New console command

What do you want to see in Armagetron soon? Any new feature ideas? Let's ponder these ground breaking ideas...
Post Reply

Is this a good idea?

Yes
3
25%
No
9
75%
 
Total votes: 12

User avatar
xtrapoint
Average Program
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:11 pm

New console command

Post by xtrapoint »

OK, I've seen some people who wished that words they couldn't stand seeing were censored but there seems to be no way to do that (except silencing, but silencing completely stops you from seeing messages). So here's my idea, a console command that allows you to choose words that you don't want to see, on another topic i saw somewhere someone wanted their server to stop people from saying things like "laggg", etc. However what I'm suggesting is a command that only stops the person entering the command from seeing the word. For example if you don't want to see the word "lag" the command would be-> CENSOR lag. Thoughts?
--They say nobody is perfect, then they say practice makes perfect. I wish they would make up their minds.
--The less people speak of their greatness, the more we think of it.
--Dealing with backstabbers, there was one thing I learned. They're only powerful when you got your back turned.
--I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.
--The dumber people think you are, the more surprised they're going to be when you kill them.
--There are two types of people - those who come into a room and say, "Well, here I am!" and those who come in and say, "Ah, there you are."
--It doesn't matter what temperature a room is, it's always room temperature.
--You can't have everything in the world, where would you put it?
User avatar
compguygene
Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 2342
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:09 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: New console command

Post by compguygene »

No is not a strong enough word, I am going with Absolutely Not! There have been a half dozen or more topics similar to this to create a server-side swear list, etc. I am too lazy and tired to search and post the links in this topic. Suffice it to say, the developers are focused on making a super cool new stable release. This kind of feature would take so much work to create, for little gain. Also, all the developers here are volunteers and do projects that interest them. I highly doubt that anyone on the development team would be at all interested in taking on this task.
Armagetron: It's a video game that people should just play and enjoy :)
https://bit.ly/2KBGYjvCheck out the simple site about TheServerPharm
Wik
Average Program
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: New console command

Post by Wik »

I guess it was Ryon who asked for a similar algorithm, afair.
Good luck finding all possible variations of a word. Lag, l4g, lAg, la6, Lagg ...
For various reasons, I voted no.
User avatar
AI-team
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 1020
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 6:17 pm
Location: Germany/Munich
Contact:

Re: New console command

Post by AI-team »

What Wik said. There are just too many ways to bypass something like this
  
 
"95% of people believe in every quote you post on the internet" ~ Abraham Lincoln
 
 
User avatar
raph
Average Program
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 11:43 pm

Re: New console command

Post by raph »

Hearing stuff you don't want to builds character.
User avatar
Phytotron
Formerly Oscilloscope
Posts: 5041
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 10:06 pm
Location: A site or situation, especially considered in regard to its surroundings.
Contact:

Re: New console command

Post by Phytotron »

compguygene wrote:No is not a strong enough word, I am going with Absolutely Not! There have been a half dozen or more topics similar to this to create a server-side swear list, etc.
He didn't propose it be server-side. He proposed it be client-side. A personal censor, one that no one else in the server would be affected by or even know was employed.

Therefore, these "Good luck finding all possible variations of a word. Lag, l4g, lAg, la6, Lagg ..." and "There are just too many ways to bypass something like this" comments are also irrelevant. If someone doesn't know you've censored a word(s), they're not going to try to get around it.

A loose analogy might be with the V-chip on TVs. You're not censoring broadcast programming; you're censoring what's viewed on your screen only.

I'm mostly indifferent to this, but can see how it might be valid (e.g., onlooking kids in the room, or eliminating "lol" spam, even instachat spam if you could enter whole phrases). But you guys need to at least get what the guy is actually proposing instead of being all reactionary and arguing against something he hasn't (something that happens way too frequently on this forum).
Wik
Average Program
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: New console command

Post by Wik »

Hey, hey. Not trying to be reactionary, just thinking that this might be a technical approach to a non-technical problem.

And it has little to do with any "intention" to get around.
The relevance of the other guy knowing about my filter is basically zero. The effectiveness of said filter depends on the size of his vocabulary and the variations in typing, for both spam and swears.
I have a faint suspicion the OP does not want to block a particular constellation of letters, which actually would be easy to do, but instead the meaning it carries or attitude it represents, respectively.

If a conversation demands the use of a censored expression, would one have to un-blacklist it every time?

And on TV, you usually know what to expect and therefore filter from your program. When chatting, you seldom do. So yes, very loose.
qwxy
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 8:01 pm

Re: New console command

Post by qwxy »

Well, I voted yes for various reasons.
And, by the way, have you noticed what nicks some people use? They use nicks like IFUCKYOURMOM and other stuff like that.
I think that such nicks should be banned completely.
A reason because i voted yes is that i hate bad language in online multiplayer games.
I know that this topic has nothing to do with bad nicks, but I want to put it out.
User avatar
Phytotron
Formerly Oscilloscope
Posts: 5041
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 10:06 pm
Location: A site or situation, especially considered in regard to its surroundings.
Contact:

Re: New console command

Post by Phytotron »

Wik wrote:I have a faint suspicion the OP does not want to block a particular constellation of letters, which actually would be easy to do, but instead the meaning it carries or attitude it represents, respectively.
I don't see that in anything he said. Could be true, but I don't see it. The only thing he referenced was "lag" cries. Let him answer that. But, of course, subject stands irrespective of that.

No reason a person couldn't stick dozens of CENSOR (or whatever) commands in their autoexec.cfg including all the variations (they could think of, and with web culture I would think that's a lot) on particular words they find objectionable. Some stuff may still slip through, but it would cover most of it.
If a conversation demands the use of a censored expression, would one have to un-blacklist it every time?
Well, it hasn't been determined, even proposed, what the method of censor would be. Would it completely skip the offending word(s), leave a blank, or replace the letters with @#Q*(%& or something, leaving the context intact? And again, it would be client-side. If someone wanted to employ the censor, then it's completely on them whether they care to un-blacklist something for conversational purposes or not, just as it is with the (client-side) silence or text output options.
And on TV, you usually know what to expect and therefore filter from your program. When chatting, you seldom do.
I don't see how either of those statements are true, especially with the inconsistency of the TV ratings system and the predictability of webkids.


As I said, I'm mostly indifferent to the implementation of something like this, but considering all the unnecessary and downright stupid stuff that has been shoved into this game I don't see any particular downside to this (conceptually, that is; I've no idea about coding prospects).

Personally, I would rather see what someone says so I know where they stand, at least initially. But if some people don't want to see certain words in the first place, how does that harm you? Does it bother you if someone uses the silence option or turns off text output?

Remember, this is a video game.

qwxy wrote:I think that such nicks should be banned completely.
Doing something like that universally is impossible. There is no real top-down authority here. It would be impractical, anyway; nothing automated would be sufficient and additionally would catch false-positives.* And no one is going to monitor it manually. Not to mention getting into the matter of determining what would even qualify for censor, a huge can of worms not to be opened.


* Yes, I realise the same is true for a client-side censor, obviously. The difference is it's only on that user and what they choose to do, with a understanding of what comes with it. It's entirely voluntary.
Post Reply