5 Star Ratings & Toxicity Combat.

TwiceBornStar

I don't want to live in the DDR.

Dr_Con

Why don't they just anonymize the names of the players unless they type/talk for solo bgs? That way accurate data can be collected.

And it doesn't matter what other teams think/vote, it only matters what your own team thinks.

These forums don't have a downvote feature and I don't imagine the game would have one either for players, it would only be positive votes.

What they do with this data is anyone's guess. I would suggest sitting on it for a while.

robwolf666

One idea I've had is that everyone should have a 1-5 star rating associated with their accounts. After a Social encounter, for example after being in a group with someone, present the opportunity for people to rate others, or skip it and have the default rating be 5 stars if people don't take part in the review system.

I don't see people abusing the **** out of something like that at all, nuh uh!

HertoginJanneke

Worst.Idea.Ever.

HertoginJanneke

Thavie

That's probably the worst idea I've ever seen on this forum.

LikiLoki

If we give the right to defend our freedoms to others, then this is a movement towards democracy. If we give the right to protect our feelings to others, then this is a movement towards dictatorship. You haven't noticed yet, but you are already being told what feelings to feel with pride, and what emotions to be ashamed of.
And I advise you to watch the TV series Black Mirror season 3, the first episode about life, where everything depends on the rating of likes. You offer a subjective rating based on emotions

LalMirchi

No thank you, not a good suggestion.

DMuehlhausen

Yes, cause implementing a toxic system will get rid of toxicity...no allowing bullying to a point is how you get rid of it. You had toxic players in all games but games like EQ the communities were able to police themselves. If you were a toxic player you were shunned from everything. Systems like Dungeon finder allow for this behavior since you rarely get the same people multiple times or even really see them runnig around you can be a tool with no repercussion. When you had to be active in zone chat to find groups though you could act like that.

Duke_Falcon

A real life situation where it works really well is ride sharing. Real world application of it is a huge success in that sphere. I know everyone except for a few are largely against it because they are afraid of how they would be rated by people abusing the system. However it is precisely because of the fear of social accountability that it works in the ride sharing sphere. People are afraid to behave badly as it will directly affect them by the people they are abusing.

People in online forums such as this one can hide behind anonymity and distance away from the person they are talking to, so they can really get away being as awful as they like. It puts all the responsibility to encourage good behavior on the moderators. Imagine a system of social accountability that does not require outside influence, influence that can be lied to and manipulated. The current systems I've seen in games and forums is ideal for malicious sociopaths to thrive.

Imagine a system that puts the power back in the hands of the people, not one person who could abuse it, or a few people w/ authority who could be manipulated by those in the system, but let the power reside in the social collective of people, because we all know whats good and bad. I think what works so well in the ride sharing world could be adapted for all online forums, we just have to be smart enough to figure it out, and the key is to prevent people from hiding in obscurity without accountability to those around them is an open history of their actions for all to see.

wazzz56

Duke_Falcon wrote: »

A real life situation where it works really well is ride sharing. Real world application of it is a huge success in that sphere. I know everyone except for a few are largely against it because they are afraid of how they would be rated by people abusing the system. However it is precisely because of the fear of social accountability that it works in the ride sharing sphere. People are afraid to behave badly as it will directly affect them by the people they are abusing.

People in online forums such as this one can hide behind anonymity and distance away from the person they are talking to, so they can really get away being as awful as they like. It puts all the responsibility to encourage good behavior on the moderators. Imagine a system of social accountability that does not require outside influence, influence that can be lied to and manipulated. The current systems I've seen in games and forums is ideal for malicious sociopaths to thrive.

Imagine a system that puts the power back in the hands of the people, not one person who could abuse it, or a few people w/ authority who could be manipulated by those in the system, but let the power reside in the social collective of people, because we all know whats good and bad. I think what works so well in the ride sharing world could be adapted for all online forums, we just have to be smart enough to figure it out, and the key is to prevent people from hiding in obscurity without accountability to those around them is an open history of their actions for all to see.

hard pass..this is not an irl situation..this is not a ride share...it's an mmo....and it comes with all the good and bad that exist in the mmo world...I get that there are some people in game that are annoying or toxic etc...but you can always block or ignore to you heart's desire.

Duke_Falcon

Okay okay, I can see how rating people after a group experience is a bad idea. I have another idea of how to implement it. Being in groups may be to easily manipulated, there's probably a way to make it work but I don't know what it is.

Instead what if after every whisper or after every mail delivery there's a little pop up screen that you can click one time to skip giving the person a default 5 stars, or tab over to rate and then just select 1-5 stars enter done. Tie the rating system to social interaction and not game play.

The vast majority of people would get 5 stars because the vast majority of people are decent in their behavior the majority of the time and most people would just skip the opportunity to rate unless they were actually wronged in some way. However that one time when one of us is bad, no ones perfect, after all. The wronged person has the opportunity to defend themselves in a way that will directly affect the offender.

rpa

I believe OP's suggestion is a rather bad idea but on the other hand game would finally have new easy to enter PvP content for everyone everywhere. No need go grind or learn, just rate your opponent.
Edit: Of the OP:s reworked suggestion I'd guess it would dramatically cull social interaction with strangers.

TaSheen

Still a really bad idea. Thankfully unlikely to happen.

jaws343

1

Duke_Falcon wrote: »

A real life situation where it works really well is ride sharing. Real world application of it is a huge success in that sphere. I know everyone except for a few are largely against it because they are afraid of how they would be rated by people abusing the system. However it is precisely because of the fear of social accountability that it works in the ride sharing sphere. People are afraid to behave badly as it will directly affect them by the people they are abusing.

People in online forums such as this one can hide behind anonymity and distance away from the person they are talking to, so they can really get away being as awful as they like. It puts all the responsibility to encourage good behavior on the moderators. Imagine a system of social accountability that does not require outside influence, influence that can be lied to and manipulated. The current systems I've seen in games and forums is ideal for malicious sociopaths to thrive.

Imagine a system that puts the power back in the hands of the people, not one person who could abuse it, or a few people w/ authority who could be manipulated by those in the system, but let the power reside in the social collective of people, because we all know whats good and bad. I think what works so well in the ride sharing world could be adapted for all online forums, we just have to be smart enough to figure it out, and the key is to prevent people from hiding in obscurity without accountability to those around them is an open history of their actions for all to see.

There is an extremely stark difference between ride sharing ratings and social ratings in an online environment.

For ride share drivers, the only way you can give a negative rating is to have direct interaction with them by purchasing a ride. Which means that Person A cannot convince 1000 followers to all give 1 star reviews to a driver out of spite.

With this game, and pretty much every online rating system, people can use their platforms to mass harass someone. Not everyone of course will do this. For Player A, maybe they have a bad experience with someone and rate them at a 1 and then move on with their day.

But it is Player B where the problem arises. Player B is a streamer with a huge following. Player B decides that they dislike the person they grouped with, or they were beat in pvp by the player they fighting against. Player B decides to ignite their following against the player.

Not to mention, Social Ranking systems are inherently just plain awful. They aren't some power to the people nonsense. They are bullying devices that people use to push people down. You see it with public rankings for movies, where people will mass review bomb something because it has an element in it they disagree with. None of them having ever actually seen the movie. You see it on Reddit, where echo chambers are constantly propping themselves up. Even Youtube removed their negative reaction count. Because, in all cases, people will take any opportunity they can to put their boots on someones throat.

Coppes

Putting players on the "honor system" in order to judge their fellow players never turns out well. In almost every case. It works for services like DoorDash or Uber because that's in the real world. Where most toxic players are too timid without anonymity.

Heartrage

I’ve played the game since beta, I’ve never felt like this game needed a social score to weed out toxicity. There’s already a reporting system and you can ignore people.

ghastley

Perhaps the system should automatically downrate anyone who uses it. That way the trolls are trolling themselves.

VaranisArano

Duke_Falcon wrote: »

Okay okay, I can see how rating people after a group experience is a bad idea. I have another idea of how to implement it. Being in groups may be to easily manipulated, there's probably a way to make it work but I don't know what it is.

Instead what if after every whisper or after every mail delivery there's a little pop up screen that you can click one time to skip giving the person a default 5 stars, or tab over to rate and then just select 1-5 stars enter done. Tie the rating system to social interaction and not game play.

The vast majority of people would get 5 stars because the vast majority of people are decent in their behavior the majority of the time and most people would just skip the opportunity to rate unless they were actually wronged in some way. However that one time when one of us is bad, no ones perfect, after all. The wronged person has the opportunity to defend themselves in a way that will directly affect the offender.

Sure, let's consider that hypothetical idea.

"Can I have that weapon drop?"

^ That's a not uncommon whisper from PC players who use addons to see what loot drops their group mates got. But if you're familiar with debates over that addon, you know that there are some players for whom a whisper is an automatic "No." What's to stop that from becoming an automatic 1* in order to punish behavior the player doesn't like? What's to stop the asker from leaving a 1* if the asked player replies "No"?

"What build are you using?"

^ That's a not uncommon whisper in PVP, especially since ESO doesn't have an inspect feature (for good reasons.) We had a recent thread from someone complaining that players weren't sharing their builds. What's to stop a question like that from getting a 1* from a player who thinks the asking player is trolling or trying to steal their build without putting the work in to figure it out?

"Tank, slot a taunt"

^ That's not an uncommon request when dealing with a fake tank, just as it's not uncommon for fake tanks to shoot back that the group shouldn't need them to. Who's going to get the 1* - the fake tank, the player who called them out, or both?


When you rely on human nature to be inherently decent, you forget a couple crucial details.

1. It's very hard to tell "tone" through text, so incorrect interpretation happens a lot.

2. Your idea has no protection for innocent but misinterpreted interactions.

3. Your idea allows bad actors to punish those who call them to account, even if it's done reasonably.

I would expect one thing from this new idea: a spate of posts going "Why was I rated so low?!"

And in all ways, it's inferior to what we already have: if someone breaks the TOS, you report them.

wolfie1.0.

Duke_Falcon wrote: »

Okay okay, I can see how rating people after a group experience is a bad idea. I have another idea of how to implement it. Being in groups may be to easily manipulated, there's probably a way to make it work but I don't know what it is.

Instead what if after every whisper or after every mail delivery there's a little pop up screen that you can click one time to skip giving the person a default 5 stars, or tab over to rate and then just select 1-5 stars enter done. Tie the rating system to social interaction and not game play.

The vast majority of people would get 5 stars because the vast majority of people are decent in their behavior the majority of the time and most people would just skip the opportunity to rate unless they were actually wronged in some way. However that one time when one of us is bad, no ones perfect, after all. The wronged person has the opportunity to defend themselves in a way that will directly affect the offender.

The problem is that such a system would only work assuming that every player and person had the same moral level, cultural, and societal norms and they they also act as in a polite, respectful, and compliant manner to such norms.

Welcome to the internet.

Here on the internet we have rebels to norms, counter culture, and clashing cultures. We have clashing cultures and people that hold grudges petty and legitimate.

Implementing such a system would be abused and misused. It would Require ZOS to invest resources into, for no real economic gain for them as a company. Not to mention the increase in complaints, ticketing, and other issues they would have to deal with.

Imagine trying to corral and manage 100's of children that like to rebel and wreak havoc. That is what such a system encourages.

peacenote

This is not a completely new idea.

I think the idea of downvoting or rating people unfavorably would be extremely toxic and also unfair given the fact that we experience disconnects, crashes, cats jumping on keyboards, etc.

However I am not completely against some kind of system that rewards good behavior. I had at one point suggested a kudos system, where players could receive appreciation votes, a capped amount per day, with a small reward, such that it wouldn't matter if people farmed or abused it but it could be a small incentive. Like, maybe you can earn up to 5 kudos a day and for each one you get an endeavor seal or tripot or something. Just something so players can feel appreciated when someone notices you didn't fake tank or helped someone out.

boi_anachronism_

I mean I think zos need some kind of automatic filter system for very specific words like certain slurs- they should get an autoban from chat for at least a few days. Not necessarily the game but a chat ban. If they get multiple chat bans then that ban can increase to weeks. They could also appeal it. I'm not suggesting something that could be misconstrued sentences or phrases that may be taken out of context but like calling someone the f slur or the n word. Something like that. I think this may at least create a baseline for really really toxic and demeaning things in chat. Beyond that it's hard. Basically for someone to get permabanned I think multiple people would have to submit evidence. Screenshots from dms or whispers that were threatening, abusive w/e. While you can report people at present the system is pretty awful and I've seen people get ganged up on and banned as well as people doing super abusive things with zero repercussions. (And I'm not talking about teabagging 😂)

TechMaybeHic

Join a guild.
Get to know who you play with
Make friends
???
Profit. Or at least not have to worry about rating strangers.

Vulkunne

Duke_Falcon wrote: »

I've been thinking of ways to counter the inherent toxicity that develops in Social Online Environments where people are mostly anonymous and unaccountable for their toxicity.

One idea I've had is that everyone should have a 1-5 star rating associated with their accounts. After a Social encounter, for example after being in a group with someone, present the opportunity for people to rate others, or skip it and have the default rating be 5 stars if people don't take part in the review system.

Similar to Lyft or Ubers Ridingsharing apps, if you rate someone lower than 2 or 3 stars then your never paired with them again in a group Activity Finder. I was a Lyft Driver for about 3 years, and out of the 9,000 rides I gave my rating was usually 4.93-5 stars, meaning out of the last 100 ratings I only lost 0 - 7 stars out of 500 potential stars. Lyft drivers and passengers can see the rating of the other passengers and drivers, and I soon learn never accepted anyone with less than 3 stars in your vehicle, because without fail they are horrible people.

After every 100 reviews then make a number tied to the persons name for all to see as they play the game. People will know right away, that's not a person I want to hang out with, and as a result people will be in a position where they are directly accountable for what they do, they can't hide behind anonymity and continue to be abusive toward others. If they want to have people to play the game with, they'll have to be nice to everyone or everyone will see that they are not a nice person by their peer reviewed rating.

Hi Duke_Falcon,

Let me start this by saying I completely agree and its an idea I've also proposed in the past.

However that said, let me tweak this a bit. The first thing we want to do is give people the option to opt out of this system right? So if you do not wish for your character (or account whichever) to participate in the rating system you can opt out. Now you will probably come back and say, "but then everyone would just not do it?" And I would say, "not so fast."

The thing is this. Some people will care about their rep, they will (and many already are) considered professionals with running certain types of content and a system like this gives them the opportunity to shine and for their works to be appreciate by anyone interested in learning more about them. I would also participate as well.

If someone does not participate, fine. That says one of two or three things, either a) they're new b) they do not run the content often or c) they don't care. Not to judge anyone but that only would create a sort of implied acknowledgement without drawing a negative conclusion.

Regarding leaving feedback about the individual, they would have to be careful with that because some people will abuse the feature. Although in some instances I would like to know if the person has had a substantial poll of negative ratings. To protect against abuse, feedback should only be left if certain conditions are met, such as completing a dungeon run. If the person chooses to bail from the group early or if a vote is initiated to kick them, both of those actions are deliberate and so it would be nice to know how reliable someone is. Once or twice is fine but if its a pattern then that is something people should probably be aware of.

Again, I'm sure this post to will be ripped apart by criticism but I understand where this concept is coming from and I'm getting tired of getting straight up told to *blank* off or uh go and do this action *blank*. You know, it doesn't happen often but as I've said before I'm there to have fun, be part of the solution and not there to abuse or be abused by other people.

VaranisArano

Vulkunne wrote: »

I'm getting tired of getting straight up told to *blank* off or uh go and do this action *blank*. You know, it doesn't happen often but as I've said before I'm there to have fun, be part of the solution and not there to abuse or be abused by other people.

You're reporting those players to ZOS, right?

Hapexamendios

I'd quit if something like this is implemented. Absolutely atrocious idea imo.

ForzaRammer

Great idea, with this, soon nuf the low dps freeloaders will be at the bottom

thorwyn

Instead what if after every whisper or after every mail delivery there's a little pop up screen that you can click one time to skip giving the person a default 5 stars, or tab over to rate and then just select 1-5 stars enter done. Tie the rating system to social interaction and not game play.

Why are you so obsessed with rating other players?
Whenever I bump into someone who'se behaviour is real toxic, I put them on ignore and that's it. For any other case... maybe I've been in a cranky mood and misinterpreted their actions, maybe they were in a cranky mood, or maybe we just have different opinions on how to play ESO.
Adding a rating system to whispers and mails would just discourage peopler from interacting with other players at all because every whisper comes with the potential risk of a bad rating and every bad rating comes with the risk of a revenge rating.
Also, why 1-5? Do you really think that people would take time to consider whether this whisper was a 2 or rather a 3?

couriersix

Absolutely not. Blocking and reporting exists as is and toxicity exists in all games, but in my four years of playing daily I've never encountered it to be as extreme as other games.

Everyone has bad days as well and no one deserves to have their social credit run into the ground because they got a bit snappy with the wrong person.

thesarahandcompany

No, this isn't Yelp. It's a game. And unlike a company or place of public accommodations, people aren't providing you a service.