Boot message should be public

[Hullukko]

Hmm... maybe, although sometimes a good host might want to keep the boot reason private for the sake of the booted player. For instance, what if someone has to go because his gear is not good enough (not so much an issue these days, but it used to be in the harder AO3), or because the host knows that the player can't play? In such cases I might have a conversation with the player first but it would always be private, of course. Then if the person doesn't leave I'd boot with either "sorry" or "..." as the reason.

Now imagine that the group would only see the boot reason. It would lead to conversations like: "Why did you boot?" "He's not a good player." "why not?" "[lengthy rant about the other player's faults]".

Some issues are best handled behind the scenes. That's why when a group is full I usually PM the person to leave, and the group can't even tell if someone had to be booted and didn't leave willingly. Not everybody needs to be exposed to the whole "why can't I stay" discussion, or get annoyed along with me if a person refuses to leave. On the rare occasions when I do announce to the group that I booted someone, it's because the person did something so bad that I think everyone should know they were booted. But in most cases I find it better form not to bother everyone with group selection issues.

You're trying to come up with special cases where the publicity might be undesirable and almost neglecting the common case for what it is needed for, a common fallacy. Arguing against speed limits because you on some occasion you might need to drive a pregnant woman to hospital is just nonsensical. And for each of your examples I have to say that I would still prefer the boot to be public. I'm sure a host may feel differently, but as a participant, I would like to see the result. A boot for poor gear and I'd like to know that. A boot because the party is full and bootee had refused to leave. I'd like to know that. More than "like" in both cases I actually feel I have the right to know that. The whole "I'd like to spare the party from not knowing the gory details" really doesn't fly.

There's nobody stopping the host from having private conversation prior to the boot. And you could still boot with a "reason not disclosed" and I'd reserve the right as a participant to either ask for it or jump ship myself.

It's not meant to make host's life easier, quite the contrary, it's stripping the hosts from the veil of secrecy that some hosts clearly abuse. It should be implemented for the rights of the other 4/5 of the group, including the bootee. And not because it would be helpful for already good behaving hosts, but so that we'd have more of them.

[Hullukko]

This is a good suggestion, but could cause major issues. I personally rarely ever host and sometimes I boot, but I hate typing a reason unless I have the time to do so. If the entire team is at the boss (say K&Q) and a player comes in and tries to sprint to the boss and get a drop I don't actually have the time to type out some lengthy reason for booting people (I usually just type Sorry). So, the simple fix to this is to have preset responses to booting like the 4 custom preset options players have now.

On the flipside, a host is allowed to boot people for whatever reason they want to. Players know who to avoid if they get booted multiple times by the same person for pointless reasons. I have been booted as a level 56 from a Keeper run because I was using level 50 equipment (Death set). Seems like a pointless reason to me, but it's up to the discression of the host. I just avoid that host.

So you boot with "." or something like that. Fine, maybe in a hurry in the middle of a boss, but why shouldn't that be public? If it's legit the group ought to agree. And if not, well, that's what were after here.

The preset responses is a great idea, but the publicity of at least the act of booting is necessary. We could then ask for the reason if it is unclear or might seem too harsh or unnecessary.

((Off topic, but I often join 4/5 games at stronghold that are near to or at the boss. I'm most often greeted with welcome and hurry ups and I had no idea some people would consider that leeching. I always thought it's helpful to speed things up. And feel the same way when I host and peeps join in late. Again, if you consider booting people in a case like that, I would strongly feel the need to know the reason. And at least I now know to avoid your late games. ))

[KingFu]

Ingenius! No more "." booting, or letters, or even flaming. Would give a lot more of a purpose to booting requiring a "reason" since it'd influence people to boot with an actual reason!

[Lovenus]

Hi guys. Pardon me please. This is an awesome idea but I suppose this won't be much of a problem anymore in the next update.

• Joining games hosted by friends through your friend list now require a password if one has been set. Previously, you could join your friends' password-protected games without giving a password.

^^ You can make a private password locked game if you dislike having public players joining your game.
Spacetime Studios made it easy for us.

[EpuYue]

I think he's talking more about public games. Even with that update there will still be people who likes to join/host pug especially when most of your friends are not online.

[Kalielle]

@Hullukko, what you say makes a lot of sense. As I said, I can see arguments both ways.

Whether this is implemented or not, I would continue to boot with "..." or "sorry" as the reason - because I almost always either have a private conversation with the user before booting, so they know why they're being booted and I'm not typing it out again.

I think I'd also add "I had my reasons" to my quickchat slots, in response to any questions about booting.

[StompArtist]

Completely agree with public message on boot.

[Tamino]

I like public message, as well as predefined customizable answers - it is very hard to type while engaged in boss fight. I try to avoid to boot (but I host very seldom), I do prefer to invite people to leave in public chat. I feel more confortable in that way, so when I boot someone, all are aware of the reason.

((Off topic, but I often join 4/5 games at stronghold that are near to or at the boss. I'm most often greeted with welcome and hurry ups and I had no idea some people would consider that leeching. I always thought it's helpful to speed things up. And feel the same way when I host and peeps join in late. Again, if you consider booting people in a case like that, I would strongly feel the need to know the reason. And at least I now know to avoid your late games. ))

It happened to me yesterday (joining two people alone in boss, never done when they are 3-4) - I realized this is "leeching" only by reading that post ! Another reason for predefined messages !

[Wbto-Angeluscustos]

yeah goo idea +1

[superss]

cool... +5!

[Gluttony]

((Off topic, but I often join 4/5 games at stronghold that are near to or at the boss. I'm most often greeted with welcome and hurry ups and I had no idea some people would consider that leeching. I always thought it's helpful to speed things up. And feel the same way when I host and peeps join in late. Again, if you consider booting people in a case like that, I would strongly feel the need to know the reason. And at least I now know to avoid your late games. ))

I don't personally do this it's just a common example/excuse that I have come to understand after questioning why I was booted and just got "no" for a reason.

The main question I would like to ask everyone who is agreeing with this thread is, why? What would this new system do for the players? If you knew the reason was something you didn't agree would you report/flame the host? Do you really think that if someone is booting another player with a pointless reason such as "revenge booting" they are going to list that as their reason? Are you looking to implement a voting system or something? I'm not going to say that this is a bad idea, I'm just curious about what it's trying to accomplish...

[BeardedBear]

Sweet idea. I think we all know the possible good AND bad this can do, but the scales seem to be tipping in favor of good.

Also, sweet sig Gluttony.

[asommers]

Implemented. Should be out when 1.7.1 is out.

-ALS

[StompArtist]

Implemented. Should be out when 1.7.1 is out.

-ALS

Always ahead of the fans... lol

[Moogerfooger]

Implemented. Should be out when 1.7.1 is out.

-ALS

Feedback WIN.

[Tamino]

This IS customer care ! Thanks devs !

[Ellyidol]

Implemented. Should be out when 1.7.1 is out.

-ALS

Awesome!!!

Still amazed how quickly you can implement things, especially when its a good idea. I still remember Yanis' suggestion to the name of the Crown of Persistence

[Echelong]

Implemented. Should be out when 1.7.1 is out.

-ALS

Thanks ALS...

This should be interesting on the first few days.

[StompArtist]

Thanks ALS...

This should be interesting on the first few days.

You've been booted with reason: "Testing the new public boot feature".

[Lesrider]

Implemented. Should be out when 1.7.1 is out.

-ALS

Wow nice!
Hope this changes things.