LHO rule

[Chewett]

A number of people have raised concerns about rules applying to LHO's, lets dig further!

 

There are a number of LHO rules meaning that they get harsher punishments for doing bad things. For any rule that people think is bad or needs changing please post it here and we can discuss it and hopefully make the system better!

[(Zl-eye-f)-nea]

In the rules thread, I brought this up:

 

 

If LHO's (people with * around their names) say not to do something, it is generally advisable not to do it. If an LHO says something is allowed yet it is rule-breaking, both the LHO and the criminal will get punished; it is no excuse to go unpunished.

 

Note: These rules are not full but they give an example of what is permitted or not. Ask Live Help operators and others if you are unsure.

 

To me, the reason for the rule appears to be not to allow someone who knows they are doing wrong, to get away with doing so just because they asked an LHO who gave incorrect advice. Basically to avoid LHOs being scapegoats. Let me know if I'm wrong there or what you think.

 

However, to me that isn't a good enough justification for how the rule is laid out, and it is circular. I've said this before but I can't find the old thread anymore.

 

To me, an LHO is supposed to be an authority on information about MD, and if they don't know something well enough they should say so. The role shouldn't be taken as frivolous, anyone can help players but an LHO has a special place (or maybe I just give LHOs way too much credit?). If they are giving wrong advice, why should the player who received that advice be punished automatically? It makes more sense to me to be the other way around.

 

Thoughts?

 

Z

[Syrian]

i would agree with this, i would even go as far as to say if repeated incorrect/malicious advice is given that is making people break the rules, then LHO wings should be removed

[Grido]

In respect of the original post, I am a supporter of LHOs having more severe punishments for breaking rules - I have displayed this on several occasions.

 

 

The ruling is indeed circular with the end there, as you say Z, and certainly it's written in a way to avoid them being used as scapegoats. There has been talk at various points of removing the rule knowledge from LHOs and pushing it towards some other group instead, but it hasn't panned out, and indeed the questions would still get asked of them.

 

People ~should~ say when they're uncertain of information, but they don't always, and sometimes they fully believe themselves to be correct, but are not.

 

In terms of removing the scapegoat phrasing, I would agree there could be better phrasing there, but removing it opens up the possibility of them being used as scapegoats, rather than an honest mistake occurring - the LHO would still have to careful as they get punished either way, but it also means that the player asking cannot plead ignorance as an excuse, it (in my eyes) encourages both of the pair to read and be conscious of the rules to ensure that neither are falling foul of them.

[Chewett]

So, do others have no comments on Gridos post?

[dst]

I am tired of words Chewy. We all know what needs to be done and how. I want to see action.

[Jubaris]

(this is basically a response to all topics and recent Chewie's posts in them)

I'm not sure do I follow. Grido's leadership was questioned, the response is that you Chewie post these inquiries about LHOs instead of Grido and expect of people to provide contribution and energy to do Grido's work, while Grido would stay as the one responsible for everything.

 

If you say he is untouchable, okay, he is untouchable, it's easier to work with knowing there's an axiom, but if he is not, it seems most clear to me that the most efficient way would be Grido stepping down, athough I can understand old friend & old vet tendentions to give him several more chances.

 

The suggested systems in the various topics you've made are supposed to work without Grido, but with that fact they make him redundant there.

 

LHOs are an official game project which helps new players by using the activity and advice of older players willing to volunteer.

So why does it have to be a closed system, under Grido's autocratic rule (or anyone else for that matter)? The question brings weight when unefficiency is considered.

 

Make the LHO organization public, prone to discussions, community effort, the public can vote whether someone will be a part of the LHO group. The LHOs themselves would vote among themselves as per some concepts that we can treat as constitution.

Everything would be public, there wouldn't be a hidden forum, why the need for one?

[Chewett]

(this is basically a response to all topics and recent Chewie's posts in them)
I'm not sure do I follow. Grido's leadership was questioned, the response is that you Chewie post these inquiries about LHOs instead of Grido and expect of people to provide contribution and energy to do Grido's work, while Grido would stay as the one responsible for everything.
 
If you say he is untouchable, okay, he is untouchable, it's easier to work with knowing there's an axiom, but if he is not, it seems most clear to me that the most efficient way would be Grido stepping down, athough I can understand old friend & old vet tendentions to give him several more chances.
 
The suggested systems in the various topics you've made are supposed to work without Grido, but with that fact they make him redundant there.
 
LHOs are an official game project which helps new players by using the activity and advice of older players willing to volunteer.
So why does it have to be a closed system, under Grido's autocratic rule (or anyone else for that matter)? The question brings weight when unefficiency is considered.
 
Make the LHO organization public, prone to discussions, community effort, the public can vote whether someone will be a part of the LHO group. The LHOs themselves would vote among themselves as per some concepts that we can treat as constitution.
Everything would be public, there wouldn't be a hidden forum, why the need for one?

These are individual topics, none of which relate specifically to who leads the LHO group. All the ideas will work with grido, or any other leader. I see them as different points so if you want to address the whole topic of replacing Grido, this is not the place to do so. Primarily they all focus on removing work from the LHO leader so that Grido, or whatever new LHO leader replaces him has to do less work.

Grido has stated that he feels that if there is a better person to do his job, they should stand up. I am of the opinion that currently there are not many people who have the time to do what Grido does. Nor do I think Grido fits this either, he is too busy.

If you feel the LHO's should be leaderless and entirely public, then again I suggest you make another post.

There have been separate posts for a very important reason, each idea of independent of the others, and can be implemented in part, or with all other ideas. They are also independent of who leads the LHO. Please keep them separate.

[Jubaris]

These are individual topics, none of which relate specifically to who leads the LHO group.

 

 

In the LHO recruitment agent topic you specifically ask for a person to help Grido to recruit, unless you meant a generic LHO leader concept when mentioning Grido, thus implying he will stick in charge.

 

 

Grido has stated that he feels that if there is a better person to do his job, they should stand up. I am of the opinion that currently there are not many people who have the time to do what Grido does. Nor do I think Grido fits this either, he is too busy.

If you feel the LHO's should be leaderless and entirely public, then again I suggest you make another post.

 

 

I do think so indeed, if he isn't doing his job, and you yourself say he isn't fit, remove him, that's the smartest thing to do and that's the way MD deals with such situations if I have been paying attention. This confirmation makes it the third time I am making a post about that thought btw, what would you like me exactly to do?

 

There have been separate posts for a very important reason, each idea of independent of the others, and can be implemented in part, or with all other ideas. They are also independent of who leads the LHO. Please keep them separate. 

 

 

There is no public data on LHO current activities - this is a major discouragement for people to analyse the situation, because of the closed system it is expected of LHO themselves to heal their own wounds.

There were no posts of active LHOs speaking in support of Grido and in support of how the current system works.

At this point, it isn't the specifics that is troubling the LHOs that will be fixed with a few conservative chatter topics, the whole system is rotten and it needs to be re-initiated from the start. I think we should make that one single topic and re-develop the status of a LHO, the topics you started can only slightly improve the current catastrophic situation, where you try to optimize the system by staying in the same spirit which it has now, rather than embrace different perspectives if there are better ones and I think there should be several much better ones than what it is now.

[Chewett]

In the LHO recruitment agent topic you specifically ask for a person to help Grido to recruit, unless you meant a generic LHO leader concept when mentioning Grido, thus implying he will stick in charge.

Merely how I wrote it. I have no issue if we replace grido, or entirely remove the LHO leader. Until that decision has been decided on, he is still the LHO leader.
 
 

I do think so indeed, if he isn't doing his job, and you yourself say he isn't fit, remove him, that's the smartest thing to do and that's the way MD deals with such situations if I have been paying attention. This confirmation makes it the third time I am making a post about that thought btw, what would you like me exactly to do?

I personally believe that we need _someone_ as a head or some structure. I wont be removing him until we have a solid structure in place or a new player.

I meant a new topic, im trying to keep these things separate, I can move these comments to an entirely new topic if you wish?
 
 

There is no public data on LHO current activities - this is a major discouragement for people to analyse the situation, because of the closed system it is expected of LHO themselves to heal their own wounds.
There were no posts of active LHOs speaking in support of Grido and in support of how the current system works.
At this point, it isn't the specifics that is troubling the LHOs that will be fixed with a few conservative chatter topics, the whole system is rotten and it needs to be re-initiated from the start. I think we should make that one single topic and re-develop the status of a LHO, the topics you started can only slightly improve the current catastrophic situation, where you try to optimize the system by staying in the same spirit which it has now, rather than embrace different perspectives if there are better ones and I think there should be several much better ones than what it is now.

I disagree, Adding a whole new system of recruitment, having a guide, and changing how LHO's can work is massive.

But if you disagree, I will again ask you to make a new topic so we can discuss your plans :)

---

Im not trying to stick to a current system, im trying to get the best system. But people just complain and never actually help improve it.

So if I have no recommendations to improve it, its going to be changed how I want.

My worst solution, is better than everyone elses when they dont bother to post it and just attack all ideas. Because your perfect solution is worthless when we dont know of it and cant implement it.

 

Note: "your perfect solution" is not an attack on Rheagar, just a general point and general problem in MD that people attack ideas but never present better ones. Iv seen a problem with LHO, I talked to people, these are the points Grido and I came up with. In all that time no one else presented any issues, so these are mine and some of the ideas I had to fix them.

Edited March 30, 2015 by Chewett

[Jubaris]

Okay, as soon as I grab some consecutive free time, making that topic. 

 

I think the topics you started are useful both in general, both for the no-leader thought I have, however the way they are presented implies to me that Grido should stay, developping methods for Grido not have to do biggest chunks of work, rather than assuming we have operating people on their functions and finding the best division of work for the LHOs to succeed.

I will present it in a nice way in that mentioned to-be-made topic soon :)

[Chewett]

Okay, as soon as I grab some consecutive free time, making that topic. 

 

I think the topics you started are useful both in general, both for the no-leader thought I have, however the way they are presented implies to me that Grido should stay, developping methods for Grido not have to do biggest chunks of work, rather than assuming we have operating people on their functions and finding the best division of work for the LHOs to succeed.

I will present it in a nice way in that mentioned to-be-made topic soon :)

 

Grido and I are of the opinion that, if there was a simple drop in replacement for him, we would do it without a moments hesitation. We would both probably replace him with Burns but burns is inactive to the same level of grido. So we would lose the regularity of Grido applying the same "gridoness" to the situation (possibly giving us less fair decisions due to the change) and gain nothing.

 

These methods are ideally, to be developed so that no player needs to do this large role alone. If there was one player who could then we would just shift it all to them. I think we can all see that all the jobs Grido does, is too much for one person.

 

The single manager position works well for smaller groups, but it doesnt scale. More people causes a lot more complexity and it is generally accepted that the fewer "managers" the smoother something can run. But there comes lots of points where you need more managers to get it done faster, and I think we are at this point.

[Burns]

We would both probably replace him with Burns but burns is inactive to the same level of grido. So we would lose the regularity of Grido applying the same "gridoness" to the situation (possibly giving us less fair decisions due to the change) and gain nothing.

Unfortunately that's very true, my job takes a lot more time off the day than i thought...

If i find a fix to be active on a daily basis again, i'll let you know :(

[Jubaris]

Actually, I'll make that topic as soon as this one gets a conclusion: http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/16427-lho-improvements-what-is-a-lho-and-what-qualities-should-they-have

 

Because I'll be using it as a starting point from which I will draw my conclusions and references from.

[BFH]

I will comment based on experience. I think I've been the only LHO banned for giving a wrong advice.

 

Out of knowledge, I gave a wrong advice to a player. Basically the player asked me something. I commented something to Grido and received an answer which I linked with what the player mentioned me. Hence, I assumed  it as a new feature and told the player that I though there weren't issues. At the end of the day, it resulted that this wasn't a feature but a new bug.

 

I got banned for that. I considered it very unfair at that time and still consider it unfair. I spent a lot of my time helping the game without anything in exchange and at the moment in which I made a mistake I got punished. No second chances, no discussion at all. Simply jailed. That sounds fair? Hell no. It would have been much better if they approached the issue by explaining me never to assume things (with Chew did after I got jailed) and then giving me and the player another chance.

 

I don't agree on LHOs getting punished for making a small mistake. I think that if that person is trying to contribute to the game, giving of his time, in exchange of basically nothing (a couple of spells and that LHO appreciation thing is a joke seriously), he/she should be rewarded, not punished. If he/she made a mistake then speak to him/her, advice to not make the same mistake again. Lets not be hypocrite, pretend that we don't make mistakes, and try to punish him/her without giving another chance.

 

If you want to make LHO position such a responsibility and you want to put LHOs accounts in risk of getting banned for any mistakes they make, then give them good rewards, and somehow pay for what LHOs do (by pay i mean ingame rewards). Technically if you pay someone for something, you can fire/punish him/her for any reasons.

 

 

Ps. If I offended anyone with this sorry, I'm direct today.

[(Zl-eye-f)-nea]

If you dont consider LHO a particularly powerful position, then I'd agree with you BFH. If I considered an LHO just some random player who could get wings and give advice just like any other player can, then I would say the same. But I don't. if I did, I'd be an LHO. I basically am an LHO. I'm at the point all newbies come to and get stuck at, and I have constantly given a lot of LHO style support over the years....but i don't consider myself an LHO because I see them as more than that. Your valuable time is worth nothing if the duty you stand for allows a player to make a move so bad you both get banned for it. As for no discussion, there is a forum and you have hands to type and petition your case. It is a job, you have to apply for it, lack of payment is irrelevant, charity workers still get fired.

 

That being said, I do think the rewards LHOs get are possibly underrated now. Once upon a time the authority and spells were a massive thing. What they represent now has not been topped up to match the current world and should be perhaps. After all, you should be able to scare the hell out of anyone, you're the law to some degree.

 

However, if LHOs are to be considered nothing more than helper bees, sure, keep the rule as it stands, and frankly if that's all they are then I should be one automatically, and should have been for years.

 

Z

[BFH]

If you dont consider LHO a particularly powerful position, then I'd agree with you BFH. If I considered an LHO just some random player who could get wings and give advice just like any other player can, then I would say the same. 

 

I'm glad you bring this point in. From my understanding, LHOs aren't meant to be game moderators (CHEW can you clarify this, please). They are meant to be a group of players, that have some decent game knowledge and want to help other people. 

 

I think that their performance as LHOs is what gain them respect from people. Not the position itself. I think that we should be more open and allow more players into the LHO system. If we want MD to be better, become better and be prepared for a possible traffic boom after A25 changes we need to have more people that feel capable of helping others and that know the system because they experienced it at first hand.

 

Your valuable time is worth nothing if the duty you stand for allows a player to make a move so bad you both get banned for it. As for no discussion, there is a forum and you have hands to type and petition your case. It is a job, you have to apply for it, lack of payment is irrelevant, charity workers still get fired.

I disagree, there are cases and there are cases. If the player did something that harmed the game knowing that something was wrong, and the game explicitly states so (rules, restrictions, etc), then I agree he/she should be banned without much discussion.

 

• If the player is using a bug, and he/she doesn't know that that is a bug, and it is not his/her fault that the code is wrong and something was broken, he/she shouldn't get penalized, and perhaps should get advised to report strange behavior in a future occasion so that it gets fixed.
• If the player asked and was wrongly advised that he/she could continue doing whatever he asked. He/she should not get penalized because of other person mistake.
• If an LHO make a mistake, he/she should be given a chance as appreciation for the time he/she puts into the game.
• If an LHO constantly makes a mistake then he/she should not be an LHO.

 

Your time would be worth nothing, if the duty you stand for CONSTANTLY allows a player to make a move so bad that you both get banned for.

 

MD is not a game with 1M players. MD is a SMALL game, we can't afford to jail players for any small stupidity. Banned players will easily tend to leave the game. When I got banned, I was ready to leave, Mya was the one who convinced me not to leave. No one is essential, but trust me I ended up contributing more to the game than what many people have, much more than what 99.99% of you know. And it doesn't matter if the contributions are big or small, what matters is that if I had gone, then none of those contributions would have be done.

 

Shouldn't we look forward to avoid this type of cases? Shouldn't we look forward to make our community bigger instead of trying to find more ways of penalizing it?

[Chewett]

 

I'm glad you bring this point in. From my understanding, LHOs aren't meant to be game moderators (CHEW can you clarify this, please). They are meant to be a group of players, that have some decent game knowledge and want to help other people. 

 

 

Early in the games start, there were moderators. Then their roles changed to "live help" and many of these players were the old moderators. I have been consistently reiterating that LHO's now are not moderators. They may have this role from other positions they hold but being a LHO does not make you a moderator.

[(Zl-eye-f)-nea]

If they aren't moderators of some form, then why do they (as a group) vocally enforce rules and have tools at their disposal with which to do so?

 

If we are going to grow then I disagree, in a small world you can afford to have this sort of mish mash half and half authority figure, in a big game, you can't - it has to been defined.

 

To me, the more everyone talks about this, the more it comes across to me that the vest majority think of and want an official buddy system, and nothing more than that. In which case, sure a vague idea of rules is important, but knowing them well wouldn't be as you'd come under the same scrutiny as any other player helping another player. Only difference being you agreed to do it officially.

 

Its not how I see LHOs, I clearly give them way too much credit, but I have no argument if that's how they are supposed to be other than that it needs to be a lot clearer.

 

Z

[Ary Endleg]

 

If the player is using a bug, and he/she doesn't know that that is a bug, and it is not his/her fault that the code is wrong and something was broken, he/she shouldn't get penalized, and perhaps should get advised to report strange behavior in a future occasion so that it gets fixed.

 

There are few problems with this. First can you prove that said person really didn't know about and isn't just playing stupid. Secondly "strange behavior" is very vague. Losing heat was many times considered strange thing and bug by many newbs, while some deep hard to notice combat bug will go unnoticed, yet many will be using it without knowing. It's very hard to make distinction.

 

Z, what tools besides toadspeak do they have to enforce rules?

[DARK DEMON]

Mouth sewing kit given to the older elite ones, Ary

Edited April 1, 2015 by DARK DEMON

[dst]

 

Z, what tools besides toadspeak do they have to enforce rules?

Chat ban.

[Ary Endleg]

LHO activities:

• reply to help pm
• welcome newbs
• helping with common problems such as technical or pointing into right direction
• chat monitor

Did I miss anything?

[Myth]

I'd say that punishments are in order and can be properly applied. LHOs choose to be helpful, but that shouldn't be rewarded with placing them above any rule.

 

For instance:

 

- one single deviation would be considered to have been the result of lack of knowledge, and would be resolved through instruction on the matter

- several deviations from what was already discussed would call for a warning

- continuous deviations of the above would imply removal of LHO status for a certain amount of time, also leaving the player able to apply again in the future

- repetition of the above step would render them unable to apply for the position again

- detection of obvious malicious intent would call for the more severe jail/ban

 

As with any other player, they should be able to judge these cases, vote on them, and do so openly, assuring a certain degree of responsibility in this regard.

Edited April 1, 2015 by Myth

[Eagle Eye]

LHO rules

Help the new comers and promote MD
No bad words
When cast a spell to a newbies explain it
Once a week of report
Do your job
Respect and Obey

Remember don't forget where you start from the beginning.