Enforcing Teamspeak afk rules

[Lee_scar]

I think its about time that afk people on teamspeak get moved to afk channels when they are actually afk.
I've been unsure to actually move people because 'muh hurt feelings why did you move me'

The ideal of teamspeak is to actively use it to talk/text chat

How this would work:
+Procedure for non-private rooms
--enters room(if non-private)
--then asks if room participants are active
--mics are muted or no response?
--Pokes the participants
--no answer within reasonable time? (1-2minutes)
=Moved into afk room

+Procedure for private rooms:
--Does the room have a single person?
--Poke user and ask if they are waiting for someone
=Actively waiting? leave alone
=No response? Afk room
=Response but not waiting for someone? Ask to leave the room.

The issue is that when a private room has multiple users, which makes things more difficult.
The procedure is really the same.

 

[Nottykitten]

My question is are AFK people really a problem?

I know I afk sometimes for about 30 min to have dinner, but I dont leave the ts room. I dont see why I should exactly be moved if I'm gonna come back to the room anyways and nobody has a problem with me staying there.

Also a problem with these procedures is that if I'm busy in a csgo match or something and I cant respond in chat since ingame, I dont really want to be poked or moved.

 

[heartgamingmufin]

The only reason why I would encourage this rule is to stop Aika from falling asleep.

onfire37 Shanebat1 xXxFruitNinjaxXx Nottykitten Kallie_S​

 

[Hunter]

agreed with lee, if you're afk then go to the afk room.
when you come back from being afk, then you can move yourself back in like two seconds.

 

[Iguana]

what's the problem with people being afk in the rooms though

 

[Hunter]

we have an afk room, may as well use it
if it's such a non-issue, i'd countersuggest removing the then-useless afk room

 

[Lee_scar]

My question is are AFK people really a problem?

I know I afk sometimes for about 30 min to have dinner, but I dont leave the ts room. I dont see why I should exactly be moved if I'm gonna come back to the room anyways and nobody has a problem with me staying there.

Also a problem with these procedures is that if I'm busy in a csgo match or something and I cant respond in chat since ingame, I dont really want to be poked or moved.

With the inclusion of teamspeak on the main pain I expect traffic to start picking up.

Coming online and entering a room and attempting to speak to a person with mic active is discouraging to community productivity when your met with talking to a wall.
Even with mic disabled on users in a room you can still text based interaction and again being met with dead silence.
Some of our more sensitive players may think they are being ignored or ousted and not welcome.

There is a very simple 'Away' Button one can click when leaving for a duration. Its a literal second of clicking. Same with changing your room.
Being set away affects nothing but speech(which if your afk your not doing going to anyways) notifying users your not there while retaining your position on the room. You can still listen and interact and type.
Others only benefit from your courtesy.

Firstly your most likely in a gaming room of the appropriate kind right?
Common sense dictates to me that in a cs:go room you would not be ready to immediately respond, but a minecraft gaming channel has little reason to be inactive without the proper setting. That goes with most intensive games like league. Compared further to just lurking the lobby and such.

Yes it is inherently a problem, the afk room exists for the sole purpose of sorting activity or not.
I am unsure about your intentions; I cannot speak on your behalf, but I get on team speak to actually SPEAK and chat to people. Hence the programs name and purpose.

All I am asking for is a little less laziness and a bit more tidiness to inspire a raise in productivity and activity.
No one wants to join a teamspeak when everyone is just sitting around and not socializing and is effectively driving teamspeak usage and community and hindering community growth. (Because they are asleep or gone without notice of setting away at least)
There are examples of such members with that decency.

In the end I would rather an empty teamspeak then one with no one that can actually converse with a user.
So yeah lets be 'edgy' and fight about common courtesy to set yourself as busy or move a room.

 

[Jivvi]

Private rooms probably need to be moderated for afk/lone people, but other rooms I don't see what the issue is. All of the other rooms are public so anyone is allowed to be there regardless.

 

[Lee_scar]

I don't see what the whining is about. All that's happening is that your being moved to the afk room.
Its not like your being kicked from the server or banned.

Though let me just exerpt the rules of blocktopias teamspeak from the main channel which contains the catch all Rules of Blocktopia's teamspeak. That way we can have some clarification for people complaining about 'why should I be moved if im afk'

- This is TeamSPEAK. That means, if you have your speakers muted it is assumed you are afk, and as such you are at risk to be moved into the afk room. If you do not wish this to happen, do not mute your speakers.

These rules are subject to staff interpretation. In an argument about rules between a staff member and a non-staff member, the staff member has the final word.

Rules that must be understood and adhered to as an agreement between service provider and user.


This thread isn't about [hl]If people being moved is going to happen[/hl]
This thread is about enforcing [hl]When we are supposed to be moving people[/hl]
I rather hate it being 'to my interpretation'
I am only requesting a community overview and stricter guidelines and procedures as the current rule is very vague.
As I am not wanting any further unpleasantness of catching shit-talk whenever I enforce it 5 hours later when the afk party comes back.

 

[Nottykitten]

I am only requesting a community overview and stricter guidelines and procedures as the current rule is very vague.
As I am not wanting any further unpleasantness of catching shit-talk whenever I enforce it 5 hours later when the afk party comes back.

Pretty sure you're getting that for enforcing a rule that, from what I've read so far, practically nobody has a problem with. I mean what do I care if someone is afk it doesn't influence me(and probabily you) in any way, so why put that person in another room.

Exactly why did you move said people to the afk room? Was teamspeak out of rooms? Were there no more private rooms? And if the answer to that is "because it's a rule", then it's a bad answer because a rule without reason doesn't really make any sense.

 

[Malcovent]

There's plugins to enforce this if needs be, though given that teamspeak will have it's own respective admins to oversee it, we'll leave that choice in their hands rather than making it a community suggestion.

 

[Fiestaguy]

Why not just have someone's nick changed to "Person-AFK" like 90% of people already do?

 

[Hunter]

dunno what the deal is with people complaining about being moved

 

[Nottykitten]

dunno what the deal is with people complaining about being moved

Because its unnecessary. dunno what the deal is with people wanting to move other people

 

[Love]

The rule hasn't been strictly enforced for the past ~1.5 years, why would it change now? Let people stay in their rooms. It's not like it's going to be in dire need. If you absolutely need to use that room then move the occupant(s) somewhere else. But other than that, people being AFK won't hurt you.

If people being AFK is such an issue we should then consider kicking 1/3 of RoF at any given time.

/thread

 

[Hunter]

you don't /thread your own post, silly

 

[Lee_scar]

There's plugins to enforce this if needs be, though given that teamspeak will have it's own respective admins to oversee it, we'll leave that choice in their hands rather than making it a community suggestion.

Any comment below this comment above is literally unnecessary and just farming controversy.
Thread will be locked unless admin think there is even a need after Malc's post.
Which I should have locked right after because the very point of the thread was met there and then.

Then again I essentially regret I cared really enough to bring it into discussion and present the ideal that it might be favorable to enforce it.
I wanted to inspire some sort of evolution to teamspeak, but again after all its worth teamspeak is a joke for usages sake right?
I understand its current usage is limited to somewhere around 70%-80% players that do not care for anything really involved in community affairs.

Pretty sure you're getting that for enforcing a rule that, from what I've read so far, practically nobody has a problem with. I mean what do I care if someone is afk it doesn't influence me(and probabily you) in any way, so why put that person in another room.

Exactly why did you move said people to the afk room? Was teamspeak out of rooms? Were there no more private rooms? And if the answer to that is "because it's a rule", then it's a bad answer because a rule without reason doesn't really make any sense.

The rule hasn't been strictly enforced for the past ~1.5 years, why would it change now? Let people stay in their rooms. It's not like it's going to be in dire need. If you absolutely need to use that room then move the occupant(s) somewhere else. But other than that, people being AFK won't hurt you.

If people being AFK is such an issue we should then consider kicking 1/3 of RoF at any given time.

/thread

Just because that stop sign in the neighborhood is something that everyone runs and no one gets a ticket from the enforcing agency that happens to not care in no way ablates that fact that there is indeed a rule in place.

Current and past staff have only been lax because any instances of administrative structure is some kind of hot button issue and 'muh freedoms' with people around here.

I'm know first hand staff grew tired of enforcing the rule for that very fact of 'muh freedomes' arguments that spurred.

To that point I've already received harassment for the very opening of the thread, while it might be simple elbow to the side jeering laugh laugh poke fun in interpretation; its harassment all the same.

I clearly see people fighting about this because the 'last bastion' of being able to basically arse around with no moderation is being touched on.

Pardon me for wanting to polish up and 'escape restart' portions of the old systems and renew them with the ideal of growth or have we already given up any ideal of growth? I know I haven't. See what I did there.

You can't /thread a thread that I should have been locked earlier because I figured after the administration provided information about the direction the teamspeak is headed that the circlejerk between people wanting afkers moved, people that don't care, and people that just want to argue because a place that hasn't had any structure is suggested to get some.

Its boiled down to the point where there isn't even discussion of pros and cons of enforcing it and just ping ponging with statements of

dunno what the deal is with people complaining about being moved

VS

Because its unnecessary. dunno what the deal is with people wanting to move other people

The only post that has had any suggestion or evolution to the rule in place has been:

Why not just have someone's nick changed to "Person-AFK" like 90% of people already do?