Kihra wrote: »

Varana wrote: »

So our group wants to use the tool with all the details visible, no one's anonymous. We upload it - is there an option that only members of our group will be able to see and analyse that log?

Yes, logs on the site can be public, private or unlisted.

Public = anyone can see them
Unlisted = anyone can see them as long as they know the URL to go to
Private = only people who have signed up an become members of the guild on the site can see them.

At the moment, all logs are forced to Private and will be for the duration of the PTS NDA.

@Kihra Is an option for private in a sense that - if you are included in that log as a member, you can view? For a steady progression team it definitely makes sense to create a "guild" on the site, though some teams in more of a flux I can see it being more useful to just say "if your data is here non-anonymously - you can view it. If your data isn't here, you can't". Just wondering if that's available, a possibility for the future, or not being considered at this time at all.

[edit] for anyone wondering, the reason I mention your data being there non-anonymously mattering. it's because if you are set as anonymous on the game, the site won't know it was you who was there, therefore wouldn't know to give you permission to view.

Pevey wrote: »

The OP states that logs can be uploaded privately during the PTS. Does this mean that later people will have the option to make logs available publicly online?

I am very much against publishing data externally online.

I don't mind my group seeing my data, in real time or after, but only in-game. I don't like the concept of people publishing combat logs that contain my data and are available publicly online.

@Pevey I can't answer to logs created during PTS and if they will be able to be changed to "public" afterwards, but can answer that logs created on live most definitely will be able to be uploaded later on and set to public. I have created an account and did see an option for "stealth mode" on a group, that sounds like it would not allow data to go public of anyone in that group. Though i'm just going by description and not experience though.

[edit] if anyone who uses similar websites (apparently this site exists for wow etc) can explain how stealthmode for a guild works that would be super cool!

Wolfkeks wrote: »

I think the best approach is to just make an disable button for people who don't want to use it.

I think it's a great tool, especially for progression groups and raiding guilds, for big yay for that.

But if people don't want to use it,l for whatever reason (some people just simply don't want to share their data), make an disable button.

Everyone who wants to use it can use it.
Everyone who doesn't want to use it don't have to.

Everyone would be happy.
We would have an awesome new feature and people can decide whether they want to use it or not.

It was explained in the thread that it's not possible to disable the logging for someone without hurting the data - so if somebody wanted to disable using it, it couldn't provide any log at all.

However I agree that the default setting should be "off", and if anybody started logging the encounter the game should display a warning about that.

Kihra wrote: »

Rustyfish101 wrote: »

Question:
Took a look at the website and it looks incredibly thought out and detailed which makes me happy and excited but one thing worries me... Is this going to be worldwide or serverwide, or only the logs you've personally saved? I'd feel uncomfortable posting a log without someone's consent if many people will be able to see it. Just because I wanted to know about something that happened during an encounter.

@Kihra perhaps you could shed some light?

Sure, as mentioned by Bobby, you'll be able to check a checkbox in-game that will cause your name to be omitted when logging. This means if someone did upload it to the Web site, it will just show up as Anonymous and have no connection to any specific character.

In addition, the site itself supports just opting out completely and saying you don't want to ever be ranked, etc. This will be possible by either just sending an email to me through the site's contact us link asking for your character to be hidden (if say you accidentally forgot to check the box in-game), or by creating an account, claiming your character, and toggling its visibility to hidden yourself.

I just don't want my name to be omitted, but I also want all my data to be omitted as well!!

Ydrisselle wrote: »

Nebthet78 wrote: »

Kihra wrote: »

Rustyfish101 wrote: »

Question:
Took a look at the website and it looks incredibly thought out and detailed which makes me happy and excited but one thing worries me... Is this going to be worldwide or serverwide, or only the logs you've personally saved? I'd feel uncomfortable posting a log without someone's consent if many people will be able to see it. Just because I wanted to know about something that happened during an encounter.

@Kihra perhaps you could shed some light?

Sure, as mentioned by Bobby, you'll be able to check a checkbox in-game that will cause your name to be omitted when logging. This means if someone did upload it to the Web site, it will just show up as Anonymous and have no connection to any specific character.

In addition, the site itself supports just opting out completely and saying you don't want to ever be ranked, etc. This will be possible by either just sending an email to me through the site's contact us link asking for your character to be hidden (if say you accidentally forgot to check the box in-game), or by creating an account, claiming your character, and toggling its visibility to hidden yourself.

I just don't want my name to be omitted, but I also want all my data to be omitted as well!!

Kihra mentioned it in the thread that it's not possible if somebody wants to log the encounter.

If it's not possible, then a log should not be allowed to be created when a member of the group has been set to anonymous. No ifs, ands or buts to it!

This information is going to a third party website where if logs are present because someone didn't turn anonymous on in time, they have to create an account with their email and "claim their characters", which additionally then allows the site owner to take their email and sell it to others for profit.

There are reasons why I create fake emails and dumb them after a few months with fake names and reasons why I use programs like ghostery, privacy possum, adblocker.. etc.

If I don't want my data shared by others, it shouldn't be!! Period!

As Code suggested, ZOS needs to put in an option that disables ESO Logger completely, in addition to keeping things anonymous.

Kirha already said all that info can be taken away with the exception of buffs/debuffs. So there is no excuse.

But from past experience, there is NO ACCOUNTABILITY when a third party site or program comes into play.

Nebthet78 wrote: »

I just don't want my name to be omitted, but I also want all my data to be omitted as well!!

Is it actually your data, though?

Let's say you are walking down a public street. Someone is filming the street scene, and you--along with others--are captured on film as you walk down the street. They can do with that video whatever they please. They can share it with friends or share it with a wider audience (imagine a travel guide with videos) and you--the person who was caught on film--have absolutely no say in it. Now, as a matter of courtesy, some videos may blur out faces, but there's no requirement that they do.

Or, if someone is streaming the game and they capture you on the stream--whether it be something fleeting like you running by them in town or something more involved like you running a dungeon with them--they similarly have every right to make and show that video. They might, out of courtesy, cover up the group frame. But there's no requirement that they do.

Or, consider another scenario. Someone ran a dungeon or a trial with you. And afterwards, they tell a story. "I ran Frostvault today, and there was this person in that group who ...". They might, out of courtesy (or simple lack of memory) omit your name ("that tank" did this, and "that tank" did that) or they might use your name ("that code guy" was tanking like a complete amateur).

In all of these cases, anonymization is there as a courtesy, not a requirement. And in none of these examples are you able to demand, "no, you can't post that video of me walking down the street" or "no, you are not allowed to stream me" or "no, you can't tell stories about what I did".

So, I propose this analogy: Forbidding that a log be taken is no different than forbidding other participants in the dungeon or trial run from telling stories about what happened. If you disagree, then please tell me how it differs. Why are the three examples that I've given acceptable, but a recording of sorts of a dungeon or trial run not acceptable?

Again, I'm okay with there being a veto option, if that's what it takes to soothe people's concerns. But it begs the question, why are there these concerns in the first place? Why are people holding this to some unusually high standard?

code65536 wrote: »

Nebthet78 wrote: »

I just don't want my name to be omitted, but I also want all my data to be omitted as well!!

Is it actually your data, though?

Let's say you are walking down a public street. Someone is filming the street scene, and you--along with others--are captured on film as you walk down the street. They can do with that video whatever they please. They can share it with friends or share it with a wider audience (imagine a travel guide with videos) and you--the person who was caught on film--have absolutely no say in it. Now, as a matter of courtesy, some videos may blur out faces, but there's no requirement that they do.

Or, if someone is streaming the game and they capture you on the stream--whether it be something fleeting like you running by them in town or something more involved like you running a dungeon with them--they similarly have every right to make and show that video. They might, out of courtesy, cover up the group frame. But there's no requirement that they do.

Or, consider another scenario. Someone ran a dungeon or a trial with you. And afterwards, they tell a story. "I ran Frostvault today, and there was this person in that group who ...". They might, out of courtesy (or simple lack of memory) omit your name ("that tank" did this, and "that tank" did that) or they might use your name ("that code guy" was tanking like a complete amateur).

In all of these cases, anonymization is there as a courtesy, not a requirement. And in none of these examples are you able to demand, "no, you can't post that video of me walking down the street" or "no, you are not allowed to stream me" or "no, you can't tell stories about what I did".

So, I propose this analogy: Forbidding that a log be taken is no different than forbidding other participants in the dungeon or trial run from telling stories about what happened. If you disagree, then please tell me how it differs. Why are the three examples that I've given acceptable, but a recording of sorts of a dungeon or trial run not acceptable?

Again, I'm okay with there being a veto option, if that's what it takes to soothe people's concerns. But it begs the question, why are there these concerns in the first place? Why are people holding this to some unusually high standard?

Heck I will bite and answer your question.
Example 1 – I am only walking down the street unless they are trying critique how I am walking along with everyone else or following me and keeping a constant record this is vastly different. Wait with logs you will have a constant record of someone and critique it. There are laws against this – stalking.

Example 2 – You cannot name and shame on the forums ZOS does not allow it. They have no control over video sharing service. But here ZOS is allowing it. Double standard.

Example 3 – Sounds more like someone just talking about their experience of playing the game and not taking notes to compare with others.

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

T3hasiangod wrote: »

Dear everyone who is crying about the lack of opt out optionality...

Kihra wrote: »

In addition, the site itself supports just opting out completely and saying you don't want to ever be ranked, etc. This will be possible by either just sending an email to me through the site's contact us link asking for your character to be hidden (if say you accidentally forgot to check the box in-game), or by creating an account, claiming your character, and toggling its visibility to hidden yourself.

And... ? Is that going to erase our data entirely, or just flag us as anonymous ?

because, just to make things clear, you see :

4-group-data :
- Mary : 30K
- John : 45K
- Steven : 28K
- Lewis : 18K

same 4-group-data with "anonymity" :
- Mary : 30K
- John : 45K
- Steven : 28K
- Anonymous : 18K

See the problem here... ?

I see the problem here, your tank is doing a lot of damage, is he tanking properly ?

I saw this tool "in action" during yesterday's ESO Live and for me it's a horrible feature.

It's too invasive and intrusive. There is no doubt about it.

What I find very disappointing and somewhat alarming is that developers of this game support this kind of a feature by enabling it through some official means.

The game has already become too number-centric and too much focused on dps, uptimes etc. and it's obvious that only people obsessive about it support adding encounter logs to the game. While being useful for them and their hardcore raiding guilds, it carries risks that the privacy of people, who don't want to share their data with others, will not be respected.

This tool should be implemented in a following way: you can see all this stuff if everybody in your group activates it beforehand. That way you can ask all members of your raiding groups, before a trial, to activate it so everybody will agree on their activity being 'tracked'. As some said, these guilds already do so by posting their dps after every boss, so it wouldn't or shouldn't be a problem for them. On the other hand, people that don't want their data being recorded and seen by others can safely and fully opt out, not just being 'anonymous' on paper.

The intentions of adding it to the game might have been good and I understand the reasoning behind it, but in its current state it can do more evil than good.

ArchMikem wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

Is the anonymous flag the way people opt out of this? Not sure if that us enough as 3 players are being logged, it is pretty easy to figure out the 4th by interpolation. Or, if we opt out, not stats are gathered?

Seems like people who really want to single out the Anon who isn't pulling their weight will just reference the log to maybe a video they captured of their encounter, or just from recent memory and see who's name in-game isn't showing up in the log, put two and two together, and voila, let the discriminating begin.

@ArchMikem

It has been said a million times that people do NOT need this tool to discriminate people that aren't pulling their weight.
So using it as an argument against this new website is nonsense.

I am pretty sure that somewhere in the EULA reads that all data other than personal information is ZOS property.

code65536 wrote: »

So, I propose this analogy: Forbidding that a log be taken is no different than forbidding other participants in the dungeon or trial run from telling stories about what happened. If you disagree, then please tell me how it differs. Why are the three examples that I've given acceptable, but a recording of sorts of a dungeon or trial run not acceptable?

Good point.
See, I often sit there in TeamSpeak with my friends and guildies while they're doing their dungeons while I do my own stuff in the game. Most of the time there's at least 1 PUG member with them. The way they usually talk during the run about that stranger (who, luckily, doesn't hear anything) and that talk isn't nice to hear at all. They're nice guys, though, but the toxicity has spread to such an extent that it seems normal to them to bash someone with incredibly aggressive words.
Let's not get into "words don't hurt" or "guy can't hear", because it's not the point. The point is general toxicity. And, whether the logger is better or worse than what's already available in the base game or via addons, it adds yet another layer of toxicity to the pile, and a significant one.

It seems from this thread, the thread poll and the comments on the twitch stream that there's, again, no consensus : it's a 50/50 split in opinion, just like it was two or three years ago with "Group Damage". It's pretty much the same discussion anyway, with the same legit but irreconciliable arguments on both sides.

Can't we make everyone happy by asking the 2 following things :
- Feature must be disabled by default (active opt-in policy)
- No logging is possible for anyone in the group unless all group members actively agree to it.

That way, progression groups can use the tool all they like, and people who don't like it can rest assured that nothing happens behind their back.

Could we all agree on that and communicate to ZOS in that direction ?