 or lower.


The only thing collected by an Uru server is a username, password, and avatar name(s). As far as I can tell, this shouldn't be a violation of COPPA. I know there were people in UU who were younger than 12, and I don't recall there being any issues with account creation and avatar creation.

A username and password are hardly "knowingly collecting personal information".
Paradox
 
Posts: 1295
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:48 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Open Source Uru Plans, the GOW perspective

Postby Lontahv » Fri Dec 26, 2008 6:56 pm

I've been subject to very bad (global) admins in other online games. They kick people off a server just for fun. And then kick people off the next server.

Shard admins should admin. period. If I'm running a server I don't want somebody coming and telling me s/he can use tools on my server that I don't have or approve.

IMO administration on a GoW shard should be exactly the same as on the forum.
Currently getting some ink on my hands over at the Guild Of Ink-Makers (PyPRP2).
User avatar
Lontahv
Councilor of Artistic Direction
 
Posts: 1331
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:09 pm

Re: Open Source Uru Plans, the GOW perspective

Postby BAD » Fri Dec 26, 2008 8:58 pm

As a former admin for an Until Uru shard, I can confirm that even at times when their were close to 50 people on a shard, the tactics used in Chacal's posts are overkill.

However it is not because they are not needed, but because the amount of problem people you get is much lower. Usually if someone is a problem, it takes a whole lot more finesse then just kicking them or banning them.

The issue with uru is that it is primarily social game. People form friendships and join clicks. These clicks will defend each other even if they are unsure that their friend is innocent. So when you get to the stage that you allow people to defend themselves, you are not dealing with an individual, your dealing with five or six people, that are inteligent enough to not only argue for their friends benefit, but to cause enough doubt and chaos on your forum to get the whole place riled up.

This kind of thing is incredibly hard to difuse.

the only sure way I have found is knowing everyone invloved, and dealing with them one by one. The more people you deflect away from the issue, the easier it is to deal with the offender.

Failure to difuse a problem in this communty effectively, leads to things like the liaison debacle, shard wars, and recently the moderation issues on the MOUL forums. The latter being less intense than the other two.

I'll be happy to help whoever gets the unlucky position of head admin for any shard. They will need insider advice.

I'll have more to say later into next week. I am on vacation, and my mind is a million light years away from the Uru boads. :D
BAD is as good as he gets
User avatar
BAD
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 9:44 am

Re: Open Source Uru Plans, the GOW perspective

Postby Lontahv » Fri Dec 26, 2008 9:36 pm

BAD sums it up really well. :)

With battle-games everything's kinda brutal. Not that people don't have friends. Even on good battle-game servers and games I've been too, the admins usually try to "set an example" for everyone by kicking people that cause just a very little bit of trouble. Though I have seen exceptionally good admins that don't just warn people, they actually try to reason with a troll or TK-er and or calm a disagreement.
Last edited by Lontahv on Sat Dec 27, 2008 2:44 am, edited 2 times in total.
Currently getting some ink on my hands over at the Guild Of Ink-Makers (PyPRP2).
User avatar
Lontahv
Councilor of Artistic Direction
 
Posts: 1331
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:09 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron