ashling wrote:Not exactly. Decissions on if something is harrasement or deserves a ban goes through Jolt staff ....
Where du you got this info from?
Mikira
CoMa
Leanon
ashling wrote:Not exactly. Decissions on if something is harrasement or deserves a ban goes through Jolt staff ....
I did I'm just not agreeingkeithlan wrote:Ashling, I wonder whether you read what I say. It seems you're not.
Honestly? I'm guessing from experiance with customer service and what seems likely. When I've reported harrasement I've talked to a CSR and then been told the report would be looked over by Zerlin who would get back to me about it.jonasq wrote:Where du you got this info from?
Mikira
CoMa
Leanon
That's not what I said, actually.ashling wrote:You've made some good points keithlan but unless I missed something (possible) your saying that the new customer service system will work exactly the same as it does currently but with Jolt taken out of the picture we don't know who will take over their role of organising volinteers and filtering the reports from those volinteers down before passing the serious ones onto Nevrex (that's if Jolt doesn't decide on bans which I have no idea on and your not sure 100% sure on).
Ahh ok, then sorry keithlan I did misunderstand what you were saying and you've made a fair point but I still feel they are risking the best customer service set up in MMOs for maybes and possibles and I'd prefer they did not.keithlan wrote:That's not what I said, actually.
What I said is that there is no reason why it would not work the same way. What I said is that a volunteer program can work, because it does work now, with proper direction, I agree. I didn't say the system will remain the same, I'm so far a simple project supporter (although I plan to become more involved if the project succeeds). To be honest, I don't think these issues have been debated now, but I guess you can ask or contribute directly on the project's forum.
I'm not completely sure what you mean by go havoc there but I should say that this isn't a uniquely Ryzom.org complaint for me. I would be unhappy with any company removing Jolt from the customer service here and that I don't mean to sound like I'm judging the whole bid just on that. Ryzom.org might not be my first choice (CCP would be if they were biding ) but I'd much prefer Ryzom.org to SoE or EA!keithlan wrote:What I am fighting here is the assumption that you seem to make that it will go havoc if the project finally suceeds, whereas it would not if another company buys the ryzom assets.
kiexa wrote:Opening up all the lore/artwork is gonna destroy the story, everyone will know the answers to the questions that kept us imersed in the game for 2½ years. "who are the karavan" "what is the dragon" "where is jena" "where did the goo come from" "where is the dragon" "who is Ma Duk" "who dropped the teraforming bomb" "where is atys". If the .org plan works, wont we be free to download the answers to these questions next week? wheres the fun in that?
kiexa wrote: Jolt have a much more important role than just hosting, they are the GM`s, they train the CSR, they are on call 24 hours a day, they have thier own code of conduct and strict rules, all that would go out the window with a open source 15 year old GM "look at me! i can kill players with a click of a button" its gonna happen. Ryzom wouldnt be the same without Souls, Tigs, Shads and Zerl, its thier 10+ years experience at running things flawlessly that appeals to alot of people. Throwing that out the window is the worst mistake you could make.
kiexa wrote: This whole chop and change business plan highlighted by Anissa just proves that they dont know what they are doing and how to run a large project like this. they are over thier heads, wow so they have 3 people, Xavier, a free internet guy, and a former head of Nevrax, must be great then
Valid point: I guess it is just matter of opinion, since we, at the English shards, our contact has been Jolt which some (including me) find them quite professional, and we are, of course, wary of changing a team that works well.keithlan wrote: There are much more than three people behind that project, and all these people might well be over their heads and know nothing. I find them quite professional in the way they currently handle things.
And here is where we slightly disagree. I have no reason not to trust them, of course, but seeing the SAS creation, and how there are 3 parties involved now, 2 of them being funding investors and having 2/3ds of the share, this *change* in the business plan is for me, less guarantees that it will be a community, non-profit based effort. If those 2 partners agree on something, our opinion is secondary. Unfounded suspicion? probably.You don't know these people; I personally see the change in the business plan, and specially the way they expressed it and showed it to the community, as a guarantee and proof of their good-will and their dedication.