Do you think I could just leave this part blank and it'd be okay? We're just going to replace the whole thing with a header image anyway, right?
You are not logged in.
So, naturally a lot of people are sad/mad about the new limitation to the chat. So here is your chance to help change it.
What you need to do is describe an alternative system that is at least as secure and easy to use as the current system. Basically the system must satisfy the following requirements.
1: It may not be possible for a child to keep this feature secret from their parents.
2: It must rely on a secure method of verifying age as people lie when simply asked.
3: It may not be possible for a child to cheat. Simple quizzes etc are not secure.
4: It must work in the free game as well, as I am merging them back together shortly.
In short the goal is to ensure that children must explicitly ask their parents for permission and that the parents have to make a conscious decision to allow chat for their child even though it's not appropriate for children.
Examples of systems that do not satisfy the above goals.
A: Password based system where parents can disable a chat and set a password to re-enable it.
- This solution does not satisfy point 1 and 2.
(More to come here I expect)
[Edit:] A secure method that does not require credit card would be amazing!
As much as I do agree with some form of parental control, the main problem people have is asking their parents for such things. Many people don't like the current system because they don't want to ask their parents for money, not because there parents won't allow chat.
I proposed an alternative which may not quite fit your goals;
Chat is on by default with a notification when you sign on EE the first few times you play the game(once registered) that basically says this game has chat and may not be child safe. Then parents will be able to turn chat off via paying one cent with credit card(or even an auto refund system, it withdraws 1.00 USD, then re credits it so no funds are lost).
This ensures that parents that care if their child chats will not be upset as the chat will now be disable-able, but it won't frustrate children whose parents are generally unattentive, or parents that simply won't pay the 1 cent because it seems suspicious(despite being secure with paypal).
Although I'm pretty sure you'll not use my previous suggestion, at least lower the bold thing saying not to purchase chat for people under 15, as she has stated most people will hear swears frequently in 5th grade(age 10), a more reasonable age to say is under 13.
Thank you and all that
-Alex(AlexR ingame)
As much as I do agree with some form of parental control, the main problem people have is asking their parents for such things. Many people don't like the current system because they don't want to ask their parents for money, not because there parents won't allow chat.
I proposed an alternative which may not quite fit your goals;
Chat is on by default with a notification when you sign on EE the first few times you play the game(once registered) that basically says this game has chat and may not be child safe. Then parents will be able to turn chat off via paying one cent with credit card(or even an auto refund system, it withdraws 1.00 USD, then re credits it so no funds are lost).
This ensures that parents that care if their child chats will not be upset as the chat will now be disable-able, but it won't frustrate children whose parents are generally unattentive, or parents that simply won't pay the 1 cent because it seems suspicious(despite being secure with paypal).Although I'm pretty sure you'll not use my previous suggestion, at least lower the bold thing saying not to purchase chat for people under 15, as she has stated most people will hear swears frequently in 5th grade(age 10), a more reasonable age to say is under 13.
Thank you and all that
-Alex(AlexR ingame)
I very much agree that a system where children have to ask their parents for their credit card is fare from optimal. It is however the only secure option I have been able to find so far. I have been looking into other age verification systems but so far I have found nothing.
I am aware that kids are exposed to swearing and abuse all over, I just don't want this to be the case in Everybody Edits.
Ohh and, there would be no need to have any form of verification if it was enough to just allow people to turn it off.
I'm 20, yet I do not have a personal credit card or PayPal account, while there are many people under 18 who do.
So you can guess I'm not very fond of this system.
I'l give it a shot:
Ask for the birth date first. If the person is under 15 (or whatever age you want it to be), they'll have to enable chat with the 1 cent method.
If they say they're older, give a simple mathematical equation that should be common sense for people over 15, but which looks like gibberish to kids. If they can't solve it, they'll have to enable with the 1 cent method again.
This isn't really the same as a simple quiz, as the answer is impossible to look up on the internet. And to be able to solve it, they'd need to learn the basics first.
Also, make clear on the page with the equation it's to verify age / enable chat, in case they ask the parents to solve it.
I'm 20, yet I do not have a personal credit card or PayPal account, while there are many people under 18 who do.
So you can guess I'm not very fond of this system.
I'l give it a shot:
Ask for the birth date first. If the person is under 15 (or whatever age you want it to be), they'll have to enable chat with the 1 cent method.If they say they're older, give a simple mathematical equation that should be common sense for people over 15, but which looks like gibberish to kids. If they can't solve it, they'll have to enable with the 1 cent method again.
This isn't really the same as a simple quiz, as the answer is impossible to look up on the internet. And to be able to solve it, they'd need to learn the basics first.Also, make clear on the page with the equation it's to verify age / enable chat, in case they ask the parents to solve it.
Regarding the quiz, I am constantly amazed at how clever our children here are and as soon a puzzle has been solved by one, everyone will know the answer.
If you are above 18 and have this issue, you are more than welcome to send me an email at chris at everybodyedits.com with some form of documentation and I will give to you for free.
133 wrote:I'm 20, yet I do not have a personal credit card or PayPal account, while there are many people under 18 who do.
So you can guess I'm not very fond of this system.
I'l give it a shot:
Ask for the birth date first. If the person is under 15 (or whatever age you want it to be), they'll have to enable chat with the 1 cent method.If they say they're older, give a simple mathematical equation that should be common sense for people over 15, but which looks like gibberish to kids. If they can't solve it, they'll have to enable with the 1 cent method again.
This isn't really the same as a simple quiz, as the answer is impossible to look up on the internet. And to be able to solve it, they'd need to learn the basics first.Also, make clear on the page with the equation it's to verify age / enable chat, in case they ask the parents to solve it.
Regarding the quiz, I am constantly amazed at how clever our children here are and as soon a puzzle has been solved by one, everyone will know the answer.
If you are above 18 and have this issue, you are more than welcome to send me an email at chris at everybodyedits.com with some form of documentation and I will give to you for free.
PLUS: It might not look like gibberish to many people.. for example, i'm taking math two years ahead... so i am 14, taking the math that a 16 year old might....
GAH why can't people just behave!?
Offline
I think an effective alternative would be to DISABLE chat for 1 cent.
IE: parent gets mad, does that, chat is disabled, and it can be reenabled for 1 cent.
This way people with unattentive parents who don't give a crap aren't chatless, or people with relaxed parents that don't want to give money are also can still have chat.
Quoted from another thread
Conary wrote:alex wrote:I think an effective alternative would be to DISABLE chat for 1 cent.
IE: parent gets mad, does that, chat is disabled, and it can be reenabled for 1 cent.
This way people with unattentive parents who don't give a crap aren't chatless, or people with relaxed parents that don't want to give money are also can still have chat.Quoted from another thread
Quoted for freedom.
Also maybe the second 1¢ needs to be payed with the same Paypal account that disabled the chat with 1¢, as there would be no reason for a parent to "forget" their Paypal account and need to use another one.
I am 15 and I do see why I am being restricted from using a "chat room" which I have since I was 10-11 because I was responsible, especially one I paid for.
Oh, yes, this is a great point. I've been using AIM since I was about 10, too.
Perhaps, a warning system, you swear three times and you lose chat ability for a minimal amount of time, the progresses in length. That way the punishment is focused on the swearers. The warnings expire after 24 hours, and would work something like this:
1. Warning the first time.
2. Second warning(perhaps taking away energy, or slowing it until the warning goes away?)
3. Banned from chat for 30 minutes.
4. Banned from chat for 1 hour.
5. banned from chat for 5 hours
6. Banned from chat for 1 day.
7. Banned from chat for 3 days.
8. Banned from chat for 1 week.
And, only one warning would expire a day, so if i swear 4 times(with some delay for temporary chat bans), the next day it still counts as if I have 3 swears.
You'd have to add any variations of the words for this system to work, including spaced out swears(l i k e t h i s), and typos.
As much as I don't like censorship, this idea seems to be a reasonable alternative to the 1cent system at the moment, as it's relocating the punishment to the people committing the act that is unwanted.
Conary wrote:I am 15 and I do see why I am being restricted from using a "chat room" which I have since I was 10-11 because I was responsible, especially one I paid for.
Oh, yes, this is a great point. I've been using AIM since I was about 10, too.
Perhaps, a warning system, you swear three times and you lose chat ability for a minimal amount of time, the progresses in length. That way the punishment is focused on the swearers. The warnings expire after 24 hours, and would work something like this:
1. Warning the first time.
2. Second warning(perhaps taking away energy, or slowing it until the warning goes away?)
3. Banned from chat for 30 minutes.
4. Banned from chat for 1 hour.
5. banned from chat for 5 hours
6. Banned from chat for 1 day.
7. Banned from chat for 3 days.
8. Banned from chat for 1 week.And, only one warning would expire a day, so if i swear 4 times(with some delay for temporary chat bans), the next day it still counts as if I have 3 swears.
You'd have to add any variations of the words for this system to work, including spaced out swears(l i k e t h i s), and typos.
As much as I don't like censorship, this idea seems to be a reasonable alternative to the 1cent system at the moment, as it's relocating the punishment to the people committing the act that is unwanted.
Actually, I think swear bans should count towards severity, such as saying "(d-word) it" would get you banned for less time then saying "you worthless *racial term*" and also after a certain amount of bans, you would lose the privilege to chat forever.
If you go above 1 week, its a month, then forever, I'd say.
If you go above 1 week, its a month, then forever, I'd say.
I think 8 chances is too much though, if they break the rules 8 times, then they obviously have not learned their lesson.
Warning.
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
2 Months
Perma-banned.
EDIT: Added Warning.
Last edited by Xpo20 (Dec 15 2010 5:15:44 pm)
I say:
1 day
1 week
2 weeks
1 month
Forever
I think a point system could work, where 100 points disabled chat, and you lose 1 point a day some works like crap or damn could be 1-2 points, more offensive ones like **** and such would be 5-10, and racial and otherwise 'offensive' words could be 20-50 points.
This could even work on an honers system, people report it swears, then the mods can gauge how many points the person should get('oh, ****, I fell' would get less warning than 'you ***ing loser!!!').
Also, restrict use of god mode while banned, give ~50 warning for trolling, and you'll get rid of most trolls simultaneously.
I think a point system could work, where 100 points disabled chat, and you lose 1 point a day some works like crap or damn could be 1-2 points, more offensive ones like **** and such would be 5-10, and racial and otherwise 'offensive' words could be 20-50 points.
This could even work on an honers system, people report it swears, then the mods can gauge how many points the person should get('oh, ****, I fell' would get less warning than 'you ***ing loser!!!').Also, restrict use of god mode while banned, give ~50 warning for trolling, and you'll get rid of most trolls simultaneously.
I like this idea. Though it world require a very extensive library of swear words and all variations of it.
alex wrote:I think a point system could work, where 100 points disabled chat, and you lose 1 point a day some works like crap or damn could be 1-2 points, more offensive ones like **** and such would be 5-10, and racial and otherwise 'offensive' words could be 20-50 points.
This could even work on an honers system, people report it swears, then the mods can gauge how many points the person should get('oh, ****, I fell' would get less warning than 'you ***ing loser!!!').Also, restrict use of god mode while banned, give ~50 warning for trolling, and you'll get rid of most trolls simultaneously.
I like this idea. Though it world require a very extensive library of swear words and all variations of it.
Not to mention in other languages.
alex wrote:I think a point system could work, where 100 points disabled chat, and you lose 1 point a day some works like crap or damn could be 1-2 points, more offensive ones like **** and such would be 5-10, and racial and otherwise 'offensive' words could be 20-50 points.
This could even work on an honers system, people report it swears, then the mods can gauge how many points the person should get('oh, ****, I fell' would get less warning than 'you ***ing loser!!!').Also, restrict use of god mode while banned, give ~50 warning for trolling, and you'll get rid of most trolls simultaneously.
I like this idea. Though it world require a very extensive library of swear words and all variations of it.
True but when you have a huge program like this, it's better to take that time to do that then get shutdown by angry parents.
I like this idea. Though it world require a very extensive library of swear words and all variations of it.
Thats what I was thinking until I thought of reporting chat messages, that way mods can look at a reported message and gauge if the message has any swearing in it.
RPGMaster2000 wrote:I like this idea. Though it world require a very extensive library of swear words and all variations of it.
Thats what I was thinking until I thought of reporting chat messages, that way mods can look at a reported message and gauge if the message has any swearing in it.
The only problem with that is some people may find it funny to report messages and when you have the amount of players versus the amount of moderators, well lets say they have lives and probably couldn't deal with that.
There could also be suggestive stuff that may not contain swear words but be very inappropriate, but that could be negated by reporting as well.
alex wrote:RPGMaster2000 wrote:I like this idea. Though it world require a very extensive library of sweard words and all variations of it.
Thats what I was thinking until I thought of reporting chat messages, that way mods can look at a reported message and gauge if the message has any swearing in it.
The only problem with that is some people may find it funny to report messages and when you have the amount of players versus the amount of moderators, well lets say they have lives and probably couldn't deal with that.
Add chat moderators that don't have any power besides banning offenders or something.
Last edited by Conary (Dec 15 2010 5:46:04 pm)
alex wrote:RPGMaster2000 wrote:I like this idea. Though it world require a very extensive library of sweard words and all variations of it.
Thats what I was thinking until I thought of reporting chat messages, that way mods can look at a reported message and gauge if the message has any swearing in it.
The only problem with that is some people may find it funny to report messages and when you have the amount of players versus the amount of moderators, well lets say they have lives and probably couldn't deal with that.
Thats where more Mods come in. They aren't Glowing mods, but they do take care of the Guage of reports. If you put a false report, you get your next level of ban.
EDIT: Ninja'd.
Last edited by Xpo20 (Dec 15 2010 5:47:09 pm)
The only problem with that is some people may find it funny to report messages and when you have the amount of players versus the amount of moderators, well lets say they have lives and probably couldn't deal with that.
Give 100 point warning for false reports.
Also, making this game 13+ is a horrible idea, EE would lose >50% of its users.
Theres gonna be a rule list, and I don't think people are gonna like not chatting so they MIGHT follow it. At least only the GOOD ones are left...
All this banning. Soon there will be no one left.
Thats the thing, no bans will be permanent, it won't be getting rid of people, it will be more like punishment.
Thats why my point system would be best 100 points=lose chat and god mode ability, you can have more than a hundred points, but its virtually impossible to gain more once you have it(however, you can have, say, 90 points, and then you commit an offense that gives you 20 points, then you'll have 110...), you lose 1 point a day so if you swear once in a while on accident, you won't lose chat privileges at all. I'm thinking with this method, someone was banned from chat for three days, and now they have 99 points, they're not too likely to swear, because they don't want to be re banned(which isn't too far away for them ).
[ Started around 1732444338.6855 - Generated in 0.147 seconds, 12 queries executed - Memory usage: 1.79 MiB (Peak: 2.04 MiB) ]