Suggestions

[quote name="Aequorin" date="2023-10-27 16:21:18" ] [quote name="alyblaith" date="2023-10-27 16:16:16" ] Thank you for replying, Aequorin! I think I can speak for all of us that we really appreciate the direct communication and the clarity on timeline (months not weeks) - however one thing that's come up immediately in discussion is that from the current system, folks still get the notifications for pings in forums they can't access, the link in our alerts just 404's. We've been discussing your use of 'should' and want to make sure that it's brought up that currently the system is not working as, as you say, it should. Hope you have a great weekend - thank you for all your work <3 [/quote] @/alyblaith, that sounds like a bug. You shouldn't be getting pings from forums you don't have access to. I'll get that information to an engineer today. [/quote] just wanted to confirm this did happen -- @/dems and i did a bit of testing and i got a ping to an [url=https://www1.flightrising.com/forums/permalink/reply/55042519]in-flight earth thread[/url] with the new pinglist feature haha: [img]https://i.imgur.com/EUsL8Rp.png[/img] [s]and also it's been happening for ages so i guess we all thought it was just a thing kgjdkg[/s] thank you for your response! have a good weekend [s]and please don't end me haha[/s] [emoji=gaoler laughing]

I really appreciate you, Aequorin, and the other devs, for taking so much time to communicate with the players about this system and for taking all the suggestions into consideration. I hope you all have a good weekend. [emoji=familiar heart size=1] If I can offer my two cents on some of the points of consideration Aequorin brought up: [quote name="Aequorin" date="2023-10-27 16:07:59" ] [b]This is part of why a pinglist is locked to the player who created it.[/b] Because even with pinglists being opt-in, even with them being onsite, [b]we have to weigh the consequences of open-to-the-public pingable lists[/b] with the potential for exploit, especially from tech and internet savvy bad faith actors. Throwaway accounts with throwaway emails on a dynamic VPN could easily target and troll a pinglist that's open to the public to ping. This isn't to say with enough time and iteration a solution can't be found. It's to say that we have to keep this in mind and in consideration when developing this feature further. [/quote] Throwaway accounts sabotaging publicly pingable lists is a very reasonable concern... But if community-accessible pinglists are something that the team is still willing to consider, then that situation seems ideal for minimum account activity requirements. Maybe in order to unlock the ability to ping a community pinglist, an account has to have existed for at least a week, or even a month. Maybe there could be some small set of tasks a new user has to have completed in addition to a wait period. They could be required to pick a flight, create progenitors, post on the forums X times first, etc. Small basic account set up tasks and wait periods aren't likely to impact new users much, but they would vastly increase the amount of effort a troll would have to go to to abuse a community pinglist, and greatly reduce the likelihood anyone will bother to make separate accounts for that. [quote name="Aequorin" date="2023-10-27 16:07:59" ] As for approved co-owners, one of the issues we have to consider is how that works with blocking. What happens if a player has blocked the originator of the co-owned pinglist after subscribing? Should the co-owners be able to ping that individual with the list? What if the originator blocks a player, should the co-owners still be able to ping that player with the pinglist? What happens when co-owners have a falling out, where an approved co-owner did more to maintain the pinglist than the originator? Who owns the list? Do we need to task our employees with mediating player personal relationships over pinglists? What if the originator becomes inactive or does something that costs them the ability to access their account? Just the possible solutions floated within the team while reading through your feedback lead to additional scenarios and edge cases. [/quote] I may be wrong about the original suggestion -- and folks involved in crafting these suggestions feel free to clarify if so! -- but my impression of the co-moderated pinglists was that one user is the [i]owner[/i] of the list, and a group of users they alone can add/remove form a curated group of people who can [i]ping[/i] that list, but [i]not manage[/i] that list. It sounds like less co-ownership and more access; in which case, if people have a falling out, there's not much mediation to be done, because there is still only a single owner of the list. That said, the issue of how to handle blocking in that case is a complex one. My impulse is that blocking should probably only consider who is sending out a ping in that moment -- but I trust the team to come up with a good solution for that if moderated lists (or something like them) does get implemented. [quote name="Aequorin" date="2023-10-27 16:07:59" ] Something else I'm also able to let you know is that we have some [b]pending, more straightforward updates[/b] to the pinglist system that [b]we hope to implement next week. [/b] [/quote] I look forward to seeing what those updates are! Thank you again for being so transparent with us.

[quote name="reliquiaen" date="2023-10-26 16:12:19" ] - site-wide pinglists. individual users have their own little lists for hatcheries and stuff, but perhaps a repository of like Official Pinglists could be added for anyone to join and use. i'm thinking specifically for g1s but it could be useful for things like swipp trades, the weekly dominance announcement, stuff like that. maybe there could even be an option added in for accents too given there are updates for that coming, but that'd be harder. honestly there's really no replacing the gasp list without like, actual conscious effort - building off the above, flight specific pinglists for organising dom stuff, food banks, level 25 loans, community events, all that stuff. [/quote] I was thinking along these same lines- why couldn’t the Swipp pinglist be an official site one that automatically pings people when the trades they’ve signed up for appear? Or official flight specific forums? Not having these things run by individual players by their personal accounts would go a long way towards eliminating the kinds of issues that might cause.

@Aequorin Thank you for the reply! We were aware of the reasoning for deciding it necessary that this new pinglist structure be created. I think I can safely speak for the others as well when I say we were disappointed in the fact that some of our pinglists were being misused to harrass specific individuals, and it's good to see efforts being made to help solve the issue. It may not currently be the perfect format in our eyes, but I'm glad we are able to discuss and share experiences to help make things as good as they can be. In regards to bad faith involving VPNs and throwaway accounts- Is there reason to believe that there would be an increase in bad-faith activity with this new system? It just seems to me that if somebody is going to set out to cause trouble, they will find a way to do so, be it misusing a pinglist, just stirring trouble in the forums in general... (etc etc, being vague on purpose, I don't want to be giving people a list of things to do). I would assume that since pinglists are kept on site, it would be much easier to at least locate which account was causing the trouble and prevent that particular account from continuing? There is the step to onsite pinglists, cutting out the offsite, and then this limit to 1 owner of the pinglist is another step. It may be possible that just the first step is enough to curb the issue? Or that a different second step could be found that would make it easier for those of us with dom teams and programs to remain flexible? What if accounts have to be of a certain age before they can utilize pinglists? Say, 30 days? Long enough for the trolls to get bored and move on. That might be helpful anyways, so that new folks dont go pinging the masses before they understand what that will do. From a personal perspective, I would just like to stress that if it came between requiring only 1 player to be responsible for an entire flight's dom pinglist 24/7/365, and risking the occasional misping from a user with poor intentions, I would personally much prefer the second. It is vital that we are able to reach our flight-mates at any time, and not feasible to expect 1 person to be around all the time forever. That all said, I am excited for all the fun events you guys have planned for us and I wish you all the best halloween! (Side note- wow if only you could see how quickly my notifications fly through the roof when you guys give us more info to work with [emoji=coatl laughing size=1] I think it's safe to say we are eager to help provide ideas in creating a system that works smoothly for all involved)

Hi Aequorin! Thanks for your prompt response, I hope you're taking good care of yourself. We only have one community manager, you're invaluable to this site <3

Most of my feedback I'm at this point passing to the rest of my dom team so it can be collated (and workshopped) and delivered all at once, rather than in 20 different messages.

Throwing my own two cents in here despite not really nonparticipating in dom much (so feel free to take what I say with a grain of salt).

I'd love to have the ability to whitelist other users on a pinglist to be able to ping it too. Not necessarily manage it, just give them the ability use the ping command. When it comes to things like being blocked or blocking the owner, the whitelisted person just gets removed from the whitelist and the pinglist. Whitelisted players would need to be invited to the whitelist (so it's still an opt-in thing) and can leave it at anytime,

Owner transferring would also be rather important. You could treat it kinda like how dragon trades are treated, in the sense that once the pinglist is transferred then it's no longer yours. Perhaps a opt-in grandfathered in whitelisting could happen, so the person can still use the pinglist once transferred. Plus if a system like this is in place, it'd make it a bit easier for mods to move piglists in the case of an important account being banned. There could be a form for it where the person explains the situation (ie: The banned account had dom related pinglists) and can request particular lists to be transferred to someone else after being being reviewed.

To prevent public(ones that might have a blacklist instead of a whitelist) mass pinglists from being abused, perhaps there can be options to limit them to particular threads, or how many times someone can use the pinglist in a day? Plus pinglist abuse can more easily be tracked down and moderated if they're on site and all of them are opt-in by logged in accounts so other people can't be randomly added. That already cuts down quite a bit of the issue that the offsite ones had.

I'd also think a description box being available for pinglists could let players list rules on how others should be using the pinglist, to make it a bit easier for mods to see how a pinglist just called "Green" was misused when looking through reports.

Of course this doesn't really cover much of things like GASP or the G1 pinglists, but it's a few ideas that could help move things in the right direction.

If any of this doesn't make sense, feel free to ping me so I can try and clarify. Or you can take what I said with a grain of salt lol.

[quote name="ZoranaDragon" date="2023-10-27 17:53:35" ] [...] I'd love to have the ability to whitelist other users on a pinglist to be able to ping it too. Not necessarily manage it, just give them the ability use the ping command. When it comes to things like being blocked or blocking the owner, the whitelisted person just gets removed from the whitelist and the pinglist. Whitelisted players would need to be invited to the whitelist (so it's still an opt-in thing) and can leave it at anytime, [/quote] User-side whitelisting/blacklisting/permissions settings ("friends only" "not in this forum") is still my number one in terms of potential harassment reduction. I'd like to see on-site pinglists work for all programs, but user-side settings around pingings would be great. Love the idea of managing a whitelist in the pinglist so only those listed can use it - though it won't address the needs of GASP, etc, it would be very helpful for dominance organization teams and programs. I still think user-side settings are an immediate solution for cutting down harassment while giving plenty of time to implement a functional on-site pinglist system that meets our needs.

Hi @Aequorin, thank you for your reply, it's reassuring to hear you are taking our (dom team organiser specifically) concerns on board. I just wanted to mention one part of your comment in relation to co-owners of pinglists. The short version: extend the existing policy of non-interference around dragons and items moving between accounts to shared pinglists; and do not distinguish between originator and co-owners of accounts in any meaningful sense. the longer version: as dom teams, in particular, are already in a state of trust in relation to so many pieces of dom machinery both on and off FR (raffle prizes, flight bank money held by players, the spreadsheets that make raffles run, getting work done, so much more). If anything goes wrong with these (say a bank holder refuses to return flight funds or goods or dragons), by FR policy already in force staff will not involve itself with this. (the 'once a dragon / item leaves your lair it is no longer yours' policy to paraphrase). Extending this policy to co-owned pinglists and just putting up a policy reminder when making / inviting owners to a co-owned list could cover much of these issues you raise in the quote below. Sort of an 'own risk' clause. I notice you also distinguish between originator and co-owner... I am not convinced this is really distinction that needs to exist, it should not particularly matter who originally created a list (especially in dom where people can and do move on - if all co-owners are essentially in the same position of ownership then new people are simply added as owners and the old people remove themselves as owners). This would also solve any issues with originators becoming inactive, getting suspended or banned, or - for a flight specific list -taking a vacation in another flight which could be different issues. Basically the originator and the co-owners are equal wrt to the pinglist: as long as there are owners that remain in good standing, the pinglist is operable by them regardless of what happens with the originator. Again this does put co-owners in a situation of trust with each other but as i mention - we already are, with so many pieces of what makes the dom community. And if we fall out... well that has happened in the past in dom teams and things have eventually resolved one way or another without staff involvement. We would not expect staff to get involved with resolving this kind of inter-team dispute. I realise dom is not the only user of these lists, but we are a large community on FR that many, many of the players enjoy, and just... making it possible to co-own a list with a specific (but changing as team members join and leave) group, with a policy of non-intervention from FR, should solve this particular issue for us and for you both. [quote name="Aequorin" date="2023-10-27 16:07:59" ] As for approved co-owners, one of the issues we have to consider is how that works with blocking. What happens if a player has blocked the originator of the co-owned pinglist after subscribing? Should the co-owners be able to ping that individual with the list? What if the originator blocks a player, should the co-owners still be able to ping that player with the pinglist? What happens when co-owners have a falling out, where an approved co-owner did more to maintain the pinglist than the originator? Who owns the list? Do we need to task our employees with mediating player personal relationships over pinglists? What if the originator becomes inactive or does something that costs them the ability to access their account? Just the possible solutions floated within the team while reading through your feedback lead to additional scenarios and edge cases. [/quote]