Existing players used to logging in with their character name and moo password must signup for a website account.
- Slyter 48s
- Burgerwolf 3s PANCAKES
- Veleth 1m
- cata 7s
- Dale 4m
- xXShadowSlayerXx 1m
- BubbleKangaroo 48s
- spungkbubble 5s
- JanekSembilan 23m
- meero619 44s
- SmokePotion 1m Right or wrong, I'm getting high.
- Rillem 21s Make it personal.
- LadyLogic 8m
- Vanashis 3h
- Sivartas 8m
- zxq 2m Blackcastle was no ordinary prison.
- NightHollow 4m
And 28 more hiding and/or disguised
Sindomedome logo
a cyberpunk roleplaying game
banner art by Michal Lisowski
Connect to Sindome @ moo.sindome.org:5555 or just Play Now

How to Increase Player Activity on @bugs
What are some ideas?

Login to post. Membership required.
Jump To
Newest Post
I want more players to review @bugs and leave comments and thoughts.

A good example of one I could use some additional comments on is: @vb 1373

It's a bug about aim, which may not be a bug, it may be a feature request, depending on if this is something broken or something never implemented.

What are some ways that we could get players reviewing @bugs, leaving comments and thoughts, reproduction steps, etc. for bugs that others submit?

I don't want to be very intrusive and ping people a bunch about bugs possibly needing comments. Not every bug needs a comment.

At the same time, players helping with the QA and reproduction steps, or calling out something not being a bug and just user error is very effective for streaming the bug fixing/closing process as it reduces the amount of work I need to do via crowdsourcing…

Thoughts?

By Slither at Mar 3, 2025, 7:02 PM | 0
If @bugs were had a color coded category of urgency which was calculated based off Staff assigned 'severity' and player-submitted comments it would ad a layer of visibility to tickets which needed the most attention for non-coder staff to callout on the regular and for players to also check.
By ReeferMadness at Mar 3, 2025, 7:40 PM | 0
I honestly find the bug interface to be really annoying to use for viewing bugs. Typing @bugs just fills up my entire screen with a wall of text every time, and there's no indicators on if these bugs have comments or not, or need more input from players.

In a world where we had more code time and resources, I think it would be nice to have the bugs mirrored on an external website or something for easier viewing and all. But we definitely don't have the resources for that so I suggest just adding little indicators to them, sorta like the @who indicators. One that shows if it has new, unread comments on it, one that shows if staff is requesting more information/player testing, and one maybe one for urgent, possibly game breaking bugs.

Also having a search argument specifically for bugs that staff wants more info on would be nice.

By Emily at Mar 4, 2025, 7:41 PM | 0
I agree that a flag for bugs that need more eyeballs on them (like a yellow highlight on the line) would be cool, though of course that needs staff to look at them and determine if something needs more eyeballs which in and of itself is more work.

I'll do my best to read through more often, I do leave comments on bugs sometimes with my own experience but I didn't really realize this was so highly sought until reading this thread.

By 0x1mm at Mar 4, 2025, 7:46 PM | 0
In a world where we had more code time and resources, I think it would be nice to have the bugs mirrored on an external website or something for easier viewing and all.

Pretty sure they're hitting JIRA or something similar. It's just not accessible to players. I expect it has something to do with this:

You are submitting a new bug, the following info has been recorded:

* your object number

* your contents

* your location

* your location's contents

* your last traceback

* the exact time

But yes, I agree the in game interface is not exactly ideal in its current form, and would probably prefer to comment or submit bugs directly on a tracker, where I can format them properly.

By Quotient at Mar 4, 2025, 8:10 PM | 0
The previous bug tracker was jira (Gojira) but it had a lot of problems, at least as far as I remember, with bugs failing to get registered from when they were submitted from the Moo. Slither also said previously it was hard to maintain, so he made the new version (Kaiju) entirely in-Moo.

I actually really like the new version but I am not a web developer so doing things through the game makes most sense to me.

By 0x1mm at Mar 4, 2025, 8:16 PM | 0
Lack of ability to submit formatted data is a pretty huge drawback. I've spent time trying to make sure data was formatted in a manner that is easily readable only for the @bug input to turn it into a horror show.

Lack of ability to attach detailed logs for things is annoying as well. I've had to resort to dropping logs on private pastebins and such.

By Quotient at Mar 4, 2025, 8:41 PM | 0
I appreciate the feedback on the bug system itself, but this isn't the thread for general @bug feedback. Feel free to submit an @idea or other thread to discuss that.

As for Jira – we used Jira for over a decade, and it was even worse in terms of player and staff engagement. Having it in MOO is superior for our purposes. You can check the Kaiju thread in New Features section for a better overview of why we moved.

To respond to some of the feedback:

- Indicator that bugs need comments -

I don't dislike this idea... it does require each bug to be reviewed and flagged and then possibly unflagged, which adds work for staff. Not sure we'll actually use this enough... I'll consider this one.

- Indicator that we have comments -

I could probably add a column to the @bugs view which shows how many comments a bug has.

One quick way to know if a bug has comments is that it is out of order, a newly commented bug will show up at the bottom of the list even if it's older.

- @bugs is long -

Fair points. That's what '@bugs new' is for. Though as I test this now, it seems to be not working as I would expect so I'll look into that, but this is the command for showing new bugs (when working properly). This is shown, along with other options at the bottom of @bugs output:

Available arguments: @bugs assigned / new / unassigned / mine / resolved /

- @bugs urgency -

Showing urgency... similar problem to flagging for needing more comments, it needs to be triaged by someone when the bug comes in. I can usually triage bugs mentally with a glance. Classifying all of them would probably fall to me and may end up just being an extra step that takes me away from fixing bugs.

Also, I think there is typically a disconnect between how urgent something is and if I need comments on it. Most of the time, the comments I want are to help me understand the urgency or impact. I guess if we had bugs classified as urgent/important, maybe that would be an indicator that we don't need comments as they've been triaged?

- Player QA -

I wonder if some additional tooling that could be granted to certain players who have expressed an interest, to triage bugs, would be useful? Maybe it can be more of a community effort? Not quite sure how it would work, or if people would want to do it (it's fairly boring). Also would need to figure out how to handle private bugs, as ~50% of bugs get submitted private due to circumstances around the bug or their perceived severity & potential for abuse.

(Edited by Slither at 7:15 am on 3/5/2025)

By Slither at Mar 5, 2025, 6:59 AM | 0
The way I was thinking about the indicators and stuff, I think it wouldn't be necessary for staff to review bugs any more than they already do. I wasn't thinking of it as something where every bug needs to be triaged, just whenever staff gets around to looking at a bug as they usually would, if they have questions about it or something, they can give it a little mark or something, and then move on like usual.

Yeah this means that some bugs will need more info without people knowing about it as staff haven't looked at them yet, but that would have been the case anyways without the system.

By Emily at Mar 5, 2025, 7:34 AM | 0
That makes sense. I think what I'm hoping for is situations I sometimes come across when I review @bugs for the first time, and to be clear I may review @bugs each day, or it may be 1-2 weeks between reviews because I get busy IRL.

So, sometimes I come into a bug, and a conversation between the submitter and other players has already happened. They might be providing extra info, other times an issue happens, when the issue started, how it used to work, how they think it is supposed to work – or they may be saying 'actually this isn't a bug, see this BGBB post here where it's described as being intended to work this way'.

When that happens it makes my life so much easier :)

All that being said, a toggle where we can make it clear a bug needs more info/feedback from players is a good idea.

(Edited by Slither at 12:32 pm on 3/5/2025)

By Slither at Mar 5, 2025, 12:31 PM | 0
UI change, currently if I do @bugs mine I see:

@bugs mine

UPDATED ID SUBMITTER VIS CATEGORY ASSIGNEE SUBJECT

Can we somehow squeeze status here? I cannot see what bugs are resolved, or not, or is my comment on the issue last.

This way @bugs mind literally gives me output of things that need my attention, and not having to dig through to see how's it going.

By Aida at Mar 31, 2025, 9:58 AM | 0
Do bugs currently create "watch" alerts for those who comment on them, or generate on-login events for either creator or watcher? If not, those would be useful features for commentary. I feel like I end up checking the entire @bugs list way more than I should.
By Quotient at Apr 4, 2025, 12:34 PM | 0
Jump To Oldest Post