Moderation Tools for World Creators
tracked
Lucifer MStar
Allow world creators the ability to moderate their OWN worlds and issue their OWN bans. I'm tired of seeing crashers and exploiters in my worlds and kicking them is nothing. I want the ability to ban certain individuals from my worlds.
There is absolutely no harm in doing this. Who is it going to hurt? The exploiters and cheaters.
What if world creators abuse it and ban people from THEIR OWN worlds? Well it's their fault their world fails to gather a population.
What else will this do? Allow world creators to suit the needs of their wanted audience.
it will also help take the stress off of the actually game moderators.
Thank you,
Lucifer MStar - Creator of 30+ worlds including church of marriages.
P.S. Communicate more with your community on what you are doing about these crashers and exploiters and maybe the heat and stress will die down. Honestly this is the most annoying thing communication.
Log In
Uzer Tekton
In the ideal world, world authors are just designers, and VRChat Inc. ban all cheaters with cheat detection.
But evidently, VRChat Inc. is not effective nor efficient at policing cheaters. Perhaps because VRChat itself takes a fairly lenient approach to cheat detection (e.g. multiboxing is allowed lol) due to it being fundamentally a chat room with a fancy 3D interface rather than a serious game engine.
Imo it should be entirely VRChat's responsibility to up their cheat detection standard and treat their game more like a game.
User level moderation should be moderating user level problems, like someone pisses someone off, or breaking some social rules in the lobby.
User level moderation (or Udon moderation tools) should never have to tackle program level or hacking related problems, because that is a program level violation that is VRChat Inc.'s domain.
Therefore, giving world authors more "anti-hack" is a mere patchwork that does not resolve the underlying causes of the problem.
The more fundamental solution would be VRChat Inc. completely pivoting to a zero tolerance approach to anti-cheat, with better cheat detection and automatic logging/reporting and banning, better reporting or voting functions, disallow multiboxing etc. (just like any other serious multiplayer games).
There is a fundamental philosophical disagreement here, between a chat room program (easy) and a game engine/platform (hard). VRChat Inc. needs to make up their mind, and up their game.
Nex1942
Uzer Tekton Just like how VRChat allows group instance owners and moderators ban people that they never want to see in their instances. We can't ask VRChat to actively monitor every published world 24/7. There are so many of them. And every game world has different conditions to consider.
For example, attached is a shop of a guy selling exploited in-game currency in my poker world. I know exactly who he is, and I really want to stop him from doing that. But reporting him to the VRChat Safety team probably won't help that much because this isn't typically a violation of the VRChat ToS. And proving this is xxx player will take forever if not never work.
The best thing in this case I can do is just ignore and let them grow. It's really upsetting for me as a world creator to watch it burn.
Having a persistent system really made moderating game worlds a different story. Especially for the games that involve PVP or an in-game resource transfer system.
Nex1942
As a world creator for 4 years, I totally agree. Especially with the persistence-data update, relying on assigned moderators to regulate players is nearly impossible to protect the economy of the game worlds with any kind of trade system.
I understand many would worry about the "can't play with friends " issue. But having a tool that allows world creators to restrict certain players from entering public instances of their worlds can still be a huge help. Banned players can still join their friends+ instances or other private instances. With this system, we can minimize the damage that can be caused by every mod client abuser and exploiter.
I genuinely believe this system could greatly improve the atmosphere of game worlds, while it doesn't harm any player's needs. For streamers who want to host events, they can host with group instance or friends+, there's no restriction for anyone to enjoy the world, but also giving a chance for the world creator to moderate and make their world a better place.
Adeon Writer
My thinking is that the ToS for Udon-powered world moderation as currently written was well-suited before worlds could have persistence, but now that worlds can be powered by persistence, it is time to re-evaluate the ToS and create rules that account for cheaters able to misbehave in one instance and carry that result with them into new instances where the ToS does not currently allow creators to do anything about it.
DarkSwordsman
Linking to this other feedback request which expresses a similar sentiment.
It's definitely important, especially now with World Persistence, that world creators should be able to protect their own worlds from bad actors.
Kyootfox
Use Predictive Analysis:
- Known Crasher AV
- AV Statistics that are outside norms.
- Known Crasher Group or Groups that do not align
- Suspect Account
- VR Chat Management that actually cares about the community and proactively looks at System Metrics to trap and remove disruptive users.
Oh, or just use toolsets like VRCx or TailGrab to help you do what VR Chat will not..
Litе
Honestly its insane we still don't have a proper system for this and they straight up have a rule against preemptively moderating people. Like what if world creators just don't want certain people and groups in their world because they're being a nuisance to everyone. It'd make the game much better for everyone if world creators could actually self moderate their own worlds.
Comrade General
Litе I believe at some point I've suggested giving world creators an ability to, at least, ban groups. It would give the "Block the Group" button more purpose than just blocking incoming invites. Which would be fair, considering that a ton of groups powertrip, but it only got one comment saying "No, this is dumb, world creators already have too much power", but I digress.
Along with being able to check for age verification through Udon, it'd make moderation by world creators extremely effective. And as MStar pointed out, if a world creator bans people left and right as well - it's on them that their world flops.
Litе
Comrade General I don't think straight up NSFW content should be allowed on a 13+ platform period. Will that happen? Probably not with the current leadership.
I like your idea of being able to ban certain groups. I'd personally make a whole list of nsfw/gooner groups that VRChat isn't dealing with and completely ban them from my world.
The Architect
I 100% support this idea, I have seen people in this game breaking TOS in public worlds, including cases of pedophilia and I know for a fact they also use my worlds for roleplay purposes. I do not want to incentivise these people to be in VRChat, I would like to ban them permanently from using any of my worlds.
The VRChat RP community (especially the Genshin Impact one) is full of pedophiles looking to prey on minors and as a world creator I want to ban users I know are involved into this type of ilegal acts, I got a long list of users I wish to permanently ban from my worlds because they have openly broken VRChat TOS and commited US federal crimes in front of me.
S̷̾̐ouls
here to say I was the 1000th vote I did my part.
Sotalo
The Museum's biggest rule, please respect the artists and their time, is meant to ensure the personal safety of all contributors. Artists and contributors shouldn't get flooded with hate, harassment, threats, or excessive popularity. In return, they're willing to contribute and have their art and history displayed for free, and the project can operate. I tell people of my mod powers, and they feel more secure having their names and history displayed. When trolls first found my world and realized I had the power to kick anyone in any public instance, they asked me to stop joining public lobbies. When they realized these powers are built into VRC, they stopped.
I join instances opened by others. TheDoctor26 (creator of Furhub and Furhub Karaoke) opened the instance where I held Sylys' memorial on the day of his passing. While relaying his life's history, I knew not everyone would approve. But because I had mod powers, I felt more at-ease not having to take 80 people to a new instance just to ensure history could be told accurately. And I did remove someone that night who harassed me in that instance.
World creators who abuse their powers aren't benefiting their world. But because full details of mod actions aren't publicly shared, mods already have to put up with harassment from people who know less about the reasoning behind such actions, and any Canny request to eliminate mod powers undercuts moderation even further. Mods need more help to ensure peace, not less.
I can say any decision to remove mod tools from world creators will absolutely hurt the museum. And since world creators have a vested interest in the worlds they create, their powers are less likely to be used for petty reasons and more likely to be used to curtail trolling, hatemongering, and bad actors of all sorts.
Deantwo
Sotalo: So, aside from the difficulty of moving 80 players from a normal public instance to a group public instance, there is no reason for you to have these world author moderation powers? I don't know your world or your exact use-cares, but we can find better ways to solve these issues.
Sounds like we just need ways to change the ownership of an existing instance. So you can convert a normal public instance into a group public instance.
Or maybe a more reliable way to move a massive number of people between instances. For example a way to automatically invite everyone in an instance to a new instance or something. Probably something like a "party system" would be best here, so you can join a party and have an easier time following them between instances.
The last and arguable most effective options are already built-in to VRChat. Everyone has the ability to mute or block people that are being a nuisance. And if that isn't enough, a vote-to-kick can be called on the troublemaker.
Either way, these are just random first ideas that could potentially solve the issues you are describing, which would allow the new groups features to take over where the old "world author moderation powers" have clearly failed.
Some of the worst world authors seem to be so entitled that they think they should be able to enter any private instances of their world, or that they should be immune to group moderation actions while in group public instances of their world. And this is all just so they can prevent a few people they have labeled as "bad" from using their published world.
Sotalo
Deantwo NO. If world creators can't moderate public instances, it will just lead to creators never wanting to use Public instances ever again. There is a deep, longstanding record of very lousy trolls doxxing, harassing, and spreading false rumors targetting Furries. Any attempt to limit world creators' abilities will give those trolls more power. Some people use information in the worlds to benefit their own hatemongering schemes and have broken trust completely. This is not 1 in 10 people, or even 1 in 100, this is 1 in 10,000. Those people pose an immediate danger and threat to the safety of users and break trust with the platform. We can give information to VRChat's Trust and Safety team, but without any ability to moderate public instances, World Creators would become powerless to help people immediately when known abusers are permitted free reign. The good far outweighs the bad on this decision. World creators who abuse their powers can and should be reported, and after investigations it would make sense to remove them. But known harassers and abusers can't wait for a decision from the TOS team to stop harassing people in an instance. One of my friends recorded such an interaction and submitted it to VRChat.
People salty about world creator's moderation are just salty about moderation in general. Until VRChat finds some magic way to eliminate trolls, my vote will always be for better moderation. And nothing anyone says will justify a world creator's inability to remove known dangerous and psychotic individuals from spreading rumors, ripping avatars, crashing lobbies, etc. in a public instance of their own world.
Deantwo
Sotalo:
> "NO. If world creators can't moderate public instances, it will just lead to creators never wanting to use Public instances ever again."
Plenty of people don't like normal public instances for any number of reasons. I don't see why the world author/creator should be treated any differently.
But I will agree that normal public instances would be without any moderation at all. I just don't see that as a bad thing currently. Maybe because I haven't seen all the same things you have. I didn't mean to be insensitive or anything.
> "Those people pose an immediate danger and threat to the safety of users and break trust with the platform."
Then you, as the world author, kicking them from a single public instance doesn't make a difference. You should make a detailed report to VRChat's Trust and Safety, so they can be dealt with correctly and potentially permanently.
> "World creators who abuse their powers can and should be reported, and after investigations it would make sense to remove them."
I agree, but we are still waiting to see these reports actually leading to any sort of action.
> "People salty about world creator's moderation are just salty about moderation in general."
I think you are missing the scope of current world author moderation powers. The world author has moderation powers in ALL instances of their world. If a vindictive world author wanted to, they could assert their will unto any instance they manage to enter. For example, if a world author could enter a friends+ instance owned by someone they dislike, they could join and literally kick the instance owner out instantly. The same is true for group public instances, the world author also has moderation powers there, which has caused moderation wars where the groups are forced to ban the world author from their group just to prevent them from joining.
I would be happy enough if the world author moderation powers were just limited to only be in normal public instances. That way everything will seem consistent with the rest of VRChat, and we won't have to worry about moderation wars. VRChat can then take their time to decide what they want to do with moderation of normal public instances in due time. Simply just prevent world authors from asserting their moderation on instances they don't own.
Sotalo
Deantwo You may not have had experience with this, but many have. Some world creators and moderators experienced attacks, harassment, defamation, and doxxing by trolls in their world. Trolls who use alt accounts to bypass bans regularly. Restraining abilities to moderate public instances makes VRChat's public instances that much more unsafe for people.
Blocking people does not stop them from sending defamation, death threats, and swat threats. Ensuring they are at least unallowed in the worlds of the creators they hurt is the first step in making sure that behavior gets controlled.
If a world creator cannot guarantee safety in their own world, then what will supplement this lack of safety?
Deantwo
Sotalo:
> "If a world creator cannot guarantee safety in their own world, then what will supplement this lack of safety?"
The players (or world creators themselves) can make a new instance, preferably a group public instance so they can moderate it themselves and feel safe. Or they can go to a private instance if they want to be even safer.
If you want to encourage people that visit your world to use group public instances of your official group, so you can moderate it better, then look at how the Trans Academy does it. If you enter a normal public instance of their world, it has a message explaining that it is unmoderated and suggest that people move to an instance hosted by the official group.
Chirping_Cat
If the suggested feature is implemented, world creators will be held responsible for moderating witch hunts that are unrelated to their world's activity, even though they may lack the qualifications, experience, or skills to do so. This combined with Sasha Mason's concerns about sharing bans, which have already shown mixed results on a small scale, makes it evident that the difficulties of implementing this feature far outweigh any potential benefits.
Load More
→