[Feedback] Blacklist is better, but not good enough.

[voidlorn]

I dont have alts but yes, I would be entitled to anonymous alts. This might as well be a EU GDPR concern as well.

So you think that people should not be able to block other people unilaterally when they're being harassed and/or otherwise want no contact with that person on any character.

Do you think restraining orders should have clauses that allow following a victim as long as the harasser doesn't speak to the person being followed, too? Just want to see how far this logic goes for you.

[voidlorn]

The problem is your suggestions are exploitable. For example if you block someone you say they should not be able to see you. In order to make them not able to see you their client has to register you blocked them. Which means blacklist information is being sent to the client. Blacklist information being sent to the client of other players is exactly what the stalking plugin is built on and why people bring it up

Anything that forces person A’s blacklist information to be processed by person B’s client to achieve a result (say making it so person B can’t see person A) is open to extreme account wide exploitation

I don’t oppose the idea behind what your suggestions offer. I simply oppose anything that sends more account information to the client

Everything is exploitable. That doesn't mean no attempt should be made to implement changes that make it more difficult for users to harass other users.

[PotatoePet]

So you think that people should not be able to block other people unilaterally when they're being harassed and/or otherwise want no contact with that person on any character.

Do you think restraining orders should have clauses that allow following a victim as long as the harasser doesn't speak to the person being followed, too? Just want to see how far this logic goes for you.

We are talking about a video game and a virtual world here. Never saw a restraining order in my life limiting the allowed distance in a virtual world. If this easily bypassable "security feature" is an invasion into the accounts of players who did nothing wrong, then yes, its simply wrong and no court would ever rule like that. To invade the privacy of everyone to protect a single person.

Or do you have police around you 24/7 checking everyone in your vicinity for having a restraining order? You can report players harassing you and this will get their account banned. No need for you to know what account that is.

[Veladrys]

Just so I'm clear, what you guys are arguing for is to allow someone that you have blocked to continue following you around in game and seeing all your chat? You're cool with people you don't want to be around being able to follow you all over the place without your knowledge? I know you think you're advocating for privacy, but it's really sounding like you're advocating for in-game stalkers to be allowed to continue stalking their victims.

[Supersnow845]

Everything is exploitable. That doesn't mean no attempt should be made to implement changes that make it more difficult for users to harass other users.

That’s the thing, the old blacklist wasn’t exploitable (mostly because it was so limited in its functionality that it wasn’t worth exploiting). The new blacklist is simply far too exploitable because your account information SHOULDNT be on someone else’s client, this is MMO design 101. No change to the blacklist will do anything meaningful if you continue to allow account information to be sent to the client because with that happening everything else is just an security theatre

Like I said I don’t necessarily disagree with your proposals but they will only work if square man’s up and actually invests in moving blacklist functionality to the server, everything else is about as effective as taking your shoes off before a flight

Just so I'm clear, what you guys are arguing for is to allow someone that you have blocked to continue following you around in game and seeing all your chat? You're cool with people you don't want to be around being able to follow you all over the place without your knowledge? I know you think you're advocating for privacy, but it's really sounding like you're advocating for in-game stalkers to be allowed to continue stalking their victims.

Literally nobody is arguing that, people are arguing that “security theatre” of the suggestions offered is useless when your account data is on your stalkers client

[PotatoePet]

Just so I'm clear, what you guys are arguing for is to allow someone that you have blocked to continue following you around in game and seeing all your chat? You're cool with people you don't want to be around being able to follow you all over the place without your knowledge? I know you think you're advocating for privacy, but it's really sounding like you're advocating for in-game stalkers to be allowed to continue stalking their victims.

So lets start adding cameras in every private household because people could do crimes in their homes. That bit of privacy invasion is fine. Or do you want people to die?

You see the flaw in your logic? I am argueing about the cost others have to pay for the sense of security of a few.

Like I said I don’t necessarily disagree with your proposals but they will only work if square man’s up and actually invests in moving blacklist functionality to the server, everything else is about as effective as taking your shoes off before a flight

That's my stance as well. I will reconsider my opinion if Square comes up with a working solution for what there is right now.

[voidlorn]

We are talking about a video game and a virtual world here. Never saw a restraining order in my life limiting the allowed distance in a virtual world. If this easily bypassable "security feature" is an invasion into the accounts of players who did nothing wrong, then yes, its simply wrong and no court would ever rule like that. To invade the privacy of everyone to protect a single person.

Or do you have police around you 24/7 checking everyone in your vicinity for having a restraining order? You can report players harassing you and this will get their account banned. No need for you to know what account that is.

There are, indeed, restraining orders that apply to digital contact, be that via social media or in games, but okay.

People are allowed to ban others for any reason they deem valid. It's a basic safety feature on the majority of social media platforms, and it prevents those blocked users from seeing and interacting with the individual's content while logged in. Yeah, they can often work around it, but the blocking allows people to set boundaries when others keep repeatedly violating them. The fact that you feel that being blocked is a violation of YOUR privacy says a lot more about your character than it does about the people who want more comprehensive blocking features.

Since you refuse to contribute any good faith points to this conversation and insist on fixating on illegal plugins, I have nothing more to discuss with you. Good luck with your empathy problems.

[PotatoePet]

There are, indeed, restraining orders that apply to digital contact, be that via social media or in games, but okay.

People are allowed to ban others for any reason they deem valid. It's a basic safety feature on the majority of social media platforms, and it prevents those blocked users from seeing and interacting with the individual's content while logged in. Yeah, they can often work around it, but the blocking allows people to set boundaries when others keep repeatedly violating them. The fact that you feel that being blocked is a violation of YOUR privacy says a lot more about your character than it does about the people who want more comprehensive blocking features.

Since you refuse to contribute any good faith points to this conversation and insist on fixating on illegal plugins, I have nothing more to discuss with you. Good luck with your empathy problems.

No you are using a strawman. I never said "Never saw a restraining order limiting the digital CONTACT" but "the digital DISTANCE" (being in the vicinity of someone)

And you are the only one right now showing no good faith. I already said that I might reconsider my stance on this topic once Square proves they can implement a system like this in a somewhat secure way even tho the mere concept is flawed from the get-go.

EDIT: I just dont feel asking them to add new features to a broken system. And as long as the system is like it is right now I don't think giving clients even more info about others is a good road forward.

[voidlorn]

Anyways, now that we've put the third-party stalker tool fanatics on the ignore list, let's get back to the point of the actual post!

[PotatoePet]

Anyways, now that we've put the third-party stalker tool fanatics on the ignore list, let's get back to the point of the actual post!

Oh my god, this is so childish. Hey people, I want to announce that I put people on my ignore list. You see? Here, I have people on my ignore list. You are the best example why that cost of the privacy invasion isn't worth the effect.

I am out of this thread. I gave my 2c.