First, I apologize for losing track of this, a reasoned and on-topic response, in the midst of the subsequent rhetorical kamikaze attack. (I expect the Emperor was honored by their sacrifice and will reward them in another life.)Jeshin wrote:Hey,
Cola I know I am not staff on SOI. I know I do not play SOI currently and have not for over a year. I am however lucky enough to have over 10 years of staffing experience! And so I thought I might chime in here regarding your concerns about why an RPI staff member would nogain a player without their knowledge?
1) By not informing a player of why the nogain was applied the staff do not confirm whether their course of action is an effective means of grinding.
2) Because the staff have not confirmed that a players actions are an effective means of grinding they have only their results to inform them.
3) With the results being skewed due to the nogain the player will (hopefully) presume that their powergaming actions are not effective and not continue them.
This is considered standard policy on some RPIs and there is clearly a logic to it. Once you confirm a method of play can lead to quick gains it either leads to that player trying to sneak in ways to do it or the staff having to change code to try and compensate for the grinding approach that is being used.
However, I don't think the solution you describe is a good idea, even if you've seen it done at other MUDs. If a player finds and uses an aspect of code in an unexpected or unintended way, the first remedy staff should pursue should be to alter the code to eliminate the "exploit." If that isn't practical, the second response should be-- in my opinion-- to just announce that an exploit exists and to ask people not to make use of it. The solution you describe overlooks some important issues. I've already gave an example of a situation where one person sees a behavior as completely fitting, consistent with real-life, and in-character (routine use of 'palming' to improve the skill) while someone else insist it is blatant twinking. Another example is the one that started this whole bru-ha-ha: repeated hiding and ambushing during a combat session. Some thought it to be justified, others blatant abuse. If you secretly set a character to no-skill-gain because they are exploiting code in a way you wish to keep secret, they don't have a chance to explain their viewpoint. What you are describing is a situation where staff presume they are always right, and don't even need to hear the player's side, and also one where they think it more prudent to <i>hide</i> not only their punishments but possible exploits as well. I believe that's a very bad attitude to foster, but maybe more to the point, to be myopic: those 'secrets' will get out-- they always do-- and then trust and cooperation is eroded instead of strengthened.