How to make a suggestion to Blizz

"Lepak Nerat" <why.RemoveThis@why.com> wrote in message
news:wt1%j.18068$SA7.3273@newsfe09.ams2...
>I have an idea to minimise the misuse of some in game chat channels.
> Who or how do I contact blizz to suggest this idea too?
> Forums? any that are monitored? phone them? is there a link on the wow
> site i missed for game ideas?
>
> Its not a great idea, all it is is limit the number of times a char can
> post in a channel for XX mins. not long just 3 mins.
> Stop all the inane and useless chats that go on in the trade channel, it
> would make players use the LFG channel for its purpose and leave the trade
> channel to its purpose, trading stuff.
>
> They could also have an in game healper for setting up your own channel to
> chat BS with your mates, intstead of trade, or general, or LFG or /s (say)
>
> It does bug the S**t out of me.

There's a "suggestions" forum....

Xymmie
 >> Stay informed about: How to make a suggestion to Blizz 

On Wed, 28 May 2008 01:14:20 +0100, Lepak Nerat <why RemoveThis @why.com> wrote:

>They could also have an in game healper for setting up your own channel
>to chat BS with your mates, intstead of trade, or general, or LFG or /s
>(say)

I don't know about a helper (I think that's what you meant), but this
is already in the game and could *not* be simpler. Decide on a name
for the channel and have everyone you wish to talk to /join it. My
guild has one that was set up to be a way to look for people in
another "allied" guild, but it's grown, and has now become the chat
channel as well as LFG channel not only for both guilds but also for
the remnants of the raiding guild that split off from us many moons
ago, and several others that split off from them. Note: You only have
to join the channel once with each toon, up until 2.4 the game never
made you quit the channel when you logged out, when 2.4 broke I found
several toons that I had to rejoin it on, but several others didn't,
so even that wasn't consistent.

ald
reply via email to ald_007_1999 at yahoo dot com
 >> Stay informed about: How to make a suggestion to Blizz 

On May 28, 1:02 pm, Urbin <ur....DeleteThis@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On Wed, 28 May 2008 10:37:11 +0100, Lepak Nerat wrote:
> > > On Wed, 28 May 2008 01:14:20 +0100, Lepak Nerat <w....DeleteThis@why.com> wrote:
>
> > > Its not a great idea, all it is is limit the number of times a char can
> > > post in a channel for XX mins. not long just 3 mins. Stop all the inane
> > > and useless chats that go on in the trade channel, it would make players
> > > use the LFG channel for its purpose and leave the trade channel to its
> > > purpose, trading stuff.
>
> >  thanks all for the info. i am surprised none of you had any comment on
> >  my idea tho
>
> I thought about it but decided not to piss on the idea
>
> In short, while it might cut down on the inane chatter, the asshats could
> still spam, just a little less often but I doubt that it's single chars that
> spam a single channel, I fear it's more a problem of the asshats having a
> following and each of them contributing.
>
> Even if each asshat could only post 1 message to /2 every 3 minutes, if
> there are another 9 asshats, you'd still get 10 spam messages in 3 minutes
> or one every 18 seconds.
>
> I doubt that each idiot has a much higher output than that (after all, that
> would require typing skills
>
> On the downside, you would also limit legitimate posters. While I am not
> sure how often it happens, I am sure there are cases where people need to
> post to a certain channel more frequently than once every few minutes, let's
> say:
>
> Tom: /1 where can I find [Secret Stash of Goodies]?
> Dick: /1 just next to the house
> Tom: /1 which house do you mean?
> Dick: /1 the one to the right of the mill
> Tom: /1 the windmill or the water mill?
> Dick: /1 the windmill
> Harry: /1 the one just next to the school
>
> This is a perfectly legitimate conversation and probably approaches posting
> frequency of spammers in such a channel.
>
> Filtering out spam is a matter of textual analysis and that is so far from
> perferct that it would probably cause more grief than relief and the same is
> true for access limiting methods such as you propose.
>
> I'd much rather just /ignore or /report idiots once instead of being limited
> by an imperfect automated mechanism.

Random chat in /1 seems to me a reasonable thing to do. What else is
it there for? It's an MMO where people interact. /2 has the specific
purpose of being for trade and should only be used as such. Blizzard
should really just create a global chat channel that works in cities
and leave it at that. Hopefully people will move off trade to that
channel.
 >> Stay informed about: How to make a suggestion to Blizz 

ald wrote:
> On Wed, 28 May 2008 01:14:20 +0100, Lepak Nerat <why.DeleteThis@why.com> wrote:
>
>> They could also have an in game healper for setting up your own channel
>> to chat BS with your mates, intstead of trade, or general, or LFG or /s
>> (say)
>
> I don't know about a helper (I think that's what you meant), but this
> is already in the game and could *not* be simpler. Decide on a name
> for the channel and have everyone you wish to talk to /join it. My
> guild has one that was set up to be a way to look for people in
> another "allied" guild, but it's grown, and has now become the chat
> channel as well as LFG channel not only for both guilds but also for
> the remnants of the raiding guild that split off from us many moons
> ago, and several others that split off from them. Note: You only have
> to join the channel once with each toon, up until 2.4 the game never
> made you quit the channel when you logged out, when 2.4 broke I found
> several toons that I had to rejoin it on, but several others didn't,
> so even that wasn't consistent.
>
> ald
> reply via email to ald_007_1999 at yahoo dot com
thanks all for the info. i am surprised none of you had any comment on
my idea tho
Thibor druid EU Shadowsong
 >> Stay informed about: How to make a suggestion to Blizz 

On Wed, 28 May 2008 10:37:11 +0100, Lepak Nerat wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 May 2008 01:14:20 +0100, Lepak Nerat <why RemoveThis @why.com> wrote:
>
> > Its not a great idea, all it is is limit the number of times a char can
> > post in a channel for XX mins. not long just 3 mins. Stop all the inane
> > and useless chats that go on in the trade channel, it would make players
> > use the LFG channel for its purpose and leave the trade channel to its
> > purpose, trading stuff.
>
> thanks all for the info. i am surprised none of you had any comment on
> my idea tho

I thought about it but decided not to piss on the idea

In short, while it might cut down on the inane chatter, the asshats could
still spam, just a little less often but I doubt that it's single chars that
spam a single channel, I fear it's more a problem of the asshats having a
following and each of them contributing.

Even if each asshat could only post 1 message to /2 every 3 minutes, if
there are another 9 asshats, you'd still get 10 spam messages in 3 minutes
or one every 18 seconds.

I doubt that each idiot has a much higher output than that (after all, that
would require typing skills

On the downside, you would also limit legitimate posters. While I am not
sure how often it happens, I am sure there are cases where people need to
post to a certain channel more frequently than once every few minutes, let's
say:

Tom: /1 where can I find [Secret Stash of Goodies]?
Dick: /1 just next to the house
Tom: /1 which house do you mean?
Dick: /1 the one to the right of the mill
Tom: /1 the windmill or the water mill?
Dick: /1 the windmill
Harry: /1 the one just next to the school

This is a perfectly legitimate conversation and probably approaches posting
frequency of spammers in such a channel.

Filtering out spam is a matter of textual analysis and that is so far from
perferct that it would probably cause more grief than relief and the same is
true for access limiting methods such as you propose.

I'd much rather just /ignore or /report idiots once instead of being limited
by an imperfect automated mechanism.

Cheers
Urbin

--
Dun Morogh-EU (PvE)
Urbin (70), Dwarven Hunter | Surana (24), Draenei Mage
Mymule (70), Gnomish Warlock | Juran (33), Nightelven Druid
Sunh (70), Nightelven Priest | Gera (26), Human Paladin
 >> Stay informed about: How to make a suggestion to Blizz 

"Mark (newsgroups)" <marknewsgroups RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:844a117f-1504-443d-9818-550b4ce3fc21@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
<snipped>

>Random chat in /1 seems to me a reasonable thing to do. What else is
>it there for? It's an MMO where people interact. /2 has the specific
>purpose of being for trade and should only be used as such. Blizzard
>should really just create a global chat channel that works in cities
>and leave it at that. Hopefully people will move off trade to that
>channel.

The game used to have a global chat channel. It was removed. As was the
'looking for group' channel.

Personally, I liked the old ways.. I just ignored the spammers, and I liked
being able to monitor groups that were forming, as I could join some groups
with my alt.

But, despite complaints regarding the changes, here we are, with NO method
of global communication EXCEPT the trade channel.
 >> Stay informed about: How to make a suggestion to Blizz 

On Wed, 28 May 2008 15:58:04 -0400, "L"
<lisaanne_quiltshatesspam RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Mark (newsgroups)" <marknewsgroups RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:844a117f-1504-443d-9818-550b4ce3fc21@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
><snipped>
>
>>Random chat in /1 seems to me a reasonable thing to do. What else is
>>it there for? It's an MMO where people interact. /2 has the specific
>>purpose of being for trade and should only be used as such. Blizzard
>>should really just create a global chat channel that works in cities
>>and leave it at that. Hopefully people will move off trade to that
>>channel.
>
>The game used to have a global chat channel. It was removed. As was the
>'looking for group' channel.
>
>Personally, I liked the old ways.. I just ignored the spammers, and I liked
>being able to monitor groups that were forming, as I could join some groups
>with my alt.
>
>But, despite complaints regarding the changes, here we are, with NO method
>of global communication EXCEPT the trade channel.

'Looking for Group' channel has *not* been removed, you just have to
use the LFG tool to access it. If you are trying to monitor instead of
wanting to join with the toon you're currently playing, click the down
button next to "Dungeon" and select "Zone" instead, then pick one.
Admittedly I haven't tried this a lot, but I've yet to be asked into a
group for the zone I've selected in the few times I've tried it.

Now, if you had said the LFG tool is broken and/or almost useless, I
wouldn't argue. I've had several toons not be able to LFG for Gnomer,
because the filter they use thinks they are too high level, even
though "The Grand Betrayer" (I'm pretty sure that's the right name),
the main quest or at least the quest for the end boss, was still
*red*, or at the very least still orange.

I had an even worse problem with the LFG tool when I last played my
Priest. She finished up a level 30 Dun Modr quest, and got a Stockades
quest. Of course the filter decided that at level 30 she was too high
for Stockades, so again I couldn't look for Stocks (incidentally, this
is when I discovered the "zone" thing, as she also had quests (still
green) for BFD and couldn't look there, either, so I tried looking for
Ashenvale). Fortunately, a level 26 Rogue whispered me to ask if he
was high enough to try Gnomer, which I'd also signed up for. My reply
was that I didn't think so, unless he had a really good tank and/or a
better healer than I was, so he asked me what dungeon he should be
going to. I told him Stockades, and asked him to *please* let me know
if he got a group together for it.

That turned into one of the more interesting runs I've had lately
Levels 24 and 26 Rogues, a Mage (don't remember level, but it was in
the right range) and a Druid (same). I'd seen them asking in LFG for a
tank, so I asked if the Druid was going to Tank. The leader, the 24
Rogue, said "No, Rogue tank", and I'm glad I kept my mouth shut,
because I certainly had my doubts about that.

I ended up pretty bored through the run, with not much to do except
for in the Ward fight. *That* one was tough, I might have lost a
member or two if I didn't get help healing from the Druid, but I did
get it although I hadn't asked for it, and we got through without a
single death. The 24 Rogue seemed to me to be doing a better job of
playing his toon than I do with my 53 Rogue, not that that's saying a
whole lot, but he tanked through with *no* problems, not even needing
a heal on most of the fights. Heh, I probably ended up healing the 26
Rogue and the Mage more than the Tank, even though I was keeping my
focus on the Tank.

Again, I've gone into "much more than you asked for" territory,
especially since you didn't *ask* anything, so I'll shut up now

ald
reply via email to ald_007_1999 at yahoo dot com
 >> Stay informed about: How to make a suggestion to Blizz