Game Privacy enhancement - post-advertising

[iantruesilver]

I'm a little confused about game privacy settings still.  I currently GM two games, one of which has just closed off recruitment, awaiting for current applicants to finish their applications.

 

So I've been fiddling around with those settings, and still can't seem to understand where this game should be at.  Is there a privacy setting that allows forum members that have previously posted content in my game to continue to edit/add to their own content, but at the same time restricts new content from people not yet invited/joined to the game?

 

I know, I'm kind of asking for an in-between of a lot of different privacy options, but that's kind of where an ideal would be.

[Eric]

There is not a setting that does what you want; privacy settings are based around game membership, not content authorship. I understand why you're asking for it, but this proposed option would require a lot of very tricky coding to cover all possible outcomes (surely you don't want applicants to be able to post in those threads forever), and I think it would end up being harder for GMs to manage as well.

 

I'm willing to discuss specific implementation ideas that could make this workable. Ideas, anyone?

[bwatford]

I think the ideal is an ad closes, a selection is made, and then the game is switched to closed or read only so that the DM can invite players. The old applicants, some of them at least will want to come back and post a congratulations or access their application thread for another game app. On ogmw you could do that because you never lost access unless the game was set to private.

 

A lot of that was because we had "readers" there and it is just how the forum worked. We might could work it where players could still be invited and be members even though the game was technically still public. Like on ogmw.  This would allow a period of time before the DM would need to make it closed or read only for applicants to respond.  Right now, you cannot invite members if the game is public.

[Neopopulas]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the request is more or less the ability to close an ad, so its closed to any new applications, but still have it accessible by people who are finishing their applications.

 

So, you have a game that has been recruiting for a week, and you have 5 applications, you close the ad, but the game is still open so now you have 8 applications because you couldn't stop new people from applying even though the game ad was closed.

 

It sounds like the problem is that you have applications, not players, so you have 5 applications and you haven't picked 4 players, so you can't just invite the four people you intend to have in your game and then close it, you need the game to have access to everyone because you're still in the selection period.

 

It looks like the only option currently is something like;

 

Game Ad -> Application Period -> Close Game -> Invite ALL current applicants (so they can continue to post, etc, but no one else can) -> Choose players and remove the remaining (after giving them time to copy their applications out, if you want).

This would allow you to have all your applicants posting in a closed game where no new applications can be submitted, but it will eventually be locked off from all other players than those you selected.

 

The only other option i can see, which would surely require code work, would be that you could have a 'read only' mode to games, so anyone can SEE (and say, edit/copy posts) but not post anything new to the game.

 

 

[iantruesilver]

Wow!  Certainly a few things to consider an options to plan!  I don't imagine this transition has been as kind to you as it has been to us.

 

Now that I'm aware of these various options, let me try to clarify.

 

Currently, and I believe I'm speaking for some other forum members as well, as we've discussed a couple times recently our individual predicaments in this particular flavour, the issue looks something like this:

 

I create a new game, and throw up an advert for it (I'm actually still unsure how this part behaves here on Baldr, aside from that I write a blurb and that the game can't be "closed" and "advertising" at the same time, so I guess it's hardcoded to either "public" or "open" during advertisement?).

 

Anyway, during that time I'm recruiting, and at some point, either from a cutoff by time or volume of applications, I would want to close off new applications.  This is when I haven't yet made decisions, and in truth some applicants have not yet completed their applications, and I'd allow a grace period prior to selections.  That's what Baldr is currently not catering to properly as I think we can agree.

 

Of the solutions that are currently available to me, as mentioned, during this time I could "close" the game, and invite all current applicants.  That however, is not only tedious (depending on how many applicants you have), but it could seem misleading, as there's no additional category beyond "GMs and co-GMs" and general "Members", distingushing that one may be a "Reader/Applicant" vs "Player", as OGMW did.

 

The other solution currently available to us is that we simply leave the game in either open/public mode, clearly identify somewhere on the game's prominent areas that new applications are no longer being processed, and deal with whoever doesn't see/read/adhere to that declaration.

 

Now.  I won't presume to know how difficult each of the above proposed solutions may be, as I've no experience in coding forum software, but the one that looks most...  Simple to me, is to add an additional category.  Even if it essentially gives exactly the same permissions between a "Reader/Applicant" as a "Player", it visually distinguishes the difference between the two, and similiarly allows both groups access to the forum, to create/edit/copy/respond to material, that once the game has been "closed" off would otherwise become inaccessible to readers and applicants.

 

The finer details of what permissions are given to each group, and what's possible without tricky coding, I suppose that's more your domain than mine.  But IMO ideally, a "Reader/Applicant" should be able to participate in threads they started themselves, and threads they've been invited to participate in I suppose?

 

Hope that clarifies the core issue behind the ask?

[Eric]

OGMW does not distinguish between applicants and members. Game forums there are open to post in regardless of membership, unless the forum is set to private. This can give the impression that there's an actual applicant status, but it's just a gap that is papered over by it being slightly difficult to find games if you're not a member.

 

Adding another member status is likely quite complicated, since it touches many places in the UI and logic. It would be more straightforward to add a game status (something like, "After-Advertisement") that can be leveraged by the permission model to allow/restrict posts.

 

When you say "continue to post", where do you mean, exactly? Topics the user created? Topics where they've posted at all? Any topic? Creating new topics? That's the part that gives me the most pause about the idea, because the more difficult that is to explain to a computer, the more likely it is the resulting implementation will be cumbersome (or inadequate) to the GM.

 

[bwatford]

Also of note, the application/ad close date is traditionally the time applicants have to complete an application, so it's not usually used in the way you explained.

 

Turning the ad off in the game setting (ad close date, game advertising status) should take the game out of the advertising list regardless of game status. So players looking for advertising games would no longer see it.

[iantruesilver]

In my experience, there seems to be several places an applicant/reader would want to post. Ongoing applications (which would be threads they’ve started themselves), or threads they’ve previously posted in, such as OOC’s, pre-game roleplay areas, or other applicants’ applications, all of which could technically be individually flagged  by the GM and/or dumped into a specific sub-forum if that helps.

[iantruesilver]

Just now, bwatford said:

Also of note, the application/ad close date is traditionally the time applicants have to complete an application, so it's not usually used in the way you explained.

 

Turning the ad off in the game setting (ad close date, game advertising status) should take the game out of the advertising list regardless of game status. So players looking for advertising games would no longer see it.

Ah okay I see why the software behaves the way it does now. We’re not using it as intended! XD

[Colin]

Is there any reason setting the game back to public doesn't work, since like bwatford stated the ad is removed from the advertising list?

[iantruesilver]

I definitely see and resonate the "if it ain't broke why fix it" sentiment.

 

Though, if you look at say, my Deos Ferrum (In Machina) game that's currently in this weird limbo situation, the cutoff date for advertising has expired.  I've since settled on putting it in "open" status, as to allow current applicants to complete their applications prior to selection date.

 

While you're correct, that this technically pulls the game off of a specific "advertisements" list (which btw I just only now found out about...  So I'm wondering if I'm the only one who clicks games > games without even looking, or if others have completely missed out on this "advertisements" category too simply because it's not top of the list?), it technically is still open to forum members to join.  Which, I understand is the intent of an "open" game vs "closed" one, and that I'm kind of asking for something of a middle ground that may require the software or general vision of MW to work outside of the way it was originally intended.

 

On the other side of the coin though, one might ask the question: If a game is "open", would you not want to advertise it to be so?  So why all the fuss/differentiation between "advertising" and "open" being two different things?  Not a philosophical question I think I wish to pursue though.

 

I think the point is, I'm trying to advocate for a middle ground between a completely "open" game, where anyone can join and add content as they wish (kind of like how Zoom was in the early days, being susceptible to meeting crashers), and a completely "closed" one, as it's intended for only GM and players.

 

Ultimately, is it a super deal breaking experience to leave a game in open status for say, a week or two and suffer the possibility of a crasher?  No not really.  Ain't gonna ruin my day.

 

Would some kind of a middle ground of sorts be helpful?  Absolutely.  Even if it's nothing at all to do with recoding, beyond adding a couple of clarifying sentences on how the various privacy levels in the game settings work, so GMs have a better idea which setting to use when.

 

Do I want you guys to revamp the whole code or potentially break the new shiny thing?  Hells no.

Edited January 11, 2023 by iantruesilver (see edit history)

[Eric]

Hmm. Maybe there is an easier middle ground here. What if we simply dropped the game off the advertising list when the advertising period ends, and without automatically changing the game status? Might be possible to add a button that shows up in the menu when the game is Public and past the advertising window that combines status setting and member inviting...

[iantruesilver]

1 hour ago, Eric said:

... a button that shows up in the menu when the game is Public and past the advertising window that combines status setting and member inviting...

Not really sure what that means, but I'm sure glad you guys do xD

[Neopopulas]

5 hours ago, Eric said:

Hmm. Maybe there is an easier middle ground here. What if we simply dropped the game off the advertising list when the advertising period ends, and without automatically changing the game status? Might be possible to add a button that shows up in the menu when the game is Public and past the advertising window that combines status setting and member inviting...

Thinking about my own needs this would work pretty well.

 

Essentially what would happen, if i'm understanding, is that when a game passes its advertising close date, the game simply disappears off the main list, so new people couldn't find it, but it doesn't close the game as it does now. This means anyone who already knows where the game is - and is actively posting in it - would still be able to do so, but new people wouldn't be able to find it anymore. And you would have to manually close the game to 'lock' it from new players when you invite those players you choose to the game.

 

This would mean everyone who is already posting in what is now sort of a 'hidden' game, can continue to post, and when you eventually choose your players and invite them, you can close the game and then ONLY those chosen players can post.

That does seem to solve the problem, even if technically new people could post in it, the likelihood that anyone will actually be able to find it is basically nill. they aren't going to stumble across it and start posting post-game ad close.

Edited January 12, 2023 by Neopopulas (see edit history)

[iantruesilver]

That would work I imagine yeah.