But that’s the beauty of the right click report system, not only does it ignore them but if they get squelched they might not even do it again in the future.
![:man_shrugging:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/man_shrugging.png?v=6" ":man_shrugging:")
If only there were a way for every individual player to make the choice as to whether they wished to see “people troll chat channels” for themselves instead of others insisting upon making that choice for them. Maybe some way for an individual to ignore those they do not want to see?
Oh, wait…
I know that you consider ignore a reactive system and that ignoring a person before you have seen at least one message that person posted is difficult, at best.
The player imposed punishment of an auto squelch is just as much of a reactive system, though. After all, how can you report someone before they have even said anything that could be cause for reporting?
2 Likes
The difference is knowing there’s a real possibility for consequences someone might not say whatever junk it was they were going to say in the first place. Ignore has no deterrent power, squelch does.
Refer to this post.
Ignore tied to the right click report without a player imposed punishment has deterrent power, though. That power is just in the hands of Blizzard,not in the hands of the players.
I’ll repeat my earlier suggestion and question to you, since you apparently chose to ignore it.
I have suggested that the target report number required to trigger that player imposed punishment be raised significantly, say to 100 reports. This would still leave that player imposed punishment tied to reports while making it more difficult to abuse the system by requiring a significant number of players to be negatively impacted and submit a report before that player imposed punishment is triggered.
Would you find that to be acceptable, since it does leave that player imposed punishment in place, even if it does require a higher number of reports to trigger that punishment?
One persons junk is another persons treasure
Someone’s gonna find a gold mine in this forum one day then.
How many reports do you think is currently required to squelch someone?
I do not know. Do you know?
Is it 5 reports? Is it 10 reports? Is it 100 reports? I don’t think anyone outside of Blizzard knows the number of reports required to trigger that auto squelch.
In this thread alone, I have seen claims that it is as few as 5, but I cannot confirm that number is accurate.
We’ve seen players in a 10 v 10 RBG squelch players on the opposing team. That would seem to indicate that a squelch can be triggered 10 or less players reporting, but I cannot confirm that number is accurate, either.
We’ve seen people claim that “many” reports are needed for a squelch to be triggered, but they have either been unwilling or unable to provide a number that “MANY” is exactly.
If it is already 100 reports required, then leaving that target report number at 100 should not be a problem, IMO. It would require a significant number of players to be negatively impacted and choose to submit a report to trigger that player imposed punishment, and the system is not easily abused with the need for 100 reports.
It the number of reports required to trigger that player imposed punishment is currently a much smaller number, say only 5 or 10, then raising it to 100 would still leave that player imposed punishment in place in the event that Blizzard does not get to the ticket in a timely manner if there were a significant number of players negatively impacted and submitting reports while making it significantly harder to abuse the system.
I have no idea how many reports it is, it may not even be a static number. I’ve seen discussion regarding the squelch and how it works back to 2009 and players in the thread I read were discussing it potentially being a percentage of the players online or in the particular chat channel the player was reported in.
I’m only guessing, but I think with the way that the way numbers of players online, in a particular chat channel, in a particular zone, etc. can fluctuate, a static number is more consistent, especially when you take cross realm into consideration. I know that Classic will not have cross realm, but retail does and that is where the system is currently implemented.
If they do use percentage I hope that the target percentage is a minimum of 51%, preferably a good but higher and that they have additional measures in place to prevent “population manipulation” to trigger the auto squelch. I
As an example of “population manipulation”, Johnny and 6 of his friends are in zone X. There are 11 other players in that zone, including Billy, a player that Johnny thinks “stole” an item from him when the reality is that Billy just won the roll for an item that was an upgrade for both of them.
Johnny and his 6 buddies report Billy for a violation, creating 7 reports against Billy. There are 18 people in the zone, so that 7 tickets is less than 50% of the zone population.
Johnny and his friends decide to leave the zone. That brings the zone population down to 11, but the number of tickets they submitted is still 7. 7 tickets in zone with 11people is more than 50%, potentially triggering the auto squelch.
So how do u join a group if you are muted? how do you ask for the disc link?
Like this:
Ask a guildie to ask for an invite on your behalf? Run groups with your guild? Better off sticking with your guild anyways.
CS may have a better answer but the simple answer is join an active guild and be active within it and not a server nuisance. Funny how the forums have shifted from “You have to have a guild in Classic” to “We pug everthing and our fellow players will abuse this right click report so we can’t join groups but Classic will have the best community ever”. Yea…something still don’t jive…
1 Like
After 10,000 replies to these threads I have completely changed my position.
I am quite happy that my guild will be able to silence anyone who annoys us. This will make classic great again.
Actually, that fact has been stated by Blizzard numerous times. Mostly in threads like this one where they proclaim that Silences are not put into place by a GM but rather automation. Or where people claim to have been silenced by people reporting them maliciously… until Ythisens (#BringBackOurYak), Vrakthis, or Orlyia responded and spilled the T. Then their tune changes and the rest of us nearly choke on our popcorn from laughing.
And we’ll never know because they’re never going to tell us.
But it is not being abused. It means that a great number of people thought someone said something that went against the CoC/ToS. And it is unique account considering the individual has to right click in their chat window in order to send the report after it has been said.
If they’re somehow able to do that on an additional character on the same account, then that’s a whole different matter that Blizzard will have to deal with separately.
You claim to have played since BC. So you should have been on during the times where General/LD/Trade were unusable because gold-selling spam. It allows the server community (which isn’t that one of the pillars Classic is supposed to “bring back”? Server communities?) to decide on a more general level that Person X is a problem and can be dealt with by them on an interim basis before a GM has the ability to step in.
Since you’ve been around since BC, again, you should know that this is the case 99.99999% of the time. It’s SOP for Blizzard not to discuss any actions taken against others. The only time they do is in response to someone self-disclosing and as I pointed out earlier, it often does not end well for them.
Your “abusers” may have been given just a warning. Or even a short suspension. Or the GMs could have agree that, while your comments were not against the ToS/CoC where you would be issued an official Silence, they could be interpreted by a good number of people to have been such. If it were truly being abused, then they would simply bypass the GM.
The other thing is the evidence may just not be there. If it happens outside of the game and where a Blizzard employee cannot see it, then there is not much they can do about it. But if someone like Asmon-whatever does it live on Stream, then Blizzard can action him and any others. And yes, that has happened before where Blizzard has used Twitch streams as evidence of ToS/CoC violations.
4 Likes
That is the point. You do not know what the threshold target report number to trigger a player imposed penalty is, let alone that it is a “high number”.
I’m not aware of Blizzard even saying “high number”. I know that they said something to the effect of “enough reports”, but what is “enough reports”? Is it 5 reports? Is it 10 reports? Is it 100 reports?
If you can provide an official Blizzard source stating even “HIGH NUMBER OF REPORTS”, please do so. Otherwise, IMO, you are just trying to pull “facts” out of your posterior in an effort to prop up your desire to have the option to conspire to squelch any other player at any time for every little slight you think you had to suffer.
It IS being abused, though. Evidence has been provided, including video evidence. People are using that auto squelch system as a way to DC players on the opposing team in RBG’s.
At least you admit that proving abuse can be difficult at best, and that players can abuse the system for their own gain and avoid punishment for that abuse.
1 Like
And if it can’t be appealed?
And if you’re not in a Guild? Or in an inactive one? I never pushed the thought of “needing” to be in a Guild, in order to function in Classic. I just know that people wanting to run Dungeons, IDK how a Silenced Player can let them know, that they’re interested in helping them out.
Well, you and your Guild will reap the consequences of your actions.
I think you’re confusing Padre with Ziryus and Gnocci. To Ziryus and Gnocci, I’m not mentioning your names as an invitation to talk to me. I’m using your names as examples. Thank you. Back to Rathir, I don’t get the vibe that Padre is like that. He may disagree with me, but I don’t think he likes that.
Citation needed for your claim regarding Blizzard “telling us multiple times”.
Proof that abuse doesn’t happen? Do you actually know that the ones being reported are guilty? It doesn’t occur to you, that people are abusive on BOTH sides can be abusive?
'Cause Blizz knows: https://us.battle.net/support/en/article/42673
While we encourage you to report players that are behaving in a disrespectful manner, falsely reporting another player with the sole intent of restricting their gameplay is also unacceptable and will result in penalties to your account.
Yes, I remember. What I, also, remember is that the Report did not Auto-Ignore the Spammers, nor did it make the text disappear. All of that can stay. The Silence, itself needs to be reviewed by the GMs. It shouldn’t be up to the players 'cause we can see in this thread that there are those that go beyond the Gold Spammers.
Of course, I understand Blizzard cannot talk about it. You’re just insinuating that abuse cannot happen, and Blizz 100% “punishes” abusers, and I’m telling you that it’s not true, by using my experiences, as examples. A “warning”, is not a punishment, when they successfully Silenced me, personally. A “warning” still allows them to utilize their BNet Chats, Whispers, Public Chat Channels, etc. Meanwhile, the Silenced one loses time to access that. Thanks to the Automated Silence System, in place.
I think you may have misread my post. I was saying padre and most have reasonable arguments and reasons for wanting it the way it is. I was referring to some others who do it merely to get their little power trip and get excitement or whatever it does for them out of knowing they got someone In trouble.
1 Like