The thread itself may not have a copy saved in the wayback machine, despite having a link to it from the topic list.
I have links to AV discussions back then, and they include links to more pages and such, but it does not guarantee a snapshot of the linked page exists.
Example:
https://web.archive.org/web/20080808013348/http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=8557297376&sid=1
That convenience, when tied to an auto squelch, also improves the odds that the system will be abused to almost a certainty, IMO.
And blizzard clearly sees it’s value outweighs the potential for abuse.
Much like a hammer, a knife, a car, a plane, a computer, etc.
(sorry about the 2nd example, England)
It remains to be seen whether Blizzard will adjust that viewpoint for a game in which the effects of abuse would be much for severe.
Many of us simply wish to reduce, or eliminate, the potential for abuse so that abuse does not become an issue.
How would it be more “severe” in classic than it was in TBC or WotLK?
For starters, there is no LFG tool like there was in TBC or LFD tool like the one in WotLK.
Sounds like a stronger deterrent for bad acting in general channels. ![:+1:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/+1.png?v=6" ":+1:")
Make sure you form your group before you disrupt the communication of everyone in official public channels. Or, you know, don’t disrupt public channels in the first place.
But taking responsibility for ones self is nutso talk.
I fully believe that one should take responsibility for their actions. I believe that abusive language should be reported and punished. I believe that actual SPAM, including but not limited to gold sellers, should be reported and punished.
We simply have different definitions of “disrupting”.
I do not consider the use of /trade for things other than the buying or selling of goods or services, as long as no actual violations are committed, to be “dusrupting”.
Well guess what, blizzard acknowledged that other players may indeed see it as spam, may report it, and the offending party may be actioned as a result. Each and every non-trade blurb causes actual trade to be pushed off screen that much faster. You are within your rights to not report it.
Your pet peeve appears to be others wanting official public channels created for a specific purpose to not be disrupted by what is deemed spam by the users of said channel. You are literally pushing back against those who want clearer communication.
Yes, they MAY report it.
The final decision as to whether an actual violation was committed is up to Blizzard.
IMO, if a squelch is overturned upon manual review, every player that submitted a report contributing to that squelch should be harshly punished for submitting a false report.
Would you be willing to be punished if you submitted a report that contributed to a squelch that was subsequently overturned upon manual review? Yes or No?
I would also be within my rights to report a player that was SPAMMING /trade with his advertisements for buying or selling of goods or services. And, yes. I would be willing to accept punishment if I contributed to a squelch that was subsequently overturned.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence
I feel like a really important question that isn’t being discussed as much as I’d hope is:
Can we trust Blizzard to punish the people who abuse the system harshly enough to curtail further abuse? It’s one thing to say “People are jerks and CAN abuse the system”. Yeah, valid concern. It’s another to say “They not only will, but they’ll get away with it.”
If they are seeing people abusing it in a blatant attempt to stop gameplay (opening AQ gates, tanking raid bosses, etc), I can easily see them absolutely smashing those people. I doubt very much they would punish players who are trying to stop players from crapping up public channels intended for specific uses.
I know on the old forums, we had some posts on the CS forums about people getting three day suspension for abusing the report system. They came there crying about it til a blue corrected them on why they was suspended.
Of course, everyone favorite chucklehead streamer picked up a 3 day ban for his little stunt with the report system.
The funny thing is the people that use that as proof that it can be “abused”.
yeah, and they neglect to tell anyone that abusers get punished. It’s all about optics and pushing agendas.
The only argument that truly matters is that the punishment system works. Which is why Blizzard changed it in the first place.
See, this to me tells me everything is going to be fine. If people are going to get BANNED, even temporarily, when Blizzard reviews the squelches and finds sketchy activity, I feel like that is probably going to seriously cut down on any abuse going on. I don’t think most people want to play footsie with a banhammer just to make people mad. Especially when they can probably make people mad …without doing that? Why risk the ban when they can just troll in the chat a little and probably get away with it?
Even less so people “colluding” as some suggested guilds would do.
(and I imagine blizzard would not have problems seeing that it was alts of the same guild members)
If Blizz is bad at moderation this seems all the more reason to have auto squelch. People being muted is small potatoes compared to bigots running rampant.
If Blizz is good at moderation they’ll deal with people abuse reports.
If Blizz is middling at moderation, then a middling harshness system would be appropriate to catch what they don’t. This is probably closest to reality.