Remove OOC limit

[jacf104]

Description of the idea: Remove the OOC message limit for users

Why should this be added? (pros):
-I believe it would create more discussion within OOC as well as when people are having discussions that they our able to have it fully rather than running out of OOCs

- Would remove the abuse of /help when people run out of OOC messages

What negatives could this have? (cons):
- Could create spam within OOC (This could be counteracted by some kind of code which is put in to stop this as well as most of the time staff being on to watch over chat and delete messages accordingly)

-People may get annoyed when just wanting to play the server rather than chat that their text box is full of OOC messages

*Other additions: For the argument of people spamming,If people are sending repetitive messages or their is something implemented where if they are repeating the same word (For example if someone was coming on to be a minge and spam racist words or overly swearing)

*Images: N/A

 

[ΙεΙίος1]

I'd be up for increasing the ooc limit but not completely removing it.
If you want to talk so much about a certain topic you can always move it to the shoutbox or even add the person on steam. Of course these aren't very desired solutions since it's much easier to just keep talking in OOC but still.


Also add a poll.

 

[Bnjemann]

This is what shoutbox is for. Removing the OOC limit is kinda pointless imo.

 

[jacf104]

Yeah I guess if you didn't wanna completely get rid of the OOCs available you could up it.For example members get 15 and Premium 25 maybe? could work

 

[Tyla Jai]

I thought premium already get more

 

[jacf104]

@Tyla Jai Premium get 15 and Members get 10 I believe

 

[ΙεΙίος1]

@Tyla Jai premium gets 5 more atm

 

[Deleted member 5920]

I think we should remove OOC in general tbh.

 

[Mekls]

You're one of the reasons it should be removed

 

[rogue]

35 messages when server is under 30, 25 messages under 50 and 15 messages under 70

 

[jacf104]

Sounds good to me,I get the thinking in this so the more users that are on means you get less OOCs just to avoid flooding OOC when the server is near enough full

 

[Deleted member 5920]

Not anymore #reformed

 

[CensoredExe]

I assume the limit is to combat spam among other things, I see no reason why this couldn't be dealt with using a 15 second cooldown after each message.

I also dont see a reason it needs to be entirely removed, but I wouldn't mind it increased

 

[SatoshiAaron]

I would personally be happy with increasing the limit to around 30. I believe that is a decent amount. If not as I have already suggested, add a Cooldown timer such as a majority of ClockworkRP servers that have always had fairly high player counts.
To be fair, I understand what the purpose of an OOC message limit is, but OOC is generally pretty well monitored and people always have the option to Hide it if they get annoyed about the frequency of messages or the petty arguing that occurs. To be fair, I am surprised that OOC limitation hasn't been revised sooner. People have been talking about this since the time I joined, and it has never been changed.

OOC can get sour but it generally stays a bit tame considering other gamemodes within the platform. And to be fair, if someone is rage messaging then they usually try and add the last comment in /help anyway.

tl;dr there needs to be more opportunity to converse in OOC, at the end of the day, that's what it is there for.

Another thing that I have always thought (which I know may be experimental on server performance is a separate system which works on net.message to add a completely separate chat box for OOC, although again, I know this might be completely ridiculous, I still believe it was worth saying. This could even be incorporated to a

Player:ScreenPrint

function and I believe this could be achieved quite easily. And again, this function could be disabled by players not wishing to see it.

 

[TinySlayer]

I've wanted to increase the OOC limit when there are less people on the server for a while. However the code wasn't setup for the cap to be dynamic so requires a good chunk of reworking. I'll move this to accepted because it should be done at some point.