Poll: Multi Clienting

[Corbin]

It still hasn't addressed the question of what about people with multiple players in a household.

I would assume the only way to prevent multi-clienting is by having an IP block which allows one connected client per address, which means that if you have multiple people on a connection who happen to play, such as myself and my wife, that only one could play at a time, which is stupid.

[Arkon]

It still hasn't addressed the question of what about people with multiple players in a household.

I would assume the only way to prevent multi-clienting is by having an IP block which allows one connected client per address, which means that if you have multiple people on a connection who happen to play, such as myself and my wife, that only one could play at a time, which is stupid.

Simple really; Handle it the same way it's handled now. Talk to Derrick and let him verify it's actually 2 separate people (like my gf and I did) and create an exception.

[BobDobbs]

Asking Derrick to personally evaluate and authorize every request for each additional client connection is unreasonable.

[Derrick]

Asking Derrick to personally evaluate and authorize every request for each additional client connection is unreasonable.

I agree, this is not a scalable solution. Account creation needs to be primarily automated, and there is no true way to validate people even manually as distinct individuals short of taking credit card numbers.

[Sissypants]

But my fifteen brothers and sisters all play from the same house! Honest! They all need 3 accounts too!

[DrFaustus]

Asking Derrick to personally evaluate and authorize every request for each additional client connection is unreasonable.

I agree, this is not a scalable solution. Account creation needs to be primarily automated, and there is no true way to validate people even manually as distinct individuals short of taking credit card numbers.

/Thread


Anyone?


















Anyone?

[Kryptonical]

Asking Derrick to personally evaluate and authorize every request for each additional client connection is unreasonable.

I agree, this is not a scalable solution. Account creation needs to be primarily automated, and there is no true way to validate people even manually as distinct individuals short of taking credit card numbers.

/Thread

Not to say this should be the case but isn't this currently the system we have in place? If some one has 3 accounts and then has another person in the household who wants to have their own accounts, correct me if I'm wrong, but currently I believe you send a request to a GM and they handle that on a case by case scenario...

so "asking Derrick to personally evaluate and authorize every request for each addition client connection is unreasonable" is 1000% accurate, and I agree completely that its unreasonable, but currently isn't that the process that is in place?

[Roser]

Limiting account's per IP I don't think is the only option here.

Dr.Faustus I don't think so . This thread is not about limited IP's per account.

However I think It would be constructive to fathom way's of allowing only one client connected at a time per computer. That or perhaps Faust (not Faustus) could elaborate on his single client script.

We shouldn't assume that limiting account's per IP's is the only way to allow "Single-Clienting" as there is other ways to go about this. However I do not know in the slightest how hard any of it is to implement.

I dunno about anyone else here, but, its my opinion that "Single-Clienting" would be a huge step forward towards era accuracy. No?

Edit: Kryptonical, It would seem so aye.

[DrFaustus]

I think you're in another world if you think this is even being thought about for the near future.

Just sayin, not trying to stir shit, but there are bigger things to worry about atm.

And if you look at the current poll results, which is a very small sample of the actual population, you're going to risk disgruntling 50% of the population making a change like this.

[BobDobbs]

I agree completely with Doc.

Last night before bed I did a !status on IRC. There were close to 600 unique IPs reported. It is pretty obvious that these votes, regardless of your stance on the issue, do not represent anything remotely resembling a popular opinion on UOSA.

[GuardianKnight]

.

[BobDobbs]

This isn't America, this is UOSA and the only voice anyone has is the voice Derrick has the good graces to give us.

[Corbin]

This isn't America, this is UOSA and the only voice anyone has is the voice Derrick has the good graces to give us.

Too true

While Derrick takes requests for more accounts for people who have multiple people on a connection, they are pretty minimal. How many people would start saying they have multiple people if it became one account per IP connection? I think he'd be spending several hours a day with the sudden influx of siblings and spouses who suddenly want to play. He has better and more important things to do than deal with that.

[GuardianKnight]

.

[DrFaustus]

A good portion of the changes here have been pushed hard by the community to be implemented sooner than later. The community plays a bigger part in the changes here than you think.

Beating the Dead Horse tactics haven't proven effective here however...

That's exactly what this is. How many of you have actually been here longer than a year? And you're pushing for massive overhaul on one of the most successful era-accurate shards?

Lol