To post comments, please login.

Shut Up. We're Talking.
Host: Darren and Karen
Darren and Karen present this commentary podcast covering recent topics found within the MMORPG Blogging and Podcasting community.

Subscribe via iTunes  Subscribe to RSS Feed  


This Podcast Sponsored by:
   Wilhelm2451
   Belo




Help the Collective. Become a supporter or sponsor on the Support Page.
Shut Up. We're Talking #67
Sun, 18 Jul 2010 14:24:00 GMT [download/play]



Topics

  • Introductions
  • Listener Mail/What We're Playing
  • Fall of Carthage
  • RealID
  • Blogs of the Week

Hosts

Blogs of the Week


Login to post a comment
Previous Episodes
Episode #77 - Duration: 2925 - Released: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 06:16:01 +0000
Episode #76 - Duration: 7730 - Released: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 19:34:01 +0000
Episode #75 - Duration: 4659 - Released: Sun, 12 Dec 2010 17:57:48 +0000
Episode #74 - Duration: 4071 - Released: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 20:22:45 +0000
Episode #73 - Duration: 4943 - Released: Sun, 07 Nov 2010 19:41:07 +0000
Episode #72 - Duration: 4707 - Released: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 18:28:52 +0000
Episode #71 - Duration: 3820 - Released: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 16:39:28 +0000
Episode #70 - Duration: 4623 - Released: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 15:51:32 +0000
Episode #69 - Duration: 4837 - Released: Sun, 29 Aug 2010 18:07:07 +0000
Episode #68 - Duration: 01:13:32 - Released: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 15:34:00 GMT
Episode #67 - Duration: 01:12:09 - Released: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 14:24:00 GMT
Episode #66 - Duration: 00:59:30 - Released: Mon, 5 Jul 2010 23:26:00 GMT
Episode #65 - Duration: 01:23:43 - Released: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 16:03:00 GMT
Episode #64 - Duration: - Released: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 15:51:00 GMT
Episode #63 - Duration: 01:13:26 - Released: Sun, 16 May 2010 17:52:00 GMT
Episode #62 - Duration: 01:12:04 - Released: Thu, 6 May 2010 23:28:00 GMT
Episode #61 - Duration: 01:26:12 - Released: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 01:26:00 GMT
Episode #60 - Duration: 01:57:27 - Released: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 23:34:00 GMT
Episode #59 - Duration: 01:37:24 - Released: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 03:48:00 GMT
Episode #58 - Duration: 01:21:01 - Released: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 18:45:00 GMT
Episode #57 - Duration: 01:47:46 - Released: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 19:01:00 GMT
Episode #56.5 - Duration: 00:02:21 - Released: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 12:26:00 GMT
Episode #56 - Duration: 01:01:53 - Released: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:41:00 GMT
Episode #55 - Duration: 01:16:27 - Released: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 02:31:00 GMT
Episode #54 - Duration: 01:14:25 - Released: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 01:51:00 GMT
Episode #53 - Duration: 01:31:47 - Released: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 04:12:00 GMT
Episode #52.5 - Duration: 00:04:12 - Released: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 19:43:00 GMT
Episode #52 - Duration: 01:04:24 - Released: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:35:00 GMT
Episode #51 - Duration: 01:17:30 - Released: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:49:00 GMT
Episode #50 - Duration: 01:35:33 - Released: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 16:15:00 GMT
Episode #49 - Duration: 01:03:31 - Released: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 21:27:00 GMT
Episode #48 - Duration: 01:13:44 - Released: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 15:25:00 GMT
Episode #47 - Duration: 01:10:07 - Released: Sun, 10 May 2009 21:21:00 GMT
Episode #46 - Duration: 01:27:11 - Released: Mon, 4 May 2009 02:05:00 GMT
Episode #45 - Duration: 01:04:36 - Released: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 20:01:00 GMT
Episode #44 - Duration: 00:56:47 - Released: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 16:15:00 GMT
Episode #43.1 - Duration: 00:18:59 - Released: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 20:11:00 GMT
Episode #43 - Duration: 00:59:34 - Released: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 01:24:00 GMT
Episode #42 - Duration: 01:11:28 - Released: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 15:14:00 GMT
Episode #41 - Duration: 01:06:59 - Released: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 01:55:00 GMT
Episode #40.5 - Duration: 00:02:50 - Released: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:48:00 GMT
Episode #40 - Duration: 01:16:52 - Released: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 02:45:00 GMT
Episode #39 - Duration: 01:08:43 - Released: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 06:01:00 GMT
Episode #38 - Duration: 00:37:38 - Released: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 05:49:00 GMT
Episode #37 - Duration: - Released: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:26:00 GMT
Episode #36 - Duration: 01:10:59 - Released: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 03:03:00 GMT
Episode #35 - Duration: 00:49:08 - Released: Sun, 19 Oct 2008 22:54:00 GMT
Episode #34 - Duration: 01:08:50 - Released: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 19:38:00 GMT
Episode #33 - Duration: 00:58:54 - Released: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 01:42:00 GMT
Episode #32 - Duration: 01:03:27 - Released: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:01:00 GMT
Episode #31 - Duration: 01:05:03 - Released: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 20:13:00 GMT
Episode #30 - Duration: 00:59:20 - Released: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:44:00 GMT
Episode #29 - Duration: 00:28:31 - Released: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 13:48:00 GMT
Episode #28 - Duration: 01:09:13 - Released: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 19:31:00 GMT
Episode #27 - Duration: 01:14:25 - Released: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 02:42:00 GMT
Episode #26 - Duration: 01:06:47 - Released: Mon, 19 May 2008 03:10:00 GMT
Episode #25 - Duration: 01:01:48 - Released: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 01:46:00 GMT
Episode #24 - Duration: 00:57:48 - Released: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT
Episode #23 - Duration: 00:47:54 - Released: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 01:05:00 GMT
Episode #22 - Duration: 01:12:16 - Released: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 04:54:00 GMT
Episode #21 - Duration: 01:56:55 - Released: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 05:01:00 GMT
Episode #20 - Duration: 00:49:01 - Released: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 04:08:00 GMT
Episode #19 - Duration: 01:01:05 - Released: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 05:08:00 GMT
Episode #18 - Duration: 01:08:01 - Released: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 02:35:00 GMT
Episode #17 - Duration: 01:36:26 - Released: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 04:07:00 GMT
Episode #16 - Duration: 01:06:39 - Released: Mon, 24 Dec 2007 15:58:00 GMT
Episode #15 - Duration: 01:33:23 - Released: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 01:24:00 GMT
Episode #14 - Duration: 01:24:15 - Released: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 07:47:00 GMT
Episode #13 - Duration: 01:22:18 - Released: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 01:30:00 GMT
Episode #12 - Duration: 01:17:38 - Released: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 16:55:00 GMT
Episode #11 - Duration: 01:17:01 - Released: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 03:30:00 GMT
Episode #10 - Duration: 01:00:37 - Released: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 03:33:00 GMT
Episode #9 - Duration: 01:12:13 - Released: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 04:47:00 GMT
Episode #8 - Duration: 01:24:35 - Released: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 02:44:00 GMT
Episode #7 - Duration: 01:11:21 - Released: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 04:05:00 GMT
Episode #6 - Duration: 01:10:07 - Released: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 01:13:00 GMT
Episode #5 - Duration: 00:58:57 - Released: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 01:50:00 GMT
Episode #4 - Duration: 01:13:04 - Released: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 03:52:00 GMT
Episode #3 - Duration: 01:10:25 - Released: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 17:20:00 GMT
Episode #2 - Duration: 01:09:48 - Released: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 05:20:00 GMT
Episode #1 - Duration: 01:08:21 - Released: Mon, 28 May 2007 02:12:00 GMT

Episode 67 Discussion Thread

'Numbers Game' by Akely
Submitted on 2010-07-19 16:54:53 CST
Do not just abandon your opinion yet, Darren. It is very important that people that can argue their points rationally do so. It leads to progress. You're dead wrong, but stick to your guns... ;-)

Regarding numbers: I work at a nuclear power plant. There we define risk as RISK = % CHANCE * SEVERITY The % CHANCE of a catastrophe might be slim, but the SEVERITY is huge. That's why so many people do not want nuclear power. And it is also why people do not want RealID. The ramifications it COULD lead to are HUGE. At least that is what some people FEEL. And we do follow our gut feelings much more than we think we do. Note I'm talking PERCIEVED risk. It might not be ACTUAL risk, hence peoples different interpretations and opinions. Statistics after the fact is useless. It does not save peoples lives.

I can just imagine my boss saying something like "you stay up far to many nights playing those stupid games... it does not cut it... i want you rested.... after all... this is a nuclear power plant... ... so you'll not get a raise..."


ALSO: I'm very glad to hear Frances and Julie's voices again. I dropped their/your podcast from my list due to time limitations. It is a decision I regret. Even though the cast seldom was about games I played it was always very rewarding to listen to. I'm coming back, sisters.



'Thanks' by darrenl
Submitted on 2010-07-19 19:49:11 CST
...Akley for that encouraging note. Honestly, it's nice to hear.

I guess it's both a strength and a weakness of mine in terms of how I view things. I tend to go on facts and actualities and I sometimes forget that others go on perception and gut. Both different and have their uses in certain situations....but both sides tend to get stuck in the "when you have a hammer..." trap.

Here's a good philosophical question for ya: how do you convince a plane crash survivor that flying is still the safest way to travel?



'An honor' by Julie
Submitted on 2010-07-19 22:07:38 CST
It was an honor and a pleasure for Fran and I to be a guest on the show.

@ Akely: You will find that we have gone back to our old format. We have recorded show 65 but it is still in the editing process.

@ Daren: Here's another question for you. How do you convince someone who has had a stalker and was once kidnapped at knifepoint that it is safe to go out at night again. Which, in my case is a rhetorical question. Answer from the said victim (me)...

you don't.



'Some one hand Darren a towel and some ice.' by Checksix
Submitted on 2010-07-20 20:53:27 CST
Heh, Darren, you really took it on the chin for this show :) I think theres an execlent place for you in military command or in the insurance industry some where ;)

I think in this case, Blizzard showing or not showing real names, the perceived benefit to Blizzard vs the preceived harm is grossly weighted to the harm side. Weather a single person is stalked or not isn't the question. The question is does this change cause the perception that people will be stalked. The answer is yes, it does.

This is something that no one wants, and they don't want it in a very big an vocal way.

Now, if there was a technical reason they had to do this I might be more sympathetic. But there isn't a technical reason and it's trivial to change (I say that without knowing how many man hours B has put into this project so far). The WoW forums have operated just fine (matter of opinion) without real names and they could continue to do so.

So if Blizzard does do this they had better hope that not a single person is cyber stalked and hurt. If they are some one is going to get rich because all that money makes a very tempting target and the internet will be overflowing with "I told you so" posts.



'Its Not About Stalking...' by KirithKodachi
Submitted on 2010-07-21 15:10:19 CST
Its about Annoying. Karen hit it on the head: its about privacy being ripped open and exposing users on a globally public scale without their agreement.

Cyber stalking may not increase due to the real names going out there, but cyber harassment will be a lot easier. And those with fairly common names like Darren Love may not feel too worried but other like William Dullemond get narrowed down pretty quickly in Google. Trust me.

As for just not using the forums? Official forums are the lifeblood despite the trolls for any MMO, being told to not use them because you want to keep your mmo life and real life separate is unacceptable. Shame on Blizzard.



'-' by Token
Submitted on 2010-07-21 19:03:36 CST
Its really sad that you all take this point of view. Real names would have started something in gaming, its like going into a dark and stuffy teenagers bedroom and opening a window. Gaming needs to grow up, be about adults and not kids. Grow out of the shame and stigma. Clearly Blizzard had overestimated their community.


'Blizzard Meh!' by DillingerEP
Submitted on 2010-07-22 08:15:16 CST
Blizzard loves money.

Blizzard wants MOAR! money.

Blizzard wants to get into the facebook craze.

Blizzard has 10-11million players, so what better! That's a lot of money to be made off with social networking... with that amount of people.

Blizzard can't make money off your avatars name, but of course they can make it off your real name.

Blizzard Introduces EULA changes, stating you need to contact them, so they don't sell of your info to various other companies.

Blizzard try's to blow sunshine and rainbow's up peoples ass, saying it well help clean the forums, but it would only lead to people trolling you with the name Chuck Norris, or people who hate life... trolling you with their real name.

Blizzard tries to bring this Real ID out, and the community kicked them in the face.

This is all about money, and nothing more. They don't care about cleaning up the forums... it's laughable for them even to say that's why. After six year's of not caring about their forums or in game chat... you think they would care now? (*)%#$ NO.

This won't be the last of the Real ID crapstorm. Activision/Blizzard knows how much money they can be making off... social networking. It will come, one way or another... it will come. When it does, they can kiss my (*&$()#_(+$)#_&$)(# ass.

As for security, e-stalking, endangerment. I agree with Darren, it's a very low chance.. to have something happen too. It's pretty hard to look up people with just name alone, unless you have a pretty unique name. Though Sister Julie.. made the good point, if one case happens of endangerment, then that indeed is one to many.

As for me I'm not to worry about using my name, but it's pretty personal to me, who i give it to.. and who i don't. I don't go running around town, screaming my name is so and so. This is a game treated more serious then life by a good deal of players, but it's still just a game none the less. I simply just don't like bringing in something personal like that into a game, but that's just me. It should remain a choice, and less choice for people always sucks.

Anywho.. w/ the Real ID, Blizzard keeps the circle turning, by yet again trying to piss into your cheerios.



'My english sux' by DillingerEP
Submitted on 2010-07-22 08:17:37 CST
Wish there was a edit button ha!


'Started What, Exactly?' by KirithKodachi
Submitted on 2010-07-22 18:04:34 CST
"Its really sad that you all take this point of view. Real names would have started something in gaming, its like going into a dark and stuffy teenagers bedroom and opening a window. Gaming needs to grow up, be about adults and not kids. Grow out of the shame and stigma. Clearly Blizzard had overestimated their community."

Your analogy is totally inaccurate. Its more like going into someone's home and taking down all the curtains.

And what would this realID improve? People's behaviours? Hardly. The trolls will be trolls and find ways around RealID. The only people hurt, once again, are the honest people who weren't the problem anyways, just like DRM.

If Blizzard really wants the community to "grow up" and remove the stigma, first thing they could do is moderate there forums like a reasonable community does.



'Convincing a Plane Crash Victim... Espcially with Darren's Viewpoint Style' by tpajeek
Submitted on 2010-07-22 21:46:27 CST
@Darren, this is pretty simple, if you follow your own MO, in using statistics to base decisions off of... Use the Robin Williams 'World According to Garp' thought in that if they have been in a plane crash, the chances of that happening twice to the same person are astronomical, so essentially they have made themselves plane crash proof.

If you want to know the reference from the movie, it is when he is buying the big house and a plane slams into the side of it while checking out with the realtor. He immediately turns and states they will take the house since it has already been disaster proofed! What are the chances of a second plane ever hitting that house!



'--' by Token
Submitted on 2010-07-22 23:46:36 CST
Hide behind barriers if you want, keep gaming your dirty little secret. Let the news anchors continue to laugh at gamers. You're not one of these people that solo's mmos are you ?


'Erm...' by Jaye
Submitted on 2010-07-23 00:19:41 CST
Kirith Kodachi is hardly a solo gamer (not that there's anything wrong with that). He has a pretty big following and runs the blog Inner Sanctum of the Ninveah (http://www.ninveah.com/).

I'm all for MMO gaming becoming more mainstream and culturally accepted, but RealID is not the way to get there. Your cause and effect just don't work.




'Great show!' by Leava
Submitted on 2010-07-23 06:29:28 CST
Great show everyone, a wonderful listen!

Special kudos to Darren -- your thinking on this Real ID thing has been a bit muddle headed, and we all knew you were going to get schooled on this episode of the podcast by Karen at the very least, but it was especially brave to invite the fabulous Sisters along to help out! You held up an unpopular perspective, which is never easy.

Maybe it's beating a dead horse, but I'd like to challenge the notion that the "numbers guy" conclusion is that fear over RealID is bogus (as a professional numbers person myself). To me, the question of whether or not the RealID change to the Blizzard forums was essentially a numbers question, and we can now trust that there is a clear answer.

Here's the question for Blizzard (assuming they genuinely wanted to improve the quality of their forums): if you implement RealID on the forums do you loose more trolls or productive members of the forum community? If we try to place aside the drama and visceral reactions, we have a simple signal to noise problem.

In proposing the change, Blizzard's model was clearly that the negative impact would most adversely affect trolls -- they assumed people would not be trolls if their real names appeared beside their posts. They did not, however, fully appreciate the number of prominent members who write well known guides, or are key posters in the UI forum, who, like Karen (and I) would never post under their real names for professional reasons. The rapid and complete reversal of this proposed change clearly demonstrates that the data (a HUGE forum thread and log of ESRB complaints) showed them that their model was wrong. "Numbers guys" revise their models when the data contradict the predictions made by those models, and Blizzard's management are good numbers people! The choice ended up being simple: let the forum community migrate off-site (I'm sure mmo-champion/curse would have LOVED Blizzard to have stuck to their guns), or back off and keep the community on the forums they control (and enjoy ad revenue from).

On a different note, I'd love to hear Julie and Fran on this podcast again! The four of you had a great report.



'Great show!' by Leava
Submitted on 2010-07-23 06:37:53 CST
Great show everyone, a wonderful listen!

Special kudos to Darren -- your thinking on this Real ID thing has been a bit muddle headed, and we all knew you were going to get schooled on this episode of the podcast by Karen at the very least, but it was especially brave to invite the fabulous Sisters along to help out! You held up an unpopular perspective, which is never easy.

Maybe it's beating a dead horse, but I'd like to challenge the notion that the "numbers guy" conclusion is that fear over RealID is bogus (as a professional numbers person myself). To me, the question of whether or not the RealID change to the Blizzard forums was essentially a numbers question, and we can now trust that there is a clear answer.

Here's the question for Blizzard (assuming they genuinely wanted to improve the quality of their forums): if you implement RealID on the forums do you loose more trolls or productive members of the forum community? If we try to place aside the drama and visceral reactions, we have a simple signal to noise problem.

In proposing the change, Blizzard's model was clearly that the negative impact would most adversely affect trolls -- they assumed people would not be trolls if their real names appeared beside their posts. They did not, however, fully appreciate the number of prominent members who write well known guides, or are key posters in the UI forum, who, like Karen (and I) would never post under their real names for professional reasons. The rapid and complete reversal of this proposed change clearly demonstrates that the data (a HUGE forum thread and log of ESRB complaints) showed them that their model was wrong. "Numbers guys" revise their models when the data contradict the predictions made by those models, and Blizzard's management are good numbers people! The choice ended up being simple: let the forum community migrate off-site (I'm sure mmo-champion/curse would have LOVED Blizzard to have stuck to their guns), or back off and keep the community on the forums they control (and enjoy ad revenue from).

On a different note, I'd love to hear Julie and Fran on this podcast again! The four of you had a great report.



'Flaws on the "security" side' by Teviko
Submitted on 2010-07-28 16:41:54 CST
While the Real ID issue doesn't directly apply to me as I am not involved in the WoW community, I couldn't help but listen to the debate over the past couple of weeks. I heard strong, valid points in favor of, as well as against, Real ID.

While you didn't mention it on your show, there was the case of a blogger posting the names of Blizzard officials, resulting in those officials being harassed. The point the blogger was trying to make was how easy it was to find out personal information via a real name. Personally, I believe this action proved Blizzard's point more. The names posted were always public knowledge. Before this, nothing was done with those names. It was only after they did something annoying that people sought out their personal information. The broad brush conclusion would be that even with real names exposed there is little chance of real life stalking unless the poster writes something to provoke the stalker, thus encouraging more considerate posts.

In regards to identity theft, Frances questioned whether Real ID would make ID theft easier. If I were an identity thief and simply having a person's name was all I needed, I could find simpler ways of stealing identities than visiting the Blizzard forums. All I would have to do is walk across my living room to the closet where I keep my white pages, and in a instant I would have the names of hundreds of thousands of victims. In fact, I would have more information than I could get from Blizzard, such as addresses and phone numbers. A trip to my library would allow me to branch out by thumbing though white pages of other cities.

Final point, I have seen examples of how someone, with the right motivation and knowledge, can find out personal information starting with only a username. In my opinion, any security people find in an anonymous username is, in reality, a false security.