Thank you for your patience, everyone. We have been collecting and discussing the questions and concerns fielded in this thread and appreciate everyone who dropped in and voiced theirs.
While we wanted to provide you with quick answers, we felt that our time would be better spent focusing in and creating policies and information that all players could reference, not only those who are reading this thread. We felt that our community deserved to have more concrete information in a place that won't get lost as time goes by.
We have created a new
Policies & Support Articles hub in the Encyclopedia that will house conduct, policy, and support information documents. While this is still a work in progress, we wanted to start off with the following:
We understand there has been uncertainty surrounding some of our methods and processes, and we wanted to bring as much clarification to that as possible.
At this time, we will be re-opening the thread, but would like to ask that general chatting and multiple replies quoting other users be kept to a minimum so that we can better read the questions and feedback coming in.
We apologize for any frustration we may have caused and thank you for your patience and understanding while we worked on addressing the concerns that we could given the time frame.
Thank you for your patience, everyone. We have been collecting and discussing the questions and concerns fielded in this thread and appreciate everyone who dropped in and voiced theirs.
While we wanted to provide you with quick answers, we felt that our time would be better spent focusing in and creating policies and information that all players could reference, not only those who are reading this thread. We felt that our community deserved to have more concrete information in a place that won't get lost as time goes by.
We have created a new
Policies & Support Articles hub in the Encyclopedia that will house conduct, policy, and support information documents. While this is still a work in progress, we wanted to start off with the following:
We understand there has been uncertainty surrounding some of our methods and processes, and we wanted to bring as much clarification to that as possible.
At this time, we will be re-opening the thread, but would like to ask that general chatting and multiple replies quoting other users be kept to a minimum so that we can better read the questions and feedback coming in.
We apologize for any frustration we may have caused and thank you for your patience and understanding while we worked on addressing the concerns that we could given the time frame.
Flight Rising Developer
Project Management | Engineering Team Cheerleader | UI Designer
So any plans to do anything about the tons of users you wrongfully banned and sent a mass "we triple checked" response to those who tried to appeal.
So any plans to do anything about the tons of users you wrongfully banned and sent a mass "we triple checked" response to those who tried to appeal.
@
Xhaztol Thank you, for both the Encyclopedia and exalted offspring list.
I've read the naming guidelines but I can't find anything against the name Mulch. Is it still banned?
@
Xhaztol Thank you, for both the Encyclopedia and exalted offspring list.
I've read the naming guidelines but I can't find anything against the name Mulch. Is it still banned?
Hey. I noticed that there is now an "exalted offspring" thats collapsible while all living dragons are listed under "offspring".
Unfortunately, I don't think it's working as planned for the female dragons. All of my females list all dragons as both "offspring" and "exalted offspring"
My male dragons don't have this problem...
Screenshot:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/JuVA50J.png[/img]
Not sure if it's suppose to be like that or what...
Hey. I noticed that there is now an "exalted offspring" thats collapsible while all living dragons are listed under "offspring".
Unfortunately, I don't think it's working as planned for the female dragons. All of my females list all dragons as both "offspring" and "exalted offspring"
My male dragons don't have this problem...
Screenshot:
Not sure if it's suppose to be like that or what...
In the Terms of Use page under the 'Conduct' section, part n. reads as follow
"Item or dragon "lending" is not a supported transaction. The Flight Rising development and moderation team will not be able to assist in cases where a lent item or dragon is not returned, and these types of deals are conducted at the user's own risk. To avoid fradulent trades, please use the Auction House or Crossroads. (Updated 6/17/2013)"
And I was curious as to whether renting out flight nests for users who are not of your flight would be considered a banable offense since they are technically lending you their dragons, but in the section (the only one I found in any of the documents that come close to this particular problem) it only says that its 'not supported'.
I would just like some clarification on this so that I, and other users, know whether we should stop this particular behavior or not.
Continuing on from that, if renting nests are NOT banable offenses would it be considered a misconduct to simply /give/ them the hatchlings and parents back instead of charging them AH prices for them?
In the Terms of Use page under the 'Conduct' section, part n. reads as follow
"Item or dragon "lending" is not a supported transaction. The Flight Rising development and moderation team will not be able to assist in cases where a lent item or dragon is not returned, and these types of deals are conducted at the user's own risk. To avoid fradulent trades, please use the Auction House or Crossroads. (Updated 6/17/2013)"
And I was curious as to whether renting out flight nests for users who are not of your flight would be considered a banable offense since they are technically lending you their dragons, but in the section (the only one I found in any of the documents that come close to this particular problem) it only says that its 'not supported'.
I would just like some clarification on this so that I, and other users, know whether we should stop this particular behavior or not.
Continuing on from that, if renting nests are NOT banable offenses would it be considered a misconduct to simply /give/ them the hatchlings and parents back instead of charging them AH prices for them?
Sorry but I am sadly confused about this passage:
[quote]The name should not contain any real-life personal information about Flight Rising players, non-Flight Rising related entities, or Stormlight Workshop staff[/quote]
So is it okay when I give dragons names like, "Frank, Bob, Susan, Mary, etc." or should be avoid RL names for dragons from now on? I mean literially hundreds of players on FR could be named Bob or Susan in RL but I as player do not know that so what if someone gets upset over that?
[quote]non-Flight Rising related entities[/quote]
I don't quite understand what that refers to? I sometimes I use names from dieties from other cultures/old cultures, is that also not allowed anymore? Are we also not allowed anymore to name dragons after like RL things like rivers, cities, mountains, flowers, etc?
Sorry but I am sadly confused about this passage:
Quote:
The name should not contain any real-life personal information about Flight Rising players, non-Flight Rising related entities, or Stormlight Workshop staff
So is it okay when I give dragons names like, "Frank, Bob, Susan, Mary, etc." or should be avoid RL names for dragons from now on? I mean literially hundreds of players on FR could be named Bob or Susan in RL but I as player do not know that so what if someone gets upset over that?
Quote:
non-Flight Rising related entities
I don't quite understand what that refers to? I sometimes I use names from dieties from other cultures/old cultures, is that also not allowed anymore? Are we also not allowed anymore to name dragons after like RL things like rivers, cities, mountains, flowers, etc?
@
Torchwoodterrors: "Unsupported" doesn't mean "bannable offense". It means...let's say you're water but want a warm-range pair to have fire eyes, for the sake of the arguement. So you tell a nest renter this or you pm someone. Say I respond and agree to look after your dergs for 6 days while they're working on a nest.
If I run off with your dergs, nobody gets disciplined. It's just that the admins won't interfere if it goes wrong.
@
Takora: Personal information... I think that means something more like spelling out 'Charaquan's legal name is Mary Susan Jones' on a derg's offspring list.*
*Not my actual legal name but you get the idea
@
Torchwoodterrors: "Unsupported" doesn't mean "bannable offense". It means...let's say you're water but want a warm-range pair to have fire eyes, for the sake of the arguement. So you tell a nest renter this or you pm someone. Say I respond and agree to look after your dergs for 6 days while they're working on a nest.
If I run off with your dergs, nobody gets disciplined. It's just that the admins won't interfere if it goes wrong.
@
Takora: Personal information... I think that means something more like spelling out 'Charaquan's legal name is Mary Susan Jones' on a derg's offspring list.*
*Not my actual legal name but you get the idea
I'm EIGHT/8/Eight hours ahead of FR Time.
Thanks @
Xhaztol, the clarification on multi-accounting would put a lot of unease to rest.
I'm thinking there might still be room for a little more clarification on the policy of linking to sites with inappropriately violent, sexual or pornographic material. For example, FR has a group on Deviantart, yet there is a lot of user-submitted content on that site which is extremely violent or sexual. Youtube also has videos that openly promote hatred towards some groups of people (even if it tries to remove them asap), yet FR has an official channel there too. Both are linked on the main splash page. Could the policy be refined to specifically exclude content submitted by other users to sites that weren't created specifically to host these things? Lots of FR members have links to deviantart or other social media accounts in their profiles and signatures.
I realize there could be a few grey areas, hypothetically someone could post a link to a personal profile on Youtube that displays racist videos that they
like, but did not personally upload as an example etc so I'm not sure if what I'm suggesting is a bit clumsy, but I'm glad that the community's concerns are starting to be addressed.
Thanks @
Xhaztol, the clarification on multi-accounting would put a lot of unease to rest.
I'm thinking there might still be room for a little more clarification on the policy of linking to sites with inappropriately violent, sexual or pornographic material. For example, FR has a group on Deviantart, yet there is a lot of user-submitted content on that site which is extremely violent or sexual. Youtube also has videos that openly promote hatred towards some groups of people (even if it tries to remove them asap), yet FR has an official channel there too. Both are linked on the main splash page. Could the policy be refined to specifically exclude content submitted by other users to sites that weren't created specifically to host these things? Lots of FR members have links to deviantart or other social media accounts in their profiles and signatures.
I realize there could be a few grey areas, hypothetically someone could post a link to a personal profile on Youtube that displays racist videos that they
like, but did not personally upload as an example etc so I'm not sure if what I'm suggesting is a bit clumsy, but I'm glad that the community's concerns are starting to be addressed.
DC2.S?GmL-W-TPaPlSkfCbr|br-B-AFr--NpM-H+$-FoR+Ac+J--S--U--I-V?Q---Tc---E++Df+
How about you guys stop trying to distract us with new apparel and Coli fixes and offspring lists, and instead ADDRESS THE LEGITIMATE CONCERNS OF YOUR USERBASE IN REGARDS TO THE DOZENS OF HONEST PLAYERS WHO WERE WRONGLY BANNED FOR "MULTI-ACCOUNTING"?!
You guys are handling this so badly... it would be hilarious if I wasn't so furious. You seriously could not be doing a worse job if you were actively TRYING.
EVERY -- SINGLE -- THING you have done so far has only shown that you aren't listening and don't give a fraction of a damn that a huge chunk of your loyal, legit userbase is furious, disgusted, and terrified of being banned for life because of yet another stupid admin mistake.
How about you guys stop trying to distract us with new apparel and Coli fixes and offspring lists, and instead ADDRESS THE LEGITIMATE CONCERNS OF YOUR USERBASE IN REGARDS TO THE DOZENS OF HONEST PLAYERS WHO WERE WRONGLY BANNED FOR "MULTI-ACCOUNTING"?!
You guys are handling this so badly... it would be hilarious if I wasn't so furious. You seriously could not be doing a worse job if you were actively TRYING.
EVERY -- SINGLE -- THING you have done so far has only shown that you aren't listening and don't give a fraction of a damn that a huge chunk of your loyal, legit userbase is furious, disgusted, and terrified of being banned for life because of yet another stupid admin mistake.
Hhhh of course I missed all this during the night.
I'll be reading the policy changes and then posting my unanswered questions compilation again in a bit.
Hhhh of course I missed all this during the night.
I'll be reading the policy changes and then posting my unanswered questions compilation again in a bit.
