Jump to content
deku

Messaging system on dragcave website

Recommended Posts

I just declined someone’s trade offer by accident need to tell a guy to resubmit his offer but can’t :(

Share this post


Link to post

If the person has a forum account you can PM them here. Some sort of in-cave communication feature has been suggested many times, though I can't find the specific threads right now... Many of us have a lot of doubts and concerns about something like that and rather enjoy that the game doesn't have any direct interaction.

 

edit: Found a post from TJ himself in February that seems to directly shoot down anything like this:

 

Edited by HeatherMarie

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

All interactions with other users must be willful. Bothering other users to return abandoned eggs or posting the eggs, hatchlings, or adult dragons without a user's permission are prohibited.

 

Having the option to accept messages from others could be considered willful, but if you ever decide you have to block someone, then how would you protect yourself from any angry retaliation? I can see where this makes it a can of worms.

Share this post


Link to post

Well having an ability to message a user who is interested in your trade (not hte other way around), would be good - considering the want box is being used for such communications.  A reporting system in place to deter hostility would be necessary. An ability to block a user from messaging you would probably be in place.

 

@Sextonator: I would reason that a reporting system for abusive messages would be in place - so to protect yourself, just hit report. I'd hypothosise that such a system would either block the user from sending messages, or log sent messages. That's how I would do it if I could code it. (read: If I could code)

Share this post


Link to post

Unfortunately it seems like if you want interactivity and connectivity you're better off finding a different game. A lot of users here don't want any kind of contact at all; I wouldn't get too invested in this game if you want anything social.

 

As much as it would benefit a game like this to have more, TJ seems totally against anything that would be considered "privacy invasion" as HeatherMarie pointed out. //shrug

 

It's unlikely this game will change that drastically.

Share this post


Link to post

Of course, an in-cave messaging system being beneficial to the game is only an *opinion*, no one knows if it would actually make such a huge positive difference in the game. Just like me thinking it would be more trouble then it's worth is just my own opinion.

 

And honestly, as long as we have such a huge viewbombing problem, an in-game messaging system would make it that much easier for those viewbombers to harass others. Sure there would probably be a way to report messages, maybe even a way to block users, but that's all after the fact. Does nothing to *prevent* harassment in the first place, unless the entire communication feature is opt-IN and has multiple settings for if and how you accept contact.

Share this post


Link to post

Okay, let's assume we could get a messaging system. What would we need?

 

An option to opt in/opt out of the feature, as well as the ability to block certain users. A whitelist/blacklist feature would be idea. Whitelist activated with no names on it means that nobody can message you (=opt out). We also need to have the blacklist work for our public trades, or we could be targeted through them. So, if a player is blacklisted from messaging you, they cannot see your public trades, much less offer on them.

 

Plus, of course, we'd need to be able to report messages.

Share this post


Link to post

Ideally, now that we have the Trading Hub, in addition to everything olympe said I'd like an option for only trade-related communications. Like, only people who's trade I've offered on can message me (current offer, not everyone I've ever offered on of course). Also maybe an option to allow people who offer on my own trade to contact me (so, for instance, they could mention being willing to offer something else, or mention that a hatchie is precogged a certain gender, or whatever). With how many different reasons/forms of communication there are in general, I really think that an actual in-game messaging system would *have* to come with a lot of options, not just simply opt-in or opt-out. So....

 

- Opt-IN in general, so users who aren't aware of a new messaging feature don't get bombarded with unwanted messages

- Ability to block specific users from messaging you

- Ability to only allow communications from specific users ('whitelist')

- Option to report a message

- Option to *only* allow messages from people who've offered on your trade (and/or from people who's trade you've offered on)

Share this post


Link to post

I think the trade-related-only messages are a good idea for an option. Support!

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, an opt in required for everyone from the start is a great idea. I know kids play the game, but I don’t remember if the site asks for a birthdate when you sign up... If it does, anyone under, say 13, should in general be unable to use the messaging system.

 

I’m not sure if I’m for a whitelist, but if it’s optional, I’d be ok with that.

Share this post


Link to post

I added numbers to the points to make it clearer.

 

50 minutes ago, HeatherMarie said:

1 Opt-IN in general, so users who aren't aware of a new messaging feature don't get bombarded with unwanted messages

2 Ability to block specific users from messaging you

3 Ability to only allow communications from specific users ('whitelist')

4 Option to report a message

5 Option to *only* allow messages from people who've offered on your trade (and/or from people who's trade you've offered on)

 

#1: This is how we got into this feature idea to begin with. If people opt out, then we could see people using their want boxes as a shout out "hey you there, turn your messages on." (On the fence) taking a look at #5 should show how I think a work around would go. See #5

#2 absolutely

#3 Could be admittedly limiting if attempting to communicate with people regarding a trade  (I am still all for blocking a user from offering on a given trade after that one person didn't take the hint.)

#4 100% Any unwanted messages rude or otherwise should be reported. (I cannot see such a system be implemented without this.)

#5 This is why I say #1 see #5. I think it would be best if messages were limited to only those who are actively negotiating trades with one another. In fact, I feel that the person with the trade should be the only one who can initiate the Message "Hey look, I can't take your trade, you're egg locked!". This would eliminate a lot of abusive or unnecessary messages. If people opt out, say I opt out (I often choose silence) And you want to communicate with me regarding the trade, you'd have to find other means to contact me. (Hello again want box...)

 

for example, I don't want people messaging me about my trades. If I feel the need to communicate, then I would rather be able to be the one to initiate contact. This is important because of the trolls and whatnot. I can fully understand wanting to avoid the people who intend to send sending traders with messages "gimme!".

 

This is also why #3 could be a problem If users do not have you white listed to contact them over the trade, then how is the needed discussion going to take place.

 

so to attempt to summarise, if communication is only initiated by the egg/hatching holder, then a lot of the problems under the #1 would be avoided.

 

my reasoning is not perfect.I am tired as slag and barely staying awake.

Edited by Starscream

Share this post


Link to post

Still, as the person offering on a trade, you might need to be able to communicate, too. "Hatchling is influenced/precogged male/female."; "ND will not gender." "Still scroll-locked for 20 more minutes, give or take." "Solstice will have blue wings." Things like that might be valuable to know before you accept an offer. And, yes, I know we can already re-name the parents - or offer an additional bred dummy egg with renamed parents...

 

Fact is: This kind of communication is already possible by misusing site features. I don't think it would get worse if it became an official kind of feature. At the very least, allow notes on trades - both by the instigator and the person(s) offering. (When in doubt: It's much easier to report notes/wants/whatever in trades than dragon names.)

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, Starscream said:

 

#1: This is how we got into this feature idea to begin with. If people opt out, then we could see people using their want boxes as a shout out "hey you there, turn your messages on." (On the fence) taking a look at #5 should show how I think a work around would go. See #5

#2 absolutely

#3 Could be admittedly limiting if attempting to communicate with people regarding a trade  (I am still all for blocking a user from offering on a given trade after that one person didn't take the hint.)

#4 100% Any unwanted messages rude or otherwise should be reported. (I cannot see such a system be implemented without this.)

#5 This is why I say #1 see #5. I think it would be best if messages were limited to only those who are actively negotiating trades with one another. In fact, I feel that the person with the trade should be the only one who can initiate the Message "Hey look, I can't take your trade, you're egg locked!". This would eliminate a lot of abusive or unnecessary messages. If people opt out, say I opt out (I often choose silence) And you want to communicate with me regarding the trade, you'd have to find other means to contact me. (Hello again want box...)

 

for example, I don't want people messaging me about my trades. If I feel the need to communicate, then I would rather be able to be the one to initiate contact. This is important because of the trolls and whatnot. I can fully understand wanting to avoid the people who intend to send sending traders with messages "gimme!".

 

This is also why #3 could be a problem If users do not have you white listed to contact them over the trade, then how is the needed discussion going to take place.

 

so to attempt to summarise, if communication is only initiated by the egg/hatching holder, then a lot of the problems under the #1 would be avoided.

 

my reasoning is not perfect.I am tired as slag and barely staying awake.

 

I have to admit I'm a little confused here. Are your comments on #1 for or against it? Either way we may have people using the want box for that sort of thing, I mean we already do have issues with the want box being used to talk directly to another user... That's why we are able to report the Want text. I'm not sure that's a great argument either way since using the Want box like that is and would be against the rules and reportable. 

 

My list was a list of things I'd want if an in-cave messaging system were to happen, I'd want *all* those things. If someone *only* wants communications about trades, #5 would be the way to go. #3 would be needed if people *don't* want unsolicited messages about trades but only want communications from specific listed users. It's not a 'problem' that #3 wouldn't allow trading contact, that's how it's supposed to work. 

 

I don't agree that communication only being initiated by people making the trades would solve the problems #1 would solve. I'm honestly unclear why it would supposedly solve that problem in the first place... Whether or not it's a trade-poster that's contacting you, if it's opt-IN you won't have the issue of getting unwanted messages you didn't realize were an option. If we don't have opt-IN then any person who's trade you offer on could message you, even if you don't actually realize there is this new messaging system to being with. 

 

It's completely possible that I'm totally misunderstanding your points though. *shrugs*

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, olympe said:

Fact is: This kind of communication is already possible by misusing site features. I don't think it would get worse if it became an official kind of feature.

The object is to find a way to avoid misusing the feature because individual users will, if they continue to misuse it, lose their ability to use that feature.

Share this post


Link to post

TJ's quote in the first post reads like there can be absolutely no messaging in DC, so is there even a point in discussing this?

 

(This is probably something on which he cannot just "change his mind".)

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Confused Cat said:

TJ's quote in the first post reads like there can be absolutely no messaging in DC, so is there even a point in discussing this?

 

(This is probably something on which he cannot just "change his mind".)

 

 

As a "Please no on scroll messaging" person, I console myself in general with this thought. But I can see the ORIGINATOR of a trade being allowed to contact people who offer, with a VERY brief message box (and a powerful report option) - declined by mistake; cannot accept all; you are locked and the like. And a block facility.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Confused Cat said:

TJ's quote in the first post reads like there can be absolutely no messaging in DC, so is there even a point in discussing this?

 

(This is probably something on which he cannot just "change his mind".)

 

 

My thoughts exactly (aka "oh no, not this debate again.")

I really don't know enough to judge whether this would be impossible or not, so I have no choice but to believe TJ when he says it is. In which case this is really an exercise in futility.

Share this post


Link to post

I suspect it may be the CAPPA thing.

Share this post


Link to post

I figure that’s it too. I know one website that gives users under 13 a drop down menu for conversation, though they can work around it with pet names. Older members are still able to message them, but for dc, and this is if it asks for the birthdate, I think users under 13 or so just shouldn’t be allowed to use the messaging feature, and can’t be messaged.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

 

As a "Please no on scroll messaging" person, I console myself in general with this thought. But I can see the ORIGINATOR of a trade being allowed to contact people who offer, with a VERY brief message box (and a powerful report option) - declined by mistake; cannot accept all; you are locked and the like. And a block facility.

As I pointed out before, this would only solve half of the issues.

@Starscream: Last time I checked, there was no rule against naming your dragons things like "Baby is influenced male", "Please contact me on the forums", "can take your trade in 1 hour" and the like. So, how do you go about reporting this kind of stuff?

 

Of course, quite a few of these messages could be made superfluous by implementing some improvements to teleport (aka only accepting part of a trade) or precognition (aka being able to precog stuff in trades). But there's always some kind of situation possible where communication is actually needed.

 

That being said - does DC even collect data about user age? If not, and the feature got introduced, kids under 13 would simply pretend to be older.

Edited by olympe

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, olympe said:

that being said - does DC even collect data about user age? If not, and the feature got introduced, kids under 13 would simply pretend to be older.

I believe under 13 are not supposed to be able to create an account without a parent's permission, but unless it's changed it merely asks if you are older or have that permission and doesn't actually stop you.  Though an age restriction does not appear in the TOS so maybe that isn't the case anymore.

Share this post


Link to post

I just tested it (without actually making an account, mind you!), and there's a checkbox for "I agree that I'm 13 years of age or older." However, if I were 12 or younger, I'd most certainly agree with that statement on mere principle.

 

Btw, it used to be slightly different. Something along the lines of, "I agree that I'm 13 years of age or older or have parental permission..." I remember as much from when I signed up my daughter at age 6 - way back in 2009.

Edited by olympe

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Sextonator said:

I figure that’s it too. I know one website that gives users under 13 a drop down menu for conversation, though they can work around it with pet names. Older members are still able to message them, but for dc, and this is if it asks for the birthdate, I think users under 13 or so just shouldn’t be allowed to use the messaging feature, and can’t be messaged.

 

It does indeed ask, and kids would lie, so TJ is safer not allowing it.

 

2 hours ago, olympe said:

As I pointed out before, this would only solve half of the issues.

@Starscream: Last time I checked, there was no rule against naming your dragons things like "Baby is influenced male", "Please contact me on the forums", "can take your trade in 1 hour" and the like. So, how do you go about reporting this kind of stuff?

 

Of course, quite a few of these messages could be made superfluous by implementing some improvements to teleport (aka only accepting part of a trade) or precognition (aka being able to precog stuff in trades). But there's always some kind of situation possible where communication is actually needed.

 

That being said - does DC even collect data about user age? If not, and the feature got introduced, kids under 13 would simply pretend to be older.

 

Yes - my grandson had to have parental permission when he signed up. He's a good lad, so he asked his mother and I ran it all through a mod. But yes, they will lie.

Share this post


Link to post

It may also be completely unrelated to users and their age.

I'm not sure if it's okay to speculate about this, but since it's a guess anybody could make and it's not like I'm revealing a big secret: maybe if you work at social network company, you have to agree not to add "social features" to any projects you make in your free time? That would be a very good reason for the "hard no".

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.