Sokomine reports: remove area_upvote command. on ... #6071

New Issue

yourland-report · 2024-01-25T02:48:14Z

yourland-report commented

2024-01-25 02:48:14 +00:00

Sokomine reports a bug:

remove area_upvote command. once per week is useless

Player position:

{
	x = -1009.0030517578,
	y = 24.5,
	z = -2838.7109375
}

Player look:

{
	x = -0.041004061698914,
	y = -0.0015707956627011,
	z = -0.99915772676468
}

Player information:

{
	max_jitter = 13.998000144958,
	avg_jitter = 0,
	connection_uptime = 1498,
	serialization_version = 29,
	patch = 0,
	minor = 9,
	lang_code = "",
	state = "Active",
	major = 5,
	avg_rtt = 0.019999999552965,
	formspec_version = 7,
	version_string = "5.9.0-dev-4468813d4-dirty",
	protocol_version = 42,
	ip_version = 6,
	min_rtt = 0.01799999922514,
	max_rtt = 14.039999961853,
	min_jitter = 0
}

Player meta:

{
	fields = {
		punch_count = "305688",
		["stamina:exhaustion"] = "54",
		inflicted_damage = "6433316",
		["petz:werewolf"] = "0",
		["3d_armor_inventory"] = "return {\"\", \"3d_armor:helmet_rainbow 1 648\", \"shields:shield_rainbow 1 648\", \"3d_armor:chestplate_rainbow 1 648\", \"3d_armor:boots_crystal 1 1620\", \"3d_armor:leggings_rainbow 1 648\"}",
		["petz:lycanthropy"] = "1",
		["ethereal:fly_timer"] = "-99",
		["signslib:pos"] = "(1979,18,1184)",
		["ocean_build.ocean_built"] = "5",
		digged_nodes = "2012228",
		yl_commons_thankyou = "584",
		arenalib_infobox_arenaID = "0",
		yl_church = "return {[\"last_death\"] = {[\"z\"] = 1014, [\"x\"] = 4039, [\"y\"] = 53}, [\"last_heal\"] = 1698267580, [\"last_death_portal\"] = 1699735919}",
		played_time = "16840347",
		yl_commons_player_created = "1617905120",
		yl_commons_player_joined = "1706149416",
		died = "53",
		crafted = "647065",
		["unified_inventory:bags"] = "return {\"unified_inventory:bag_large\", \"unified_inventory:bag_large\", \"unified_inventory:bag_large\", \"water_life:croc_bag\"}",
		hud_state = "on",
		placed_nodes = "338694",
		xp = "2295469",
		jointime = "1617905120",
		bitten = "0",
		["petz:werewolf_clan_idx"] = "1",
		partychat = "main",
		["ocean_build.last_warning"] = "1.65032e+09",
		["stamina:level"] = "10",
		repellant = "0",
		["stamina:poisoned"] = "no"
	}
}

Log identifier


[MOD] yl_report log identifier = BerJWJhrLnFSXYEZRVQRLKPlAG5gQqIN

Profiler save:

profile-20240125T024814.json_prettyEE

Status:

# Server: version: 5.7.0-yl-thx-tmm | game: Minetest Game | uptime: 7d 13h 4min 47s | max lag: 0.731s | clients (19/52): AliasAlreadyTaken, Aliza, Bailiff, BLuOXide, Brabenec, Calamity_Jones, daydream, flux, HorusDamocles, jackofthebean000, JinnyC, Lupercus, mahou, mrminer, Penelopee, Service, Sokomine, tagtraum, taonza12

Teleport command:

/teleport xyz -1009 25 -2839

Compass command:

/give_compass Construction BerJWJhrLnFSXYEZRVQRLKPlAG5gQqIN D2691E -1009 25 -2839

Sokomine reports a bug: > remove area_upvote command. once per week is useless Player position: ``` { x = -1009.0030517578, y = 24.5, z = -2838.7109375 } ``` Player look: ``` { x = -0.041004061698914, y = -0.0015707956627011, z = -0.99915772676468 } ``` Player information: ``` { max_jitter = 13.998000144958, avg_jitter = 0, connection_uptime = 1498, serialization_version = 29, patch = 0, minor = 9, lang_code = "", state = "Active", major = 5, avg_rtt = 0.019999999552965, formspec_version = 7, version_string = "5.9.0-dev-4468813d4-dirty", protocol_version = 42, ip_version = 6, min_rtt = 0.01799999922514, max_rtt = 14.039999961853, min_jitter = 0 } ``` Player meta: ``` { fields = { punch_count = "305688", ["stamina:exhaustion"] = "54", inflicted_damage = "6433316", ["petz:werewolf"] = "0", ["3d_armor_inventory"] = "return {\"\", \"3d_armor:helmet_rainbow 1 648\", \"shields:shield_rainbow 1 648\", \"3d_armor:chestplate_rainbow 1 648\", \"3d_armor:boots_crystal 1 1620\", \"3d_armor:leggings_rainbow 1 648\"}", ["petz:lycanthropy"] = "1", ["ethereal:fly_timer"] = "-99", ["signslib:pos"] = "(1979,18,1184)", ["ocean_build.ocean_built"] = "5", digged_nodes = "2012228", yl_commons_thankyou = "584", arenalib_infobox_arenaID = "0", yl_church = "return {[\"last_death\"] = {[\"z\"] = 1014, [\"x\"] = 4039, [\"y\"] = 53}, [\"last_heal\"] = 1698267580, [\"last_death_portal\"] = 1699735919}", played_time = "16840347", yl_commons_player_created = "1617905120", yl_commons_player_joined = "1706149416", died = "53", crafted = "647065", ["unified_inventory:bags"] = "return {\"unified_inventory:bag_large\", \"unified_inventory:bag_large\", \"unified_inventory:bag_large\", \"water_life:croc_bag\"}", hud_state = "on", placed_nodes = "338694", xp = "2295469", jointime = "1617905120", bitten = "0", ["petz:werewolf_clan_idx"] = "1", partychat = "main", ["ocean_build.last_warning"] = "1.65032e+09", ["stamina:level"] = "10", repellant = "0", ["stamina:poisoned"] = "no" } } ``` Log identifier ``` [MOD] yl_report log identifier = BerJWJhrLnFSXYEZRVQRLKPlAG5gQqIN ``` Profiler save: ``` profile-20240125T024814.json_prettyEE ``` Status: ``` # Server: version: 5.7.0-yl-thx-tmm | game: Minetest Game | uptime: 7d 13h 4min 47s | max lag: 0.731s | clients (19/52): AliasAlreadyTaken, Aliza, Bailiff, BLuOXide, Brabenec, Calamity_Jones, daydream, flux, HorusDamocles, jackofthebean000, JinnyC, Lupercus, mahou, mrminer, Penelopee, Service, Sokomine, tagtraum, taonza12 ``` Teleport command: ``` /teleport xyz -1009 25 -2839 ``` Compass command: ``` /give_compass Construction BerJWJhrLnFSXYEZRVQRLKPlAG5gQqIN D2691E -1009 25 -2839 ```

AliasAlreadyTaken was assigned by yourland-report

2024-01-25 02:48:14 +00:00

AliasAlreadyTaken added the

1. kind/documentation

label 2024-01-25 03:19:32 +00:00

AliasAlreadyTaken commented

2024-01-25 03:20:26 +00:00

Having only one area to be upvoted OR downvoted per week makes one think a bit before adding a +1 or -1 to an area. Also, it remove at least some abuse potential.

Having only one area to be upvoted OR downvoted per week makes one think a bit before adding a +1 or -1 to an area. Also, it remove at least *some* abuse potential.

👎 1

flux commented

2024-01-25 04:36:18 +00:00

sokomine and i agreed that limiting it to once per week makes it too easily forgettable. i can rarely use it, and so i rarely remember to use it. whenever i think about the command, i realize i wished i used it more.

maybe only limit it to once per 24 hours, and also limit a player's ability to vote on their own area (including alts)? what other exploits are there?

sokomine and i agreed that limiting it to once per week makes it too easily forgettable. i can rarely use it, and so i rarely remember to use it. whenever i think about the command, i realize i wished i used it more. maybe only limit it to once per 24 hours, and also limit a player's ability to vote on their own area (including alts)? what other exploits are there?

👍 2

Sokomine commented

2024-01-25 14:39:54 +00:00

The amount of areas worthy upvoting does in no way correlate to that once-per-week interval. At least not for me. When I'm exploring, I'm far more likely to find new areas with something worth upvoting. Shall I stop and give up at the first worthy area? And then come back to the spot next week and continue exploring from there? That just doesn't work. Once per week usually isn't even enough for the great contributions to the BotM award.

Perhaps keep downvote to the weekly interval as that ought to be used only in rare occasions. In general, we do have the /bug command to report areas that really need removal/fixing.

A global list of who upvoted which area might also be helpful. This might inform players of areas worth visiting of which they havn't even heard before. Such a list can also help to limit upvotes to one upvote per player and area.

And if the game stores who upvoted where it's also possible to revoke upvotes from a certain player if alts get abused for that.

Wouldn't work backwards for old votes but wouldn't be too much work for new upvotes.

The amount of areas worthy upvoting does in no way correlate to that once-per-week interval. At least not for me. When I'm exploring, I'm far more likely to find new areas with something worth upvoting. Shall I stop and give up at the first worthy area? And then come back to the spot next week and continue exploring from there? That just doesn't work. Once per week usually isn't even enough for the great contributions to the BotM award. Perhaps keep downvote to the weekly interval as that ought to be used only in rare occasions. In general, we do have the /bug command to report areas that really need removal/fixing. A global list of who upvoted which area might also be helpful. This might inform players of areas worth visiting of which they havn't even heard before. Such a list can also help to limit upvotes to *one* upvote per player and area. And if the game stores who upvoted where it's also possible to revoke upvotes from a certain player if alts get abused for that. Wouldn't work backwards for old votes but wouldn't be too much work for new upvotes.

Boot commented

2024-01-25 16:29:48 +00:00

If this is being tweaked, please also deal with Issue #4904

I supported Sokomine's proposal: one vote per plot and player (but possible in both directions) and that's it. Or you can change this one vote again and again, as with the bailiff vote.

However, all these votes are quite inaccurate in terms of area. If, like Sokomine, you want to be able to vote for each individual building, then this requires that there is exactly one corresponding area for each building. You can certainly prepare for this if you are interested in it as a builder. But most areas will continue to contain more than just one building, especially in the province. Entire cities sometimes consist of only one city area.

The main disadvantage of the current system, however, is its possible irrational use. I had criticized the content of a player's building in detail and later downvoted it with an announcement. Immediately my plot in Haven was downvoted, unfortunately without any concrete hints, but simply as an act of revenge. Ok, I then organized an upvote and so it is now at 0.

So you can be glad that far less than 1 percent of players know these commands and rarely use them, and so far I know of only one sprawling campaign in this way. Therefore, there is not only ignorance in the commands, but widespread disinterest.

Therefore, I think it would be much better if there were another or complementary form of evaluation instead of anonymous voting.

Proven construction experts (e.g. those who were among the top three in the Botm three times) were asked to evaluate structures at the request of the builder or a mayor. To do this, they can develop their own rating scale. And as a result, there should also be badges (yes, yes node limit, but it would be worth it). And a few words or examples of what could be changed.

BTW, at the moment the Botm leads to some particularly beautiful buildings of a still much too small circle of builders, but in the area this does not automatically lead to a higher construction level.

If this is being tweaked, please also deal with Issue #4904 I supported Sokomine's proposal: one vote per plot and player (but possible in both directions) and that's it. Or you can change this one vote again and again, as with the bailiff vote. However, all these votes are quite inaccurate in terms of area. If, like Sokomine, you want to be able to vote for each individual building, then this requires that there is exactly one corresponding area for each building. You can certainly prepare for this if you are interested in it as a builder. But most areas will continue to contain more than just one building, especially in the province. Entire cities sometimes consist of only one city area. The main disadvantage of the current system, however, is its possible irrational use. I had criticized the content of a player's building in detail and later downvoted it with an announcement. Immediately my plot in Haven was downvoted, unfortunately without any concrete hints, but simply as an act of revenge. Ok, I then organized an upvote and so it is now at 0. So you can be glad that far less than 1 percent of players know these commands and rarely use them, and so far I know of only one sprawling campaign in this way. Therefore, there is not only ignorance in the commands, but widespread disinterest. Therefore, I think it would be much better if there were another or complementary form of evaluation instead of anonymous voting. Proven construction experts (e.g. those who were among the top three in the Botm three times) were asked to evaluate structures at the request of the builder or a mayor. To do this, they can develop their own rating scale. And as a result, there should also be badges (yes, yes node limit, but it would be worth it). And a few words or examples of what could be changed. BTW, at the moment the Botm leads to some particularly beautiful buildings of a still much too small circle of builders, but in the area this does not automatically lead to a higher construction level.

👍 1

Sokomine commented

2024-01-26 21:53:36 +00:00

Hmm. More buildings in one area may certainly pose a problem. Especially to players who are less familar with the technology behind it. That problem exists with the current voting system as well. Getting the right target area isn't easy.

Seems that area downvote is the larger problem. I don't think it's good for players when their area - even if it deserves it - gets downvoted. Not in a situation as Boot described - when giving detailled feedback and afterwards downvoting (that's great if a player receives so much feedback!) - but when it's excessively used or as a form of revenge.

I'd really love to have a review system. Not as restricted as Boot suggested but not open to the next best alt that managed to type a username in either. Something inbetween. Player level may be an indicator, but honestly it does measure something completely diffrent. Rather a builder's club.

A public list of recent upvotes and a list of areas showing how many upvotes they got might help players find places that are worth visiting and which they havn't found on their own yet. It'd also be not too complex to implement.

Hmm. More buildings in one area may certainly pose a problem. Especially to players who are less familar with the technology behind it. That problem exists with the current voting system as well. Getting the right target area isn't easy. Seems that area downvote is the larger problem. I don't think it's good for players when their area - even if it deserves it - gets downvoted. Not in a situation as Boot described - when giving detailled feedback and afterwards downvoting (that's great if a player receives so much feedback!) - but when it's excessively used or as a form of revenge. I'd really love to have a review system. Not as restricted as Boot suggested but not open to the next best alt that managed to type a username in either. Something inbetween. Player level may be an indicator, but honestly it does measure something completely diffrent. Rather a builder's club. A public list of recent upvotes and a list of areas showing how many upvotes they got might help players find places that are worth visiting and which they havn't found on their own yet. It'd also be not too complex to implement.

Boot referenced this issue

2024-01-31 18:30:35 +00:00

A while back Chache was talking about making a Building of the Year award... #6149

Jammy commented

2024-02-03 03:22:25 +00:00

Maybe remove upvote and downvote, and add an area_suggest command that allows you to give suggestions.

tour referenced this issue

2024-03-15 23:42:23 +00:00

Areas Rework #6497

Chache commented

2024-03-16 15:27:16 +00:00

For this reason I've tried to establish Upvote Sunday as an unofficial tradition.

I usually forget the date, and it's difficult to keep track of what building you've liked the most among the ones you've visited during the week.

But I think I've managed to raise awareness of the existence of this command to a handful of people at least.

For this reason I've tried to establish Upvote Sunday as an unofficial tradition. I usually forget the date, and it's difficult to keep track of what building you've liked the most among the ones you've visited during the week. But I think I've managed to raise awareness of the existence of this command to a handful of people at least.

AliasAlreadyTaken added

1. kind/enhancement

1. kind/balancing

and removed

1. kind/documentation

labels 2024-03-16 15:27:57 +00:00

Sign in to join this conversation.