Attention All Users!

[BossTamsin (imported)]

Attention all Chatroom users!

It has been proposed that there be a small rule change for the EA chatroom.

Now, I realise that this topic is about as popular as the whole Quebec seperation thing (in the US, the Florida ballot recounts or the OJ Simpson trial), but this is something that has to be done.

The OPs of the chatroom are kicking people who have been idle in the chatroom for a half-hour or longer. Now, if someone has been idle for 30 minutes, this means that they've really just been sitting there. Not chatting in the main room, not chatting privately, nothing. Just sitting there doing nothing.

What I'd like to know is, what do the users of the chatroom think? Do you mind people just sitting there watching, not participating at all? Is 30 minutes too short? What?

IEunuch.

[Mac (imported)]

Attention all Chatroom users!

What I'd like to know is, what do the users of the chatroom think? Do you mind people just sitting there watching, not participating at all? Is 30 minutes too short? What?

I didn't know that people were being kicked out for not talking. If that is to be the rule, it should be posted in the Chat Room Banner. However, my preference is to see everybody chat in the main room so that everybody benefits from the conversation.

[Tomas (imported)]

Unless the overhead caused by lurkers is too much for the service to bear, I see no valid reason to kick users off if they have nothing to say.

In the many other chats I've been involved with, I've seen many times where what is being discussed by others is valuable information that I may not have anything I can add.

Should users be required to interrupt others, and the flow of information/the focus of a discussion, with some sort of "nothing" post just to keep from being kicked off? I don't think so.

If there is no huge bandwidth penalty to having lurkers learning from an ongoing discussion, why kick them out?

I also agree with Mac that if this is a rule ("Babble or be booted.") then it needs to be posted so that users can be aware of it.

http://home.earthlink.net/~zip98498/tomsig01.gif

[Paolo]

What bothers me, in addition to the fact that idlers waste bandwidth, is those who would sit there with logging turned on for later playback of the chat and/or distribution.

The software knows who's PM'ing ... although not the content ... that would be spying ... and knows who is just idling. I think that 30 minutes is fine, as long as that statement is made known to the user public.

If they've got nothing better to do that to idle and record, then yes, kick them off - as long as they know it.

This is much like ISP's kicking off connected users who leave the PC online and leave it for no reason. Kick them off, they're clogging up the traffic.

[Mac (imported)]

The software knows who's PM'ing ... although not the content ... that would be spying ... and knows who is just idling. I think that 30 minutes is fine, as long as that statement is made known to the user public.

30 minutes is a very generous amount of time for somebody who is just lurking. As per my earlier post, it would be nice if the message could be posted in the chat window banner as a reminder to everybody.

[luvpain (imported)]

Right now we are leaning towards the kicking of users after 30 minutes or more of idle time. We have been doing that on occasions the last few weeks and want to get user's input before making that a normal rule.

Tomas, I do understand your point of view. Most of the users that have been kicked lately usually never say anything in the main room, they don't acknowledge anyone welcoming them into the room, and won't answer questions when asked.

People like that IMO are just wasting bandwidth, or are trying to find juicy gossip to use against others.

Remember that the idle count does get reset to 0 when you send a private message to another user, so there is not worry about getting kicked when you are in a private chat.

Matt.

[happousai (imported)]

I am in complete agreement with Tomas here. I tend to multitask a lot. If I'm in the chatroom, I might be listening to what people are saying but have nothing to add, especially since I'm doing something else simultaneously. If I'm addressed directly (assuming that someone's actually interested in me), I would respond.

[Losethem (imported)]

I would agree that if it is a bandwidth issue, that kicking off after 30 minutes of idle time is acceptable. Sometimes I'll get a phone call that will last over 30 minutes. If I am idle that long, and get booted, I think I'd be able to log back in.

So long as it treated as an idle disconnect and not a ban, I don't see a problem with it. The disonnected person simply logs back in.

Would that be correct Op dudes?

[luvpain (imported)]

You are correct Losethem, the only time bans get placed are for users that violate the rules, or if they have their Clients auto join on a kick, and do not say anything still. Although those types of bans are just put in place for less than 24 hours. (If Op remembers to remove it )

Basically the regular members that actively participate shouldn't have any problems. Us Ops understand about phjone calls, etc. It is the people that don't ever participate that will be kicked after the 30 mins.

[A-1 (imported)]

If they are in the chatroom for 30 minutes without participating then they are just evesdropping.

KICK THEIR NOSY ASSES OUT!!!! :tongueout

If it takes them 30 minutes to cum they are probably impotent anyway....they don't want to join 'em, just beat 'em!

A-1