New URL Policy Revealed - UOGuide Complies (EA Rejects) [Updated Again, long title]

[Nexus]

What kind of processor usage does this cover? Yes $60 a year for hosting is the cheapest I've ever heard of, but have you ever heard the saying "You get what you pay for.". I'm willing to bet this unnamed hosting has a low uptime, crappy or no customer service, and in the fine print I'm almost sure there are big fees for high processor usage.

Actually when I went to get a host I did some research the group I use is rated as the top 10 on the interwebs at least on every site I could find....

Now make sure you read carefully I said Web Hosting not Server hosting...If they are doing nothing more than running a Wiki or a few forums they don't need to rent a server which starts out around $100 a month. And don't give me that crap about core access and security. All your security issues can be fixed with a custom php.ini file or .htaccess outside of that the do scan for viruses and will notify you if one is found and assist you in removing it.

As far as Customer support....Never had a problem not one bit of downtime in over a year. I have multiple phone numbers I can call, e-mail addresses and what not if I need to contact them. I'll PM you the name and URL of the host though.

 

[MolaRom]

It seems to me that JC thinks he should be able to decide what is and what is not acceptable. Fact is, he does not get to make the Rules of Conduct or the Terms of Service.

If you don't like it, then you don't have to play the game. If you can't afford to run a website, then you should give it up. EA doesn't owe you free advertising spots in game.

 

[AirmidCecht]

I think the point being made here MolaRom et al, it that while JC tried to comply with policy it is still not enough to be able to use that url and now apparantley UOforums is in the same boat. The healthy discussion could focus on what can be done for all sights, not just uoguide.

I'm not looking at this is a we like vs. we don't like JC. It's a good opportunity to discuss said policy and take a deeper look at it for all players.

 

[JC the Builder]

I'm not looking at this is a we like vs. we don't like JC. It's a good opportunity to discuss said policy and take a deeper look at it for all players.

AmanitaMuscaria and MolaRom are with the same person who paged on me in-game, they just want to cause trouble. They don't care at all about this situation or UOGuide. Just look up their posting histories, it is 99% replies to spite me. Why haven't they been banned from this forum yet?

 

[AirmidCecht]

That is irrelevant to me JC *smiles*
It's pretty evident from those who want to debate this topic and those who want to spray paint mean sayings all over the discussion. I am not bothered by it and would hope others can see the importance of how the real issue affects all players.

 

[Omnius]

Adam on UOForums writes to inform us of the new policy on announcing website URLs in-game.

Even though I disagree with it, I have removed all item sales from the UOGuide website. UOGuide is now in full compliance with this new policy and can once again be mentioned in-game. Thanks to all who use and help advertise UOGuide.

--------------------------------------------------------
Update

Jeremy has replied, UOGuide still doesn't comply.

I'm sorry, but I don't know of a web hosting company that accepts UO gold and items. This is absurd.

So basically this is just link whining about his site more? You provide the site at cost to yourself out of your own benevolence. You can raise money through means not directly associated with your site with the same goals but it's downright silly for you to try and earn money off your site and then claim it's purely for benevolent purposes. It's only too easy to make large amounts of money off of a UO related website and theres no reason you should be able to do it while others accept they can't.

 

[AmanitaMuscaria]

AmanitaMuscaria and MolaRom are with the same person who paged on me in-game, they just want to cause trouble. They don't care at all about this situation or UOGuide. Just look up their posting histories, it is 99% replies to spite me. Why haven't they been banned from this forum yet?

I never paged on you, Link. That was BBQ Lou - you know that! He posted that under your thread about your first suspension for advertising your sales in game -- or, more correctly, the website where you were selling items for RL Cash.

I did say that I WILL page on you in game, if you continue to advertise in game. But I have never done so before. And I'm not the same person as BBQ or Mola Rom. That's just silliness. Do you think everyone who does not like you is the SAME person? That's absurd, friend.

I'm a purist, I guess. I just don't feel that anyone should be advertising for personal gain in the game world. It's just not right.

 

[Ailish]

I think the point being made here MolaRom et al, it that while JC tried to comply with policy it is still not enough to be able to use that url and now apparantley UOforums is in the same boat. The healthy discussion could focus on what can be done for all sights, not just uoguide.

I'm not looking at this is a we like vs. we don't like JC. It's a good opportunity to discuss said policy and take a deeper look at it for all players.

Airmid is correct. I stated before, I don't even like JC, but if a policy is bad, it is bad. This thread already brought out more clarification on the new interpretation of the rule (and yes, this IS new interpretation; the rule has never been read by EA to be that stringent before), as well as highlighting the flaws in the policy. Jeremy has become aware of what people think and will take that information to the "interpreters".

While I don't applaud JC for coming back and pointing out that UOForums also had a donation button, it was an honest human response. UOForums had been told their site was just fine when it had the exact same thing on it that JC's did (after he changed it to comply with what they had been told the rules were).

I can also see the bitterness about Stratics being able to advertise other games (free or not!) and pay-for services (yes, stratics plus is defunct, but that was not due to stratics changing their minds or trying to comply with the ToS, it was due to system failure).

Anyone can see the silliness of saying "You can't say UOGuide.com in game, but you can say, go to UOGuide - find the link on uo.com".

Hopefully this discussion will accomplish something like the re-opening of the fansite program.

 

[D'Amavir]

So basically this is just link whining about his site more? You provide the site at cost to yourself out of your own benevolence. You can raise money through means not directly associated with your site with the same goals but it's downright silly for you to try and earn money off your site and then claim it's purely for benevolent purposes. It's only too easy to make large amounts of money off of a UO related website and theres no reason you should be able to do it while others accept they can't.

I have read his site and it doesn't appear as if its designed to make him large amounts of money off of UO. Maybe I am just missing that part. It seems as if its more of a fan/guide site that happens to accept donations to cover the costs of running the site itself.

If it was one of those many many gold selling sites or item selling sites that have unlimited runics and billions and billions of gold on every shard, I would back you on that claim. But his, specifically, doesn't seem to be like that.

Doesn't stratics offer a 'paid' membership that offers additional features for its members? But that is acceptable while donations to to help cover the cost of the site isn't? I think that balance is what is in question here. Stratics is 'legal' even though it clearly looks to make money while other sites aren't. Falling back on the 'well they were once our official forums' nonsense isn't covering it. They aren't the official forums, EA doesn't care enough about UO or its players to provide official forums nor do they care enough about UO or its players to provide any 'official' approved fan sites as they did when UO was run by people that did seem to care.

As many have said, EA wants UO to die. No one can look at the things they have done or allowed to be done to the came and not see that if they are just honest to themselves. The entire attitude shows that. This banning of honest sites that try to SUPPORT a poorly supported game is just another clear example of that.

 

[D'Amavir]

Jeremy has become aware of what people think and will take that information to the "interpreters".

Jeremy has become aware of the issue? Now? Finally? Well, heaven forbid when think anything negative about the fact that several several threads and hundreds of posts have been made about this subject in the past few weeks and, supposedly, the person thats supposed to be our 'link' to the dev team is just now aware of it. Very nice. Maybe someone should tell her about the civil war in the US. She might not be aware of that just yet.

 

[Bomb Bloke]

I never paged on you, Link. That was BBQ Lou - you know that!

...

And I'm not the same person as BBQ or Mola Rom. That's just silliness. Do you think everyone who does not like you is the SAME person? That's absurd, friend.

You're getting mixed up. JC didn't suggest those things. I did. Good of you to bring it up again.

 

[AirmidCecht]

Jeremy has become aware of the issue? Now? Finally? Well, heaven forbid when think anything negative about the fact that several several threads and hundreds of posts have been made about this subject in the past few weeks and, supposedly, the person thats supposed to be our 'link' to the dev team is just now aware of it. Very nice. Maybe someone should tell her about the civil war in the US. She might not be aware of that just yet.

Seriously? I know emotions run high but Jeremy has been aware of it for some time. She said she did not want anyone now at this moment to get banned for a policy in effect right now. She is more than willing to take this discussion to the proper people. Breathe with me and relaaaax a bit eh?

 

[T_Amon_from_work]

Then there is "visit www DOT uogide DOT com" or something. It's not a URL in exact context. <shrug>

This is gonna put a target on me for sure, but I agree with Tomas_Bryce. An approved, sanitized, blessed list of sites should be
a) readily available from uo.com - Support or Community list
b) directly mentionable via URL because of a)
c) made known to ALL GMs
d) all suspensions, bannings made after a) and c) occur can get heard IMMEDIATELY and reversed if shown to be improper

I included d) because we all know that things like that are gonna happen, whether it is mentioned here or not. <shrug>

 

[RedRum]

"No one post any URL at all" is very close to being the case - there just aren't many, other than small guild sites, that don't have some form of advertising/solicitation on them somewhere.

Jeremy,
I have had the Guardians of Light guild site ( http://gol.guildportal.com ) in my paper doll for over 2 years now. I hope that I am not doing anything wrong by doing so. I have read this entire post and have reviewed everything on our site that is accessible by non-admin personnel and I can't find anything that goes against the ROC. I was wondering if you (or if anyone else would mind) looking at the site and letting me know if they find something wrong so I can 1.) Remove the portion that is against the ROC; 2.) Notify my guildmates that are advertising in their paperdolls, as well as myself, so they don't get banned; 3.) Stop telling people in game to go to our site if they would like to apply to the guild. When we refer people to our site, we tell them exactly what the site addy is due to there not being a www at the beginning and some people not being able to find it; I have had to repeat the site numerous times in game.
Thank you in advance for looking at our site and letting me know if anything GoL is doing is against the ROC, or that we are in compliance.
I know that I have been guilty of telling people to go to different fan sites that have been called out in this thread MANY times in game...luckily, no one has been vindictive enough to page on me I guess. I just try to let people know where they can find the information they seek the most expeditious way I know how. I would much rather refer them to a site, guide them to a specific area, where they can read about what they are inquiring, and they can ask the "fan base" more detailed questions and get better answers than I can provide them with. I tend to get in a hurry when explaining things and assume (yes, I know what assuming does to people) that they understand as much if not more than I do about the games intricacies. It seems that if I try to explain things, after spending a lengthy amount of time with them, they either think I'm flippin' nutz, or they say "gotcha" yet don't totally understand.
I eagerly await a final decision by EA and Jeremy posting the final verdict/decision about the different fan sites.

 

[D'Amavir]

Seriously? I know emotions run high but Jeremy has been aware of it for some time. She said she did not want anyone now at this moment to get banned for a policy in effect right now. She is more than willing to take this discussion to the proper people. Breathe with me and relaaaax a bit eh?

Come on now, she needed two (2) links to get her to see that uoforums has a place on the very front page that directs you to a place where you can paypal donations of real money to them. Not that I am against UOForums at all. I think they should be 100% approved, as well as others that may ask for small donations to cover their operating costs.

But the simple fact that someone from EA came here and said that UOForums was safe to be linked to in game because they DIDN'T do that while others (UOGuide just being one example) aren't because they DID shows how little the people behind this game actually pay attention to anything like this.

You know as well as I that if a GM got a page about UOForums and then went to the site and actually did notice the big DONATE link at the top of it, they would ban the offender even though (prior to her 'getting it' finally) Jeremy said that it was an acceptable site. That is the problem with this stupid 'rule' that has always been in place but wasn't enforced until now for some reason. The devs, the community relations people and the GM's should all be on the same page. ESPECIALLY when it comes to banning people that soooooo clearly support the game.

Why drive good people away from an already weakened game unless that is your intent? Why refuse to take the small step of working with the major fansites and acknowledging their worth by allowing their use in the game that they so clearly help? Why indeed. Some see the answer. Others deny it. But the facts are clear. EA is going out of their way to drive people away. Why? I think anyone with any real experience in business an answer that. It happens every day in the real world. Why do you think this would not be possible here?

 

[AirmidCecht]

I personally do not feel anyone is trying to drive players away. In contrary it was not long ago that players were in an uproar over lack of action when hacking url sites were being spammed in game. It hurt many players. That before anything else would drive players away.

I've said it before, the pendulum has swung too far the other way now. It is like setting up all kinds of bells n whistles security because someone peeked in your window. Balance is key and I am confident with Jeremy's love for UO that she will help us find a solution that does not turn off a great resource for the players. I also feel strongly that an approved fansite program is the path to that balance.

 

[D'Amavir]

You could easily say "Visit UOGuide - see the link in the Five on Friday here!"

I know I can't be the only one that sees how stupid that comment is. Saying 'go to the HowtoHackUOandStealAccountinfo site' is ok but saying 'stay away from HowtoHackUOandStealAccountinfo.com' isn't? Silly.

Just like saying 'go to UOGuide.com' is worse or better than saying 'go to UOGuide's site'. Are people that play UO really too stupid to plug UOGuide into any search engine and get to the same place as they would have it they typed in UOGuide.com? How is that different at all? What is the logic there? Answer, there is none.

"No one post any URL at all" is very close to being the case

Another example of the lack of sense that EA shows in this regard. They encourage people to enter URL's in their guild descriptions (its right there on the front page when you click guild on your paperdoll) which then shows up and is clickable ON UO's OWN SITE. But to have the same link even mentioned or shown on a journal is bad. Gosh, I hope that sooner or later some level of intelligence is required for employment by the people running this game.

 

[D'Amavir]

I personally do not feel anyone is trying to drive players away. In contrary it was not long ago that players were in an uproar over lack of action when hacking url sites were being spammed in game. It hurt many players. That before anything else would drive players away.

Yes, let's ban people that run legit fan sites because other people used url's to hack people. That's the perfect solution indeed. Why actually put thought into anything and come up with a policy that works to accomplish their goals while still supporting the people that support them when you can make a blanket policy that drives the good folk away while still leaving windows open for the bad people?

I've said it before, the pendulum has swung too far the other way now. It is like setting up all kinds of bells n whistles security because someone peeked in your window. Balance is key and I am confident with Jeremy's love for UO that she will help us find a solution that does not turn off a great resource for the players. I also feel strongly that an approved fansite program is the path to that balance.

I am not so confident. The fact that she couldn't even read the word DONATE that was sooo clear on UOForums front page shows that there isn't much going on there that would fill me with confidence. I could understand if she didn't notice some deeply hidden link that led to something that shouldn't be allowed. But it was a big word on the front page! Come on now.

I agree that the better solution is an approved fansite. But, as I have said before and will say again, EA doesn't seem interested anything like that. WAR has approved sites doesn't it? I guess that helps show where UO falls into their collective mindsets. Maybe? Then again, if the people from EA that have posted here is any indication I would be worried that they would allow 'cometothissiteandhaveyouraccounthackbyus.com' would be allowed while 'uoguide.com' wouldn't just because they didn't notice that the first one was a site that hacked your accounts. Judging from past examples, they don't seem to really understand the basics about anything, so I doubt that anything they do will be very beneficial. Then again, like the room full of monkeys that sooner or later type out a real line of english or the broken clock that is right twice a day, they might acccidently do something right for a change.

 

[Connor_Graham]

Yes, let's ban people that run legit fan sites because other people used url's to hack people.

Funny you should say this seeing as I ended up with a VERY nasty virus on my computer by going to a legit fan site because THEY got hacked. And yeah, I've got a pretty hefty security setup on my comp.

Guess that blows your logic right out of the water.

 

[D'Amavir]

Funny you should say this seeing as I ended up with a VERY nasty virus on my computer by going to a legit fan site because THEY got hacked. And yeah, I've got a pretty hefty security setup on my comp.

Guess that blows your logic right out of the water.

While I hope it never happens, Stratics could be hacked as well. But they are allowed so thats ok. And, its happened before, UO.com could even be hacked. But that's ok right? Heaven forbid that a real trusted fan site be mentioned in game though. Because some other fansites have been hacked, all of them should be off limits.

So, you actually proved my point for me. I thank you for the support. EA encourages people to put URL's on their guild profiles (again, its the first page when you click guild on your paperdoll) so obviously they want people to use URL's. Makes perfect sense to me. UO should shut down completely because some people have used it to make money. And all fansites should be banned because some sites have been hacked in the past. And all guns should be banned because some people use them to hurt people. And all alcohol should be banned because some people drink and drive and hurt people. And all cars should be banned because *see last example*. And all kids should be jailed because some break laws and hurt people.

I could probably give examples all day but I think you get the point. Maybe not. But its there to be gotten. Maybe we should ban all points because some people don't make them. Oh, and ban all threads because some threads are just troll types.

 

[AirmidCecht]

Yes, let's ban people that run legit fan sites because other people used url's to hack people. That's the perfect solution indeed. Why actually put thought into anything and come up with a policy that works to accomplish their goals while still supporting the people that support them when you can make a blanket policy that drives the good folk away while still leaving windows open for the bad people?

tsk. tsk. That sweet soft whisper in your ear? That was me. The voice of reason.
Me? I'm still hoping for the best. *hugs*

 

[Beefybone]

This is just disgusting. EA can't even get off it's ass to vet the current crop of fansites and put them on an approved list for in-game mention, much less put up a webpage listing them. Pathetic.

 

[D'Amavir]

tsk. tsk. That sweet soft whisper in your ear? That was me. The voice of reason.
Me? I'm still hoping for the best. *hugs*

Absolutely. The world needs people with blind optimism. It also needs people with cold realism that's built from logic and experience. There is a place for both of us in the world.

 

[Jeremy]

Ok, after several discussions between various folks of higher pay grade than me, we've hashed out the following (and yes, this will be in the FoF as well for wider distribution.)

1. Sites that sell things (any things, not necessarily UO things) for cash are definitely forbidden
2. Requests for donations are fine.
3. Ads are bad. Don't link to sites with ads.
4. Stratics is currently the only exception to #3; however, there may be more in the future. If you have an interest in being an exception, you're welcome to email me and as soon as we have a process I'll let you know what it is.

This doesn't change the whole submit-to-the-FoF process at all. I'm sure you have questions - feel free to ask them now so I can refine the version in the FoF

 

[D'Amavir]

Ok, after several discussions between various folks of higher pay grade than me, we've hashed out the following (and yes, this will be in the FoF as well for wider distribution.)

1. Sites that sell things (any things, not necessarily UO things) for cash are definitely forbidden
2. Requests for donations are fine.
3. Ads are bad. Don't link to sites with ads.
4. Stratics is currently the only exception to #3; however, there may be more in the future. If you have an interest in being an exception, you're welcome to email me and as soon as we have a process I'll let you know what it is.

This doesn't change the whole submit-to-the-FoF process at all. I'm sure you have questions - feel free to ask them now so I can refine the version in the FoF

Stratics sells memberships that allow you access to additional information not available for non paying members. So, I guess Stratics is an exception to #1 as well. Silly me for expecting any consistency or common sense.

I wonder why its so easy to vet a site to be allowed to be mentioned and linked to on FoF but so difficult to vet a site to be considered 'allowed'. FoF is read by quite a lot of players so having a site shown on there regularly (WRR for example) seems a bit risky since they could be hacked and all. Which is supposed to be the real intent behind this rule in the first place. But since EA really isn't concerned about the hack risk and is instead just using that as an excuse for driving away more and more of their supporters I guess it makes sense.

Never been one of those conspiracy theory types but some things are just too obvious to overlook. This being one of them.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

Ok, after several discussions between various folks of higher pay grade than me, we've hashed out the following (and yes, this will be in the FoF as well for wider distribution.)

1. Sites that sell things (any things, not necessarily UO things) for cash are definitely forbidden
2. Requests for donations are fine.
3. Ads are bad. Don't link to sites with ads.
4. Stratics is currently the only exception to #3; however, there may be more in the future. If you have an interest in being an exception, you're welcome to email me and as soon as we have a process I'll let you know what it is.

This doesn't change the whole submit-to-the-FoF process at all. I'm sure you have questions - feel free to ask them now so I can refine the version in the FoF

Thank you. This is infinitely more reasonable.

-Galen's player

 

[Jeremy]

Sorry, I renumbered that list after writing the last bit. Stratics is considered an exception overall (although if they change their current policies and sales that would be up for review.)

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

Thank you. This is infinitely more reasonable.

-Galen's player

I'd still like to know, though, if it's ok to talk about sites without putting in the URLs.

"Go to UO Guide." "Go to Whispering Rose Radio."

-Galen's player

 

[AirmidCecht]

Ok, after several discussions between various folks of higher pay grade than me, we've hashed out the following (and yes, this will be in the FoF as well for wider distribution.)

1. Sites that sell things (any things, not necessarily UO things) for cash are definitely forbidden
2. Requests for donations are fine.
3. Ads are bad. Don't link to sites with ads.
4. Stratics is currently the only exception to #3; however, there may be more in the future. If you have an interest in being an exception, you're welcome to email me and as soon as we have a process I'll let you know what it is.

This doesn't change the whole submit-to-the-FoF process at all. I'm sure you have questions - feel free to ask them now so I can refine the version in the FoF

*kisses you full on the mouth*
Tell the various folks of higher pay grade than you there is more where that came from. Here is to the pendulum starting to swing slower towards the middle. *cheers*
Next step? Approved fan sites where this becomes a non issue please!

 

[Ash]

Ok, after several discussions between various folks of higher pay grade than me, we've hashed out the following (and yes, this will be in the FoF as well for wider distribution.)

This reminds me of rule #1 I taught to my co-workers, rule states the one with the biggest paycheck makes the rules.

1. Sites that sell things (any things, not necessarily UO things) for cash are definitely forbidden
2. Requests for donations are fine.
3. Ads are bad. Don't link to sites with ads.
4. Stratics is currently the only exception to #3; however, there may be more in the future. If you have an interest in being an exception, you're welcome to email me and as soon as we have a process I'll let you know what it is.

This doesn't change the whole submit-to-the-FoF process at all. I'm sure you have questions - feel free to ask them now so I can refine the version in the FoF

Glad to see clarification on #2, so by these standards UOGuide and UOForums should both be acceptable to say in game.

I do have a question for clarification on #1, on forum based sites (especially in regards to guild sites) that have a forum for trade or marketing, will they be unacceptable because members could post even non-game related items for cash? If so, would a policy or disclaimer in the forum description against that be acceptable?

If you really boil it down, if having a posting selling for cash will get a site banned, then griefers could post on an enemy guild's forum website (even in a non-trade forum) and page on a member of that guild because of one post they put on there that doesn't even have to be a real offer for a sale of an item. Far fetched, maybe, but I have seen griefers go through lot more trouble just harass other players.

 

[D'Amavir]

*kisses you full on the mouth*
Tell the various folks of higher pay grade than you there is more where that came from. Here is to the pendulum starting to swing slower towards the middle. *cheers*
Next step? Approved fan sites where this becomes a non issue please!

No offense but comments like that are why EA doesn't feel the need to ever actually make an effort anymore. All she did was repeat the old "Stratics is an exception" stuff and, once again state that they have no process in place for a official approved fansite list nor any idea if or when they will have a process in place for such. How is that helpful in the least? Is it just me? I would like to understand what you got from that post that I so clearly missed.

It took a supposed meeting with 'higher ups' to say the same thing she has been saying from the start and that we already knew? Gosh, no wonder EA isn't very productive when it comes to UO. If meetings like that are what goes on there its understandable. "Hey, lets all drop everything and meet on what we should call the game we work on", "After long hours of meeting with higher ups it has been decided that we will call Ultima Online 'Ultima Online'! Hope you are happy with that decision. We will be having another long meeting to discuss what initials we will use to call the game as well. I am leaning towards UO myself".

 

[D'Amavir]

This reminds me of rule #1 I taught to my co-workers, rule states the one with the biggest paycheck makes the rules.



Glad to see clarification on #2, so by these standards UOGuide and UOForums should both be acceptable to say in game.

Not really. Because people could post about selling items for real cash on the UOForums as you mentioned. The problem, as many have said, is the fact that no one is able to think on their own when enforcing these rules. UOForums is clearly a fan site that acts as a forum to discuss the game. It is not a place that is all about gold selling or hacks or the like. However, there are posts about selling for real money. So, technically, it is still not allowed. So, if someone reports someone for mentioning it in game, the mindless GM that shows up will probably react with a ban. They won't come to stratics and read any of the silly posts from EA reps about it. Nor will they judge it based on its intent as a site as opposed to one random post on it. That is where the problem lies.

 

[Kyrie_Elaison]

Thats why I want EA to create an official UO forums. That way the rules apply to whatever EAs standards are and we have official mods who are/should be non-biased.

Ages ago OSI had official forums at uo.com. At about the same time they did away with the seer program they did away with the forums. At that time most people were posting at Stratics also, and frankly they were sick of all the flaming on their forums, plus I think it was another way to downsize (no having to pay moderators, or perhaps the moderators were also a part of the seer program.)

As I remember it, OSI stated at that time that they had come to an agreement with Stratics to host all of the forum materials. I would imagine that it was done through contracts, and therefore only Stratics will be viewed as UO's official forums. In other words, don't waste your time banging your head against the wall trying to get it to change. It's a contract that they have had for a looooong time.

I think the rules need to be changed to allow the ingame ads though. This will really hurt a lot of people like the Radio stations.

 

[Jeremy]

We don't expect you to be accountable for everything people post on forums you host - however, if you're specifically hosting an RMT forum, that'd be a different story.

I can't answer every single special case - ultimately, it's not my call - so Galen, I'm not 100% sure what would happen there, but if the GM decided you were trying to do an end-run around the rules, you'd probably get a ban. Of course, that requires someone to have paged on you for it!

 

[Dicimiie]

No offense but comments like that are why EA doesn't feel the need to ever actually make an effort anymore. All she did was repeat the old "Stratics is an exception" stuff and, once again state that they have no process in place for a official approved fansite list nor any idea if or when they will have a process in place for such. How is that helpful in the least? Is it just me? I would like to understand what you got from that post that I so clearly missed.

It took a supposed meeting with 'higher ups' to say the same thing she has been saying from the start and that we already knew? Gosh, no wonder EA isn't very productive when it comes to UO. If meetings like that are what goes on there its understandable. "Hey, lets all drop everything and meet on what we should call the game we work on", "After long hours of meeting with higher ups it has been decided that we will call Ultima Online 'Ultima Online'! Hope you are happy with that decision. We will be having another long meeting to discuss what initials we will use to call the game as well. I am leaning towards UO myself".

Actually... I believe #2 is different from what was said originally, so something new did come from it. The fact that sites can ask for donations puts UOGuide in compliance from what I can tell, which is different from what was said before.

 

[D'Amavir]

Actually... I believe #2 is different from what was said originally, so something new did come from it. The fact that sites can ask for donations puts UOGuide in compliance from what I can tell, which is different from what was said before.

Yes, yes. The broken clock was actually right once today. Good thing she isn't digital or else we wouldn't even be that lucky. I guess I just expect a little more from people. It usually helps encourage them to be better than just the usual blahs. But, some people take anything that is handed to them and smiles about getting it. To each his own I always say.

 

[D'Amavir]

We don't expect you to be accountable for everything people post on forums you host - however, if you're specifically hosting an RMT forum, that'd be a different story.

I can't answer every single special case - ultimately, it's not my call - so Galen, I'm not 100% sure what would happen there, but if the GM decided you were trying to do an end-run around the rules, you'd probably get a ban. Of course, that requires someone to have paged on you for it!

Once again leaving it up to GM's that aren't able to think for themselves to determine if someone gets banned for something. Since they seem so able to think for themselves as many have already shown on this board. Didn't one of them actually thank a person for playing DAoC? Too funny.

Maybe I should let me dog babysit my baby niece. I will, of course, tell the dog before I leave that it is up to it to determine what the baby should and should not be allowed to do and to act accordingly. Things should work out swimmingly then. Indeed.

 

[Kyrie_Elaison]

Also, JC - solicitations for cash also violate the ROC. (Solicitations for in-game gold or items would be fine, btw.)

This poses a big problem for sites like UOGuide that do more for the community than EA is willing to do. How are those sites supposed to support themselves? Donations are one thing, but sometimes it's easier to get someone to buy a rare to help support a site.

I think you guys are being a little "over the top" here.

BTW when was the last time uo.com was updated with all the new content? I have been playing since beta, and I still rely heavily on sites like uoguide. It would truly be a shame if this has detrimental affects to those sites.

 

[Bomb Bloke]

This poses a big problem for sites like UOGuide that do more for the community than EA is willing to do. How are those sites supposed to support themselves? Donations are one thing, but sometimes it's easier to get someone to buy a rare to help support a site.

Keep reading - A change has actually been mentioned. Donations are now ok.

 

[Experimental]

Just got the confirmation - the websites on the UO Pro apps page that I linked above are fine to mention.

Guys, I understand that enforcement of this policy is rather a sudden change, and I really appreciate that fansites are trying to work with us about it. I'm confident that we'll be able to find acceptable solutions all around.

Let's hope a solution if found rapidly because as it stands right now it's a griefing tool.
The policy is not clear, the GM's aren't all on the same page and are at LEAST as confused as the player base.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

We don't expect you to be accountable for everything people post on forums you host - however, if you're specifically hosting an RMT forum, that'd be a different story.

I can't answer every single special case - ultimately, it's not my call - so Galen, I'm not 100% sure what would happen there, but if the GM decided you were trying to do an end-run around the rules, you'd probably get a ban. Of course, that requires someone to have paged on you for it!

I'm in trouble then. I'm not the best-liked fellow. So I'll be my usual restrained self.

Thank you for responding.

-Galen's player

 

[Sheridan]

Hey folks... I understand this is a serious issue with a lot of good points from many directions, but please try and tone it down a bit. There have been a great number of trolling posts and even outright attacks and it's getting out of hand. I've given this particular thread a lot of leeway and kept from locking it so that the information could be heard... but do try and keep it civil here. It's not that hard.

There are a lot of different views and good opinions in this thread and on these forums in general. Contrary to popular belief, it's ok to disagree with another poster without injecting any venom into your retorts and banter. If you find yourself getting heated over something, take a step back and breathe before unleashing taunts, trolls, and other attacks on your fellow posters. All it does is encourage further attacks and trolling... As a reminder, the following Rules of Conduct still apply:

A. Show respect at all times.

B. Help build the Community.
The success of our forums depends upon the quality posts of our participants. We are proud of the success of our forums and give our thanks to those who have chosen to make our forums their out-of-game home. To ensure continued success we are posting these guidelines so that all participants of the Stratics forums understand what is considered unacceptable behavior in the forums and can result in a temporary suspension or a permanent ban.

C. Personal attacks are prohibited.This specifically means any text/post that is blatantly attacking another person on or off the forum, especially in a personal way.

D. Trolling is prohibited.Trolling is whenever someone is clearly, deliberately posting in a manner for the purpose of angering and/or insulting the other participants of the board. Trolling DOES NOT encourage further discussion in the long run, it only encourages personal attacks (if left unchecked).

Thank you.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

*kisses you full on the mouth*

Oh my.

*doesn't say anything but breaks out into an undeniable smile*

-Galen's player

 

[galefan2004]

On a side note...

I want to tank JC and Jeremy for the work they put into hashing out this policy.

 

[Kyrie_Elaison]

Keep reading - A change has actually been mentioned. Donations are now ok.

LOL

I was too caught up in all the posts. :loser:

 

[drinkbeerallday]

Ok, after several discussions between various folks of higher pay grade than me, we've hashed out the following (and yes, this will be in the FoF as well for wider distribution.)

1. Sites that sell things (any things, not necessarily UO things) for cash are definitely forbidden
2. Requests for donations are fine.
3. Ads are bad. Don't link to sites with ads.
4. Stratics is currently the only exception to #3; however, there may be more in the future. If you have an interest in being an exception, you're welcome to email me and as soon as we have a process I'll let you know what it is.

This doesn't change the whole submit-to-the-FoF process at all. I'm sure you have questions - feel free to ask them now so I can refine the version in the FoF

that should be in the patch message.

 

[Sheridan]

that should be in the patch message.

Agreed. Not everyone who plays comes to the UO Stratics forums and even those that do might miss that message. Important announcements like these need to go into the login screen patch message.

 

[AdamD]

So UOGuide is free and clear..............for today at least.

Are you sure?
You sell a service for cash (UOAM hosting) and also have an affiliate link to your hosting company.
That'd clash with "but sites that sell anything – UO-related stuff or otherwise – for cash are also not good."

 

[RaDian FlGith]

Edited: JC If you had this code at the top of every page <meta http-equiv="Pragma" content="no-cache"> your pages will load up alot faster. with the heavy traffic you get.

Not at all true. The no-cache statement means that your web browser will not cache the page, and instead, must request a new copy of the page from the host server EVERY time it hits that site.

Instead of loading faster, that will cause pages to load SLOWER, and will INCREASE the bandwidth on the site.

 

[RaDian FlGith]

There are not that many quality UO fansites out there that require advert for running. It would not be that hard to simply add them to the official allowed list. I just don't understand wherein lies the difficulty in doing so.

Okay, but the problem here is that we've completely and totally lost sight of what the word "advertise" means, and how EA/Mythic has abused it to meet their own narrow stance.

Advertising a website should not include things such as "I've got it listed in my profile," or "I told my friend to go there for information." This is what is known as conversational availability. I can't see your profile unless I double-click on it. It's not there openly staring me in the face in-game. Now, leaving runes around, animals named with the site, and dropping books all over moongates certainly DOES qualify as advertising. But JC wasn't doing those things. He had a link in his profile.

It's this unique and altogether bizarre definition of the word that EA has chosen to enforce that's at the root of this. I don't think any of us are saying it's okay to stand around and spam a website. But getting banned for listing it in your profile, your guild profile (which has a spot specifically set up for that purpose), putting it in a book in your guildhouse (where someone would have to go), or telling a friend should not be considered advertisement.

Above and beyond this is a lack of anyone at EA/Mythic putting the word "intent" into this policy. If I tell you to go to UOGuide to look up information, and the site is a veritable plethora of information, I should not risk a ban simply because the guy running the site has also asked for donations in an innocuous manner. If I tell you to go to UOGuide to make a donation or you're not getting into my guild, that's an entirely different story. If I tell you to got to UOGuide and suddenly your virus alarm starts ringing, that too is another story -- which, when this first ban came up, is exactly how the person involved lied to get a GM to come and make the "judgment" call.

THESE things are what are at issue here.