*sniggers*
As mister Ronin mentioned we're taking a look at teamspeak and what we need to do to make sure everyone gets along and it is used to its best, we'll holler once our collective braincell has mulled some things over.
Clarification on TS3 Usage
- Thread starter luc
- Start date
*sniggers*
As mister Ronin mentioned we're taking a look at teamspeak and what we need to do to make sure everyone gets along and it is used to its best, we'll holler once our collective braincell has mulled some things over.
G
Gombol
Guest
I honestly see no harm in it. It's not bothering anyone.
But what exactly IS "The City Of Kings"? A quick google search suggests LOTRO, why does it have to have "THIS CHANNEL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WORLD OF WARCRAFT"? Why does it have to be called "City of Kings"? Why not call it "LOTRO" Or somthing? And "but if asked, please respect Brad and Baldi's privacy."? If they want to be able to "Have their privacy" Put a passworded subchannel, it's a public channel and they shouldn't really be able to say "We want to be alone, leave."
Just my view.
But what exactly IS "The City Of Kings"? A quick google search suggests LOTRO, why does it have to have "THIS CHANNEL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WORLD OF WARCRAFT"? Why does it have to be called "City of Kings"? Why not call it "LOTRO" Or somthing? And "but if asked, please respect Brad and Baldi's privacy."? If they want to be able to "Have their privacy" Put a passworded subchannel, it's a public channel and they shouldn't really be able to say "We want to be alone, leave."
Just my view.
Windzarko
Well-Known Member
Sorry, Ronin, you slipped my mind there; out of yourself, Big D and Haven, the only one I've ever seen on Teamspeak is Haven. Well, I saw you once, back on TS2, but... hopefully you get what I mean. I was thinking along the lines of Teamspeak administration rather than forum administration, my bad.
Also, Gombol: the "City of Kings" name is just something they came up with. It's not associated with anything other than being a fairly cool name, unless they have an in-joke going that I'm not aware of.
G
Gombol
Guest
Then if it's used as a "General" channel, they should really add it to the description. If it's a channel they use for WoW, then it should be a WoW sub channel. *shrug*
thatbloke
Junior Administrator
I believe that there was a bit of a purge and channels that seemed to be "inactive" were removed.
If it is the case that this channel was still being used then it was removed in error and I (or another TS admin) can re-instate that for you later if you like
Ya, don't fret. For clarity, they're largely the same thing, especially at full Admin level, but I trust any of the Admin Team to make snap decisions if that's what's called for, or bring up a discussion if we've got more time.
Hang on to that thought. It'll probably become directly relevant very shortly.
Ki!ler-Mk1
Active Member
Trying my best to add(and resist rising to windzarko's baiting) to this;
What good reason is there not to delete it now the generic channels are there, or at the very least revoke the perm status down to semi-perm?
Removing the ability to create perm channels without a per channel discussion involving any of the following admins; haven, trax, ronin, bloke, and reseting the channels to a template removing all the semi-perms once a month would be my suggestion as a solution
What good reason is there not to delete it now the generic channels are there, or at the very least revoke the perm status down to semi-perm?
Removing the ability to create perm channels without a per channel discussion involving any of the following admins; haven, trax, ronin, bloke, and reseting the channels to a template removing all the semi-perms once a month would be my suggestion as a solution
Windzarko
Well-Known Member
I'm genuinely confused by this.
There is no baiting, there is only pleasant discussion. Keep it calm and keep it patient until we get time to look into this. If it goes downhill then we don't have time to keep everyone calm so we will have to cut the discussions short and lock the thread - I'd very much rather not have to do this so keep this thread on constructive posts only.
Further to Haven's note:
I suggest further feedback in this thread takes the form of "I / My <named> group needs to be able to...". Y'know, requirements sort of stuff.
e.g.
"My ArmA2 group needs a channel to communicate while in game. We only play once per month but we need high quality and anything up to around 8 players. We'd be fine using a generic channel if that's all that was available, but we'd need it to be clear of other random chatter as ArmA2 is pretty intense."
Let the Admin team worry about the tedious bit of cleaning up and other janitorial stuff. The thing you can tell us is the thing we can't guess: what you need.
At this moment, not confirming anything. Oh, and I'd prefer it if group feedback was, y'know, consolidated and agreed by the group so we can avoid (for example) Trax saying EVE players need X and Bob telling how they need Y and X and Y being contradictory...
I suggest further feedback in this thread takes the form of "I / My <named> group needs to be able to...". Y'know, requirements sort of stuff.
e.g.
"My ArmA2 group needs a channel to communicate while in game. We only play once per month but we need high quality and anything up to around 8 players. We'd be fine using a generic channel if that's all that was available, but we'd need it to be clear of other random chatter as ArmA2 is pretty intense."
Let the Admin team worry about the tedious bit of cleaning up and other janitorial stuff. The thing you can tell us is the thing we can't guess: what you need.
At this moment, not confirming anything. Oh, and I'd prefer it if group feedback was, y'know, consolidated and agreed by the group so we can avoid (for example) Trax saying EVE players need X and Bob telling how they need Y and X and Y being contradictory...
G
Gombol
Guest
Windzarko
Well-Known Member
Generic FPS/MMO/etc channels, yeah. Although the only time I've seen anybody in that entire section of TS was myself, Masia and Lonsecia using a room we made in there ("Arr Pee Gee", since there wasn't a "Generic RPG" room at the time) for when we play Neverwinter Nights 2 or Titan Quest or what have you. Besides that, I honestly don't think I've seen anyone in there at all
G
Gombol
Guest
Generic FPS/MMO/etc channels, yeah. Although the only time I've seen anybody in that entire section of TS was myself, Masia and Lonsecia using a room we made in there ("Arr Pee Gee", since there wasn't a "Generic RPG" room at the time) for when we play Neverwinter Nights 2 or Titan Quest or what have you. Besides that, I honestly don't think I've seen anyone in there at all
'Cause most of the games people play have channels.
Just thought a couple of sub chat channels would be more likely to be used and encourage people to talk together. Instead of splitting us up into even more channels we don't need.
Traxata
Junior Administrator
I think to add to this, and the structure of TS3's channel lists, we can make groups appear as headers or titles that are not joinable (and through extension not voice activated) giving us an option then to have master ividers people can hide rather than the long list we currently have. Essentially it become a tree structure within TS, we have such a setup within TALOS' TS3 server (for EVE) separating the corporations in eve, from fleet areas and allied areas etc.
For us I would see it as having something like the following but with the top channels being organisational categories only.
For us I would see it as having something like the following but with the top channels being organisational categories only.
- Ts3
- Games
- minecraft
- modern warfare
- etc.
- Clans, Guilds, Teams
- EVE
- WoW
- Shooter Clan etc
- Generic
- RPG
- Shooter
- puzzle
- etc.
- Games