Ethics

[gnuman]

And btw... this should be moved to another board.

[Cz]

Originally posted by Noer
And btw... this should be moved to another board.

Yup, I agree. Moving it to the Community Corner.

(I felt the need for a new level on my MA, and grabbed two missions before going to bed. Both were a bit larger than average. )

[___________Catalyste]

Well I put this thread where I did, because I did not really see anywhere I had access to post that seemed to fit the topic, sorry..

As for the breaking the speed limit thing, yes, I have to agree. Signs are clearly posted. And aside from the speedometer calibration thing (which is in some places no longer considered, as you are held responsible for the upkeep of your own vehicle), there is no room for interpretation. If you choose (yes it is a choice) to go too fast, you take the risk of hurting yourself, and others, and get caught. Of course, we get mad when its US and "why not that other car that passed me a while back like I was sitting still?" We get angered, and some folks get in deeper trouble. I once got run off the road by someone who ran a red light. I blew my horn as I headed up onto the curb, and aside from a plastic piece getting torn off of my car, no harm was done. And yet my horn must have angered him, because he proceeded to shout a number of obscenities at me.."Mmmkay, YOU ran the light, you ran me off the road, and you get mad at me for blowing my horn?" I thought...I had to laugh, and feel sorry for him at the same time. People get angry at the police for stopping them, as if it was not\ their fault? Hmmm...

But in some towns, some highways, the speed limits are not clearly posted, you can enter a road, and drive for a long way before you ever see one. Well if I am in a new place, and drive what I think is best based on what I know, then how can I be held responsible for what is a reasonable speed? Some countries have roads with *no* posted speed limit at all...it is open to interpretation I suppose.

Yes Cz, there are no real ways to POST such rules where people will be forced to read them, other than the notices on the login screen. Waiting until you make an example of anyone, innocent or not, will create backlash. Also, as many online things are new, it's hard to suddenly "enforce" something that people got away with for a long time. I never overequipped anything, I like to self buff, so maybe I went the "Speed Limit" on that one, but it was my choice. When it was no longer allowed, people griped, but in time, things move on. And you POSTED what was going on WAY ahead of time, which is very good (remember that .

I have worked in customer service most of my life. Just rememeber, there are people on both sides of the counter.

[assassimon]

Another example.
People find out that you can name a new guild same name as an old guild. In very short time "new" guilds pop up with the same names as the existing ones including a new The Council. I talked with guildleaders from some of the others that were hit by this and they told me that I could petition it and get those guilds renamed. I of course petitions, and get the "sorry we can't do that - its against the policies". Well, other guilds just got that done a few moments ago. "Sorry we can't do that. We are not allowed to do that." Well, I don't really care. If others can, why can't I. I guess I wasn't the only one with the problem as the policy got changed and the violating guilds disbanded or renamed.

We had the same problem and when I petitioned the GM started to work on a change in policy right away, talked with some others at the office, took like 30 min, she came back to me every 5min or something and said what she was doing and why it took time and then she said that the other guild would have another name by tomorrow. She really listened to what I said and also came back to me after to make sure everything was ok.

That was great customer support and I got it just cuz I was lucky enought to get a good GM.

I have had big problems with other GMs that don't care or listen at all and now if I have a problem (usually guild related things, I don't have many probs with my characters) I don't even petition if I see that some GMs are online, it's totally pointless.

[Maximilian]

Grats, Cat, enjoyed you statements.

A question comes to my mind.

Originally posted by Cz
And again, consistency is a key factor. We must be consistent. We all agree on that.

In game 'and' on the boards?

So long,

Max(imilian)

P.S. Most human beings (including myself) can't be consistent all the time - it is their human nature . Just try to be most of the time.

[___________Catalyste]

Originally posted by Maximilian
P.S. Most human beings (including myself) can't be consistent all the time - it is their human nature . Just try to be most of the time.

Thank you Max. Doing your best, that is all anyone can or should ask, ever. Again, we need to remember, there are people like us on BOTH sides of the counter, or in this case, both ends of the 'net. This was supposed to be a game, games are supposed to be fun...

I posted little poll to see how people prefer to get notified of official changes and such. Of course it is skewed, since ONLY people who are reading the Anarchy message boards will ever see it, but hey, its a start ... pardon the funky slashes, I swear they were NOT there in the original...I typed just an apostrophe

[Jynne]

This is a great topic for discussion, and ethics in general is a huge can of worms in the online world, since it's so very easy to get away with "it." (Whatever "it" is.)

I really think in the end the ethical responsibility to avoid doing wrong lies with the actor. In other words, it is indeed our ethical duty not to exploit, even though the game may allow it. Ideally the game wouldn't contain any exploits, yes. And players can't be blamed for the existence of exploits, no. Neither can they be blamed for stumbling across one accidentally, for example, having a UNIQUE item in their bank and forgetting about it and picking up another during play.

But if you go and put your UNIQUE item into the bank specifically so you can pick up another one, well... I think that's pretty obviously an exploit. And you are acting unethically by taking advantage of it.

Because the game allows it is not in itself justification for anything. The game allows a level 200 to attack and kill a level 75, but I think most of the people reading and posting on this thread would say that it's a lousy thing to do.

As for customer service... I would like to see the GM/ARK behavior and service guidelines, when and if they are ready, I would like to see them posted someplace easily accessible. Maybe a permanent link in the launcher window. That way people can check on how well they are being served according to those guidelines and are better able to submit knowledgeable and useful feedback when they have a complaint.

[____________Slipstar]

HOOD for Cat

[Sean-Roach]

My 5 cents, (inflation.)

First of all, even the speed limit is open to interpretation. If you have a wreck going the posted speed limit during a downpour, the responding officer CAN give you a speeding ticket for driving at a speed that's too fast for conditions.

Second of all, there are certain default speed limits. In Oklahoma, you can go 45 on a graded road, 65 on most highways, 70 on DIVIDED highways, ect.

Edit, there are various stupid laws still on the books in RL. Don't believe me? How about officially still having to send a rider ahead of your automobile to warn pedestrians off the street in Roosevelt, Oklahoma? That law was, I'm sure, formed back when cars were little more than an expensive toy, and not a practical, and common, means of transport. There's a law in this state preventing ship captains from shooting whales from the deck of their ship. Oklahoma is and has always been in the memory of Man, a landlocked state. It is illegal to make faces at a dog in one town.

If you do get a permanent link to the current guidelines placed on the launcher, would you please color code the entries and changes by time? I would and do hate reading a whole document of legalese for the fourth or fifth time because someone made a small change to some minor element of the document. I have even contemplated preserving the old Terms of Agreement for this game because I noticed a new one coming down the pipe, so I could run a scan for differences on them. I would have but I don't know if you can do that in Windows like you could in DOS. (Ironically enough, the command was FC, File Compare.)

Perhaps one way of reducing the number of bad calls would be to ALLOW a person to IMMEDIATELY call for a new call. Have several GM's or ARC's show up, hear the player out, confer among themselves, and provide a final announcement. I'd say let the original GM be involved except then there will be a feeling of "us" versus "them" where the GM's will be more likely to stick together rather than tell a player that one of their own was wrong. How to strip out the ego's, I don't know. Maybe allowing the GM to, at least appear to, revise his or her opinion based on the joint opinions of his or her fellows.

Oh, and finally, I have dealt with GM's or ARC's in only three instances, I think. In two cases I was only reporting something I perceived as a bug, while in the other, I got a (somewhat, but it was primetime,) prompt response, and a boost out of the wall I was stuck behind, allowing me to finish a mission.

I take that back, a fourth ARC, a greeter, welcomed a new character I rolled a month or so back, into the game.

[___________Catalyste]

Originally posted by Sean Roach
Perhaps one way of reducing the number of bad calls would be to ALLOW a person to IMMEDIATELY call for a new call. Have several GM's or ARC's show up, hear the player out, confer among themselves, and provide a final announcement. I'd say let the original GM be involved except then there will be a feeling of "us" versus "them" where the GM's will be more likely to stick together rather than tell a player that one of their own was wrong. How to strip out the ego's, I don't know. Maybe allowing the GM to, at least appear to, revise his or her opinion based on the joint opinions of his or her fellows.

You mean like having a council or a board, made up of FC employees and some players, and have enough so that there would always be some available (and to spread out the work), and if you were not satisfied you could go to them for a public/private hearing or an appeal? Ooh Sean, you are on to something...I bet we have people who would volunteer to be on an impartial (inherent sarcasm not intended) board...for that matter, we have a group or "Professionals," that would make a good start to this. Of course its possible that the appeals and hearing requests would pile up...but it IS an idea...I like it. Though it needs work to be feasable (online needs to follow KISS (keep it simple silly)). Community team...are you getting this? *smiles* I see another poll coming...

[____________Greystar]

As you are talking about inconsistencies, a few days ago someone got a non nodrop item reimbursed, does this mean all items lost to bugs get reimbursed now ? And if so, why was there no announcement of a policy change that important ?

[loppefaaret]

Hi...

Later same GM teleports Steffani out of Camelot to please a certain group of clans and get her killed by doing so.

i remember that, was me that wanted to empty camelot... im very sorry about that, as i had no entensions of getting her killed...
but she was AFK in the 100% area... the first ARK said "we can not warp AFK people, it is against there rules..." then i got him to contact a GM.. and after a little talk, he warped her out... just out... just outside, between 2 uber guards, and they offcourse starts attacking the Omni... and she fights back(back in the days when agg/def bar set wether or not u would auto attack), so the GM assumes she there(not really AFK)... i asked him to warp her back to an omni safe area, but he was surden she was at the computer, as she was fighting back ... (omg we laughed at that)
and offcourse, it didnt help one tiny bit, cause right after trellame came by and show how he felt about us trying to cut time off tar spawn(by staying inside and refrusing to coorperate), so we didnt have to camp the damn dragon for 18H... and back then i remember, it wasnt even for the dragon, but morgan we wanted(TT).... sorry bout all this off topic, but i rarely post on the boards, and the situation were mentioned, and i felt like explaining...

have fun

[Warlock]

This problems goes all the way to the top......

Drabin gets banned for spamming all the prof boards (and possibly some others) with his 'anti-booster pack' thread. Cz (IIRC) lifts ban having admitted the incident was handled incorrectly and states that anyone spamming boards will be banned regardless of content.

Akustic spams all the prof boards (and a good couple of others)with a 'QL33 Yalm available now' thread and NOTHING is done about it despite me keeping it at the top of the Community board for approx 5 days

[_______________Velek]

Greetings Everyone,

It's encouraging to see that this thread has appeared in the Community Corner. Both the game atmosphere and the mood of the community as a whole, as of late, demonstrate the urgent need for discussion on these issues.

In the following, I would like to add my own thoughts to this, as part of a "3 Part System for Success", that I feel every company should follow.

To begin, I'd like to just mention the 3 separate parts. They exist on their own; but, when woven together, all relate to one another and form an unbreakable bond.

They are:

1) Communication
2) Consistency
3) Professionalism


Communication is, in my opinion, at the very core of a successful business. It is essential for planning, implementation, and keeping the customer informed and happy.

Funcom's biggest fault, as I see it, is a severe lack of communication. Judging on what I have both personally experienced, and heard from other players, the lack of communication exists internally, as well as outward, to the player base.

Before we can even begin to delve into any of the other issues, communication must exist.

Internally, Funcom must ensure that communication happens upwards, from the Community Representatives, to Customer Service, to the Developers, and beyond, if such is appropriate to the matter.

Outwardly, Funcom also must ensure that players are kept in the loop on key issues. Informing your customers of changes in both game dynamics as well as policies, ensures that you have an even field to build upon.

What do we, as customers, expect communication on? I'd like to list a few things here, off the top of my head.

a) We need written guidelines for ARK members posted on the main website. This is so that we, as players, know what ARKs can do for us, what they cannot do, and what they should not do.

b) We also need written guidelines for GM's, posted on the main website, for the same reasons as above.

c) We need a clear and current guideline of Funcom's policies and procedures for the game itself. The rules must be known and understood. They must be written in stone, so to speak. I will touch more on this issue, below. So called "unwritten rules" simply cannot exist, if you intend to enforce them in any way. Calls of judgment are another issue and will be discussed later.

Also, add links to these written guidelines to the game launcher, so they may be seen and accessed from there.

d) When disciplinary measures are taken against customers' accounts, it is inexcusable for there to be any doubt as to why the action was taken. Communicate the reasons with documented proof of the necessity of such.

I will leave the issue of communication now, and move on to consistency. These two issues strongly enmesh with one another, so I feel it is appropriate to discuss it now.

The issue of consistency, or the lack thereof, as the case seems to be, is a grave concern to many of Funcom's customers, if not all.

As customers, we not only deserve, but also demand that Funcom be consistent in its dealings with us.

To be frank and honest, I have never experienced such levels of a gross lack of consistency, as I have seen as a customer of Funcom and player of Anarchy Online. The issue is quite honestly appalling.

As customers, we expect that we be treated with fairness, in a just and timely manner. We expect that communications from Funcom are clear, concise and most of all consistent. We expect that actions taken by Funcom are as consistent as humanly possibly.

At this point in time, the only guaranteed constant is that consistency simply doesn't happen.

This issue is especially vital in how Funcom approaches the issue of exploitation and the violation of rules and regulations by its customer base.

If a Customer Service Representative comes across one of these issues, and makes a judgment call, then stand by it. If it truly is just; then be absolutely sure that such a decision is communicated to every other member of the Customer Service team, and let it stand as the guideline for future situations.

This is especially true when regarding disciplinary action against customers. To have one customer "let off", so to speak on an issue that another player was banned for, is gross negligence. Consistency is vital in these instances.

Consistency too, provides Funcom a platform upon which to address the so-called 'unwritten rules'. If you are consistent with your actions, then we, as customers, know what to expect from you. For instance, when you have a player who posts about something that they feel is an exploit; to have a Community Team representative reply that 'this issue is known about, and while it is currently not an exploit, it may be in the future', is frankly intolerable. You do a disservice both to your credibility as well as erode the trust that we, as customers, place in you.

Take a firm stance on these matters, let your stance be known, and above all, be resolute in your position on the issue.

Before moving on, I'd like to express my personal view of an exploit. It has been theorized that, since the flaw exists in the coding, then to use it until it is repaired, should not be considered an exploit.

That, in my opinion, is utter rubbish. Abusing a flaw in the coding to personally benefit from said flaw, while rising above other players, should not be tolerated. Yes, flaws do exist. Responsible customers will recognize that these flaws are a detriment to the player community as a whole, and will report them. To abuse a flaw for personal gain is to take away the even and level playing field that all customers should be guaranteed.

Funcom's response to these should leave no room for "wishy-washy" behavior, nor room for question. Be clear, concise and absolute. No more of this "maybe later" attitude that we've seen so often.

Finally, be consistent on your policies. For example, if you have clearly stated that items will not reimbursed, then do not do so, for anyone. If it is going to come down to individual issues where some customers are reimbursed, it simply must happen for everyone. Consistency is key. Refusal to do so will only find you called on issues again and again.

Moving on....

I would like to close on the issue of Professionalism. This, at first glance, might seem a redundant topic to discuss in considering a business. It should be a given. Sadly though, it is not.

Funcom must absolutely realize that they have not simply produced a game, as a product, but rather, they both offer and provide a service.

I personally have an issue with Funcom on the topic of professionalism.

Too often, we see Funcom taking a hard-line stance on issues that the customer base perceives as trivial and harmless, while refusing to act on real and proven problems. This only breeds confusion and frustration. Lack of communication, and inconsistency on issues, leads to a severe lack of professionalism.

For example, banning players who "spam" the forums or cross post. What effect does this have on the game? Absolutely none. In my opinion, it would be better to deny access to the forums, while leaving the account otherwise functional.

Also, on the issue of banning; far too often this is perceived as something that happens on a whim, with little to no communication to the customer in question.

These things are abhorrently unprofessional. Identify the issues that need your attention and focus on them. Right now, all that Funcom is presenting is the appearance of a very scattered organization.

The fact that Funcom does not have written, -available- guidelines on all of these issues; while at the same time, acting on them with impudence, in seemingly random fashion, only leads to further the appearance of unprofessionalism.

Issues need to be identified, understood, and handled by the -right- people the FIRST time they come up. Too much is left in question, far too much is left up to individual interpretation.

Before I close, I would like to touch upon one final issue. It ties in directly with the 3 main points I mentioned above. This is the concept of accountability. This issue itself takes on another triad; comprising the accountability of the end user, that of the individuals representing Funcom, and that of the company itself.

With the aforementioned topics in place and being practiced, accountability is the force which will continue to maintain balance among them. To run a respectable business, there can simply be no instances of "Scape Goating" being practiced, nor tolerated.

For the end user, accountability takes the form of adhering to the guideliness that have been clearly presented, and owing up to those situations where they transgress them. We, as players, as humans, make mistakes. We have to owe up to that. We need to remember too, that if we expect responses to our issues, that we present ourselves in a courteous, civil manner.

For representatives of Funcom, the idea of accountability takes shape in how they handle matters brought forth from the player base. For example, as has been pointed out; when a complaint is voiced by a customer, then that representative is accountable for handling it responsibly, and for being clear in how they address the issues with all parties involved. They also need to ensure that they realize that they represent the corporation as an entity, and that any personal agendas, projects and opinions are not voiced as truth; nor put ahead of the appropriate way to handle matters, for the company as a whole. They must be held accountable for their words and actions.

Finally, for the company (Funcom) itself, accountability comes in the form of customer satisfaction. This is done by ensuring that all customers are treated fairly and equally, that their representatives are doing their jobs by being the voice for the company and not being sidetracked by their own issues, and that the company 'polices' its customer service department internally. They must ensure that those individuals in positions of 'power' are handling them responsibly, and a system of checks and balances absolutely must guarantee this. With so many tales of supposed corruption and mishandled issues, this is vital.


In closing, I would like to say that this is not a lost cause. These situations can be improved upon, changes can be made, and a turnaround can come about. I feel that if the aforementioned items are taken into consideration, and implemented, then many more positive changes will fall into place.

I welcome any discussion on these thoughts, and will comment further as the situation warrants.

Thank you all for taking the time to read through this.

Respectfully,

Velek

[___________Serotonin]

Lots of very nicely worded, constructive posts here that i have no hope of emulating in terms of relevance/eloquence, but i justhave to get this off my chest.

I HATE the GMs guild! The name "Gods of Rubi-Ka", the description/history - everything!. Admittedly im making the early running for petty post of the year here but my first impression of an AO GM was when i typed /org info. Personally i think it creates a unneccesary and unhelpful air of elitism around GMs.

Completely pointless and shamefully petty i know, but im just speaking from personal experience.

[_______________Velek]

Hello Again, All,

I wanted to briefly touch on something that was mentioned above. Sean presented an idea on having the option to have a "new call" available to players in regards to GM decisions. Cat furthered it by suggesting a board of sorts, of players and ARKs/GM's.

In my opinion, this is a bad idea. Funcom runs Anarchy Online, and in such, AO is not a democracy. Nor should it be. Funcom DOES need to ensure that the customer base is happy, yes, but corporations are not democracies.

All this would do is undermine the GM as an authority figure, and throw consistency right out the window, if anytime a player didn't like something, he could go ask for someone else to tell him what he wants to hear.

I liken that to a child who asks his father for something, is told no, and then sneaks off to ask mother, too.

We really can't foster that sort of environment here.

The semantics of it aren't really possible. Funcom needs to have a strong guideline as part of their standard operating procedure, they need to inform the customer base of what those guidelines are, and they need to adhere to them adamantly.

It must be an absolute. Yes, sometimes the GM will ere. To do so is human; but no group of players will ever be able to be completely impartial, in order to render judgements and make decisions. Nor should such a responsibility fall upon a player, to make decisions for another.

Leave it to the company. Let them handle the policies, and let us play.

My $.02

- Velek

[Nepenthea]

Golly gee!

Real life and the game sure mirror each other a lot.

Okay, this really is not Fun-Tek VS PlayerClan. The creation of a 'Council of Truth-d00ds' is vastly inappropriate here.

The ROOT of the problem lies with lack of guidelines, thorough communication and consistency--that is what needs to be addressed and corrected; not a "committee" to cover over the root problem, further ulcerating the situation.

If Funcom and their representitives adhere to guidelines, then a "council/committee" is completely unneeded and unwarrented.

When you have well-documented guidelines, the less room you have for misinterpretation and abuse, and the more everyone knows where they stand and are accountable; and the less stressful it is for everyone involved.

less stress = good

[Paffy]

Velek must be real life business consultant

Very well worded summary of things we already all know and hope that FC will eventually too...

Zarch and da chars

PS.
Half the guild is already playing AC2 Beta more than this game, including Demios. Sigh.

[Cz]

Insanely busy these days, but dropping by this thread, as it is a very interesting one.


Yes, Maximilian, on the boards too. As usual, feel free to e-mail me any inconsistencies you see.


Cat, I doubt we will ever let players make the desicions like that. While we are very happy for feedback and act on it, we will not let go of the control we need on the game - especially in order to ensure - exactly - consistency.


Greystar, give me some more information on the issue, and I will look into it. 'Somebody got something reimbursed at some time' isn't much for me to work on.


Suspending Drabin was not the mistake, Warlock. Not letting him know the reason was, and that's why he was let back in earlier.

Have you reported the post(s) you say are spam by the report link? I only took over those reports a few days ago, but have seen no such report.


Great posts, Velek.


Serotonin, I'll look into that 'guild'. I didn't know about it, in fact.


To everybody participating, thank you for the discussion input and feedback. Please continue to add to it if you like. I read every word, and bring them with me to the other people in Funcom.

[Warlock]

Originally posted by Cz
Suspending Drabin was not the mistake, Warlock. Not letting him know the reason was, and that's why he was let back in earlier.

But like so many other issues, you comment on the trivia and avoid the core point.

The point was Akustic was not banned (nor any of the threads locked so I can only assume no official action was taken) for doing exactly the same thing days later