I just got kicked from a dungeon because of the sounds my Lala makes when she attacks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

If you want to, I'd rather you do that ran ever feel you're obligated to keep anyone around you don't want to run with.

More kicks.

---

How about if she did that to you right after putting in your time all the way to the final boss?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

Lol it will be a race to see who gets the vote kick option off first.

Jokes aside I do think if a majority of the voting party agree to remove a player then the reason for removal is valid. Sure one may not like or even approve of the reason, but at the end of day the majority party did agree to the kick.

As I said before OP you should be proud of the kick it was funny and now you have a cute story to share with people.

---

I don't think just two people grouping up together should have the ability to bully any single person out of a party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLittlestLala

How about if she did that to you right after putting in your time all the way to the final boss?

---

I don't care, if a party didn't enjoy your company you should expect the boot.

Two people agree to kick = justified kick, even if they reason they kicked you seems stupid to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

I don't care, if a party didn't enjoy your company you should expect the boot.

Two people agree to kick = justified kick, even if they reason they kicked you seems stupid to you.

---

This may come as a surprise to you but some of us have jobs and obligations and don't particularly like having our time wasted in a video game we are supposed to be having fun playing because some guy wanted to be an obvious troll and couldn't even be bothered muting character voices if he hated them so much.

Also fyi Square Enix decides what a justified kick is, not you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLittlestLala

I don't think just two people grouping up together should have the ability to bully any single person out of a party.

---

And yet, that's how it works. That's the way it's worked for literally years, and the only way Square can change that is to force people to run things with people they don't get along with.

THAT is the recipe for toxicity, not an outlier "your voice is dumb" kick.

Lord, if they hadn't kicked you I could see fifteen pages of complaining about how "they wouldn't stop giving me crap about my character's voice" in a dungeon you couldn't leave.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

I don't care, if a party didn't enjoy your company you should expect the boot.

Two people agree to kick = justified kick, even if they reason they kicked you seems stupid to you.

---

This I don't get. I've gone into dungeons with friends more then no one at this point. Are you telling me that if *we* decide that other person in our group should be kicked because we said so, then that is fine?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLittlestLala

This may come as a surprise to you but some of us have jobs and obligations and don't particularly like having our time wasted in a video game we are supposed to be having fun playing because some guy wanted to be an obvious troll and couldn't even be bothered muting character voices if he hated them so much.

Also fyi Square Enix decides what a justified kick is, not you.

---

I simply don't care about your obligations outside of the game, since in a dungeon that is utterly irrelevant.

And yes, Square determines what is justified. That is what playstyle differences encompass, and what the voting system is for. Your personal interpretation of the new TOS means less when you were voted out by two people that agree you need to go.

You're simply sour grapes you got voted off the island.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hash_Browns

This I don't get. I've gone into dungeons with friends more then no one at this point. Are you telling me that if *we* decide that other person in our group should be kicked because we said so, then that is fine?

---

Absolutely. The next time you see a tank in crafting gear, you are absolutely welcome to kick them and get someone else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLittlestLala

I don't think just two people grouping up together should have the ability to bully any single person out of a party.

---

I agree, because if 2/4 people vote to kick you, that's technically not the party majority.

Because you don't get a say in the vote, but I think you should, as you are part of the group.

3/4 people should have to agree to kick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

And yet, that's how it works. That's the way it's worked for literally years, and the only way Square can change that is to force people to run things with people they don't get along with.

THAT is the recipe for toxicity, not an outlier "your voice is dumb" kick.

Lord, if they hadn't kicked you I could see fifteen pages of complaining about how "they wouldn't stop giving me crap about my character's voice" in a dungeon you couldn't leave.

---

So you'd be cool with two guys kicking you right before the final boss because their friend wanted to get a quick clear? Since according to you literally any reason to be kicked is justified.

Of course it doesn't matter what your answer is because in the end there are rules in place that SE made and you are not the arbiter of that matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

Absolutely. The next time you see a tank in crafting gear, you are absolutely welcome to kick them and get someone else?

---

A tank in crafting gear is a bit different then a vote kick because I feel like it. You misses the point completely. We aren't talking about someone undergeared or under-preforming. We are talking about a kick for the sake of "f you".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hash_Browns

A tank in crafting gear is a bit different then a vote kick because I feel like it. You misses the point completely. We aren't talking about someone undergeared or under-preforming. We are talking about a kick for the sake of "f you".

---

If you have the votes, you have the kick.

That's the rule.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

If you have the votes, you have the kick.

That's the rule.

---

You are just being purposely obtuse. There is much more to the rules then that.

If there weren't then it wouldn't be possible to get banned for abusing votekick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLittlestLala

So you'd be cool with two guys kicking you right before the final boss because their friend wanted to get a quick clear? Since according to you literally any reason to be kicked is justified.

Of course it doesn't matter what your answer is because in the end there are rules in place that SE made and you are not the arbiter of that matter.

---

Perfectly fine, because a majority of the party didn't want me there.

I'll kindly remind you also at not an arbiter.

I merely say what the game's systems say, and that is if you vote to kick someone you need someone else in the party to back you up for it to be considered justified.

Your kick was justified.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

If you have the votes, you have the kick.

That's the rule.

---

Because it is allowed musn't mean you should do it or abuse it. You are suppose to be old enough enough to judge that some things are wrong.

edit :

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

Your kick was justified.

---

If there are choices when you kick someone don't you think it's because it's gotta be one of those reasons?
I don't remember seeing, "I find it annoying''.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

Perfectly fine, because a majority of the party didn't want me there.

I'll kindly remind you also at not an arbiter.

I merely say what the game's systems say, and that is if you vote to kick someone you need someone else in the party to back you up for it to be considered justified.

Your kick was justified.

---

That's not party majority though. Unlike every other game with a kick system, FFXIV doesn't give a voice to the person being voted on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LyraKuroneko

Because it is allowed musn't mean you should do it or abuse it. You are suppose to be old enough enough to judge that some things are wrong.

---

If it is a problem, Square hasn't seen it as enough of a problem to fix it.

Therefore there is no problem to fix, and kicking someone goes through with one supporter.

You can argue morality and tit for tat, but the game systems are clearly defined and you resent that definition.

Don't blame me, blame what's ingame.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nonuel

That's not party majority though. Unlike every other game with a kick system, FFXIV doesn't give a voice to the person being voted on.

---

As defined, their opinion isn't considered. It doesn't matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

Perfectly fine, because a majority of the party didn't want me there.

I'll kindly remind you also at not an arbiter.

I merely say what the game's systems say, and that is if you vote to kick someone you need someone else in the party to back you up for it to be considered justified.

Your kick was justified.

---

I don't understand why you are so adamant about "SE says so, so it's ok!"

It's not even the OPs story that I'm concerned with, it's the fact that you think that if I gathered a few friends in discord, and we painted the town red by kicking EVERYONE who was the 4th in our group during a night of dungeons that it would be perfectly normal an acceptable, and those people would just have to "suck it up" and move on.



"Obstruction of play
"Obstruction of play" means all behaviour in general that obstructs another person's game play. Below is a non-exhaustive list of examples of obstruction of play:

-Improper expulsion votion
This means excluding another person by manipulation of expulsion voting."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

As defined, their opinion isn't considered. It doesn't matter.

---

It really should.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

If it is a problem, Square hasn't seen it as enough of a problem to fix it.

Therefore there is no problem to fix, and kicking someone goes through with one supporter.

You can argue morality and tit for tat, but the game systems are clearly defined and you resent that definition.

Don't blame me, blame what's ingame.

---

So you're basically meaning that you aren't able to decide what you shouldn't do if you're not told as much?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

I merely say what the game's systems say, and that is if you vote to kick someone you need someone else in the party to back you up for it to be considered justified.

Your kick was justified.

---

Again this is not how it works. The system was made as a tool for players under the assumption that players will behave themselves and not use it for illegitimate reasons, with SE being the authority on what is or isn't a legitimate use. Any time you use this system you are accepting an agreement with SE that you are not abusing it outside of it's intended purpose, and that if you are you are liable to be punished.

Just because an unthinking system allows a votekick to be made doesn't mean it is justified. It's like saying the chat system allows people to type racial profanity so obviously it's not against the rules.

That's why moderators exist to deal with infractions that can't otherwise be solved with automation.

Unfortunately, most kicks for petty reasons are 'justified' by the "difference of play style" rule. However, I found an interesting tidbit in the list of prohibited activities:

https://oi86.photobucket.com/albums/...psica2qghw.png

If taken at face value and completely literally, this means that they may kick you for a difference of play style, but should they actually call you out in chat before kicking you, they are in violation of the rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DumdogsWorld

Unfortunately, most kicks for petty reasons are 'justified' by the "difference of play style" rule. However, I found an interesting tidbit in the list of prohibited activities:

https://oi86.photobucket.com/albums/...psica2qghw.png

If taken at face-value and completely literally, this means that they may kick you for a difference of play style, but should they actually call you out in chat before kicking you, they are in violation of the rules.

---

Of course if taken at face-value and completely literally it also means that kicking anyone for any reason would be against the rules according to the 7th bulletpoint.

I'm not van_arn though so I won't say it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

I merely say what the game's systems say, and that is if you vote to kick someone you need someone else in the party to back you up for it to be considered justified.

Your kick was justified.

---

Its really not that cut and dry especially considering in the dialog box there's a warning that says in red "Warning: Unjustified usage of vote dismiss is a punishable act" so no, just because two people agreed to kick a TheLittlestLala for being a Lala doesn't make it justified.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLittlestLala

Of course if taken at face-value and completely literally it also means that kicking anyone for any reason would be against the rules according to the 7th bulletpoint.

---

Sorry....couldn't help myself. I just had a fantasy of how these improper kicks could be twisted to break the rules.

We need an influx of lawyer players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LyraKuroneko

So you're basically meaning that you aren't able to decide what you shouldn't do if you're not told as much?

---

In saying there's nothing stopping anyone from doing as they please outside of the limitations already in place.

I don't care about what you or I feel is right or wrong; if it's permitted (it is) then it's permitted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SerLuke

Its really not that cut and dry especially considering in the dialog box there's a warning that says in red "Warning: Unjustified usage of vote dismiss is a punishable act" so no, just because two people agreed to kick a TheLittlestLala for being a Lala doesn't make it justified.

---

That's from back when people were stealing loot via kicks. Square fixed it by adding the vote lockout during rolls, along with extending the timer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

That's from back when people were stealing loot via kicks. Square fixed it by adding the vote lockout during rolls, along with extending the timer.

---

The text would have been removed then, its still there for reasons just like TheLittlestLala's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

In saying there's nothing stopping anyone from doing as they please outside of the limitations already in place.

I don't care about what you or I feel is right or wrong; if it's permitted (it is) then it's permitted.

---

This is a bit silly, you are able to spam an emote or a message in shout over and over again, and you can get banned for it, just because you have an ability to do something in the game doesn't mean you can do anything you want to with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

I don't care about what you or I feel is right or wrong; if it's permitted (it is) then it's permitted.

---

The chat system "permits" people to advertise gil selling sites.

It doesn't mean it's actually permitted though. I refuse to believe you are actually not smart enough to realize this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBee

I just don't get it... For the longest time, I would have thought a post like this was a meme post trying to get attention, but in the last year, I've seen so many people being straight up derranged when it comes to lalafells in the game. Making a popoto joke is one thing - haha, roundish small person is like a potato, we all laugh and move on....

But I've met some people that didn't just dislike lalafells - they HATE them. They hate the player models, they hate the sound effects - they most often hate the players behind them too. People saying disturbing things to random people in dungeons and the like...

Not in a "haha, I was just joking" sort of way, but like dude you need to talk to someone kind of way. Played a lalafell for a while (and a tarutaru way back in the day...) and never ran across anything super extreme like that, but I did get quite a lot otherwise.

Maybe they are trying too hard to be funny and it comes across wrong... But it's not funny, and it's not healthy.

Absolutely hope you reported them.

---

I've noticed a slight shift in the community as well. As the game grows, unfortunately we get some bad apples in what is usually a great community.

Everytime I see a "wow refugee" statement, I think to myself that that is the last thing we should want communitywise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLittlestLala

The chat system "permits" people to advertise gil selling sites.

It doesn't mean it's actually permitted though. I refuse to believe you are actually not smart enough to realize this.

---

Rmt is a separate issue, but does it really seem like rmt shouts aren't allowed in limsa? No, it's still going strong because square still permits it through their inaction.

Until the voting system is changed, which you have absolutely no reason to anticipate, you're left with the consequences of the current system: if two people want you gone, you're gone. This is absolute, implemented, and active in the game we play.

A gm night pretend to listen to you in a ticket, but they're not going to get you back into the party. Most likely they'll give you playstyle differences to stop the tears. If, by some absurd stroke of fortune, someone is actioned after your report it is likely going to come from harassment related to the kick in chat and never the kick itself.

Should have, could have, would have don't matter. If the party wants you gone, the party will find a way to get rid of you EVEN IF square disables voting entirely. Take the loss and find someone else if you're unwelcome in a party; you'll have a better time and won't waste some poor csr's time.

Don't feed trolls and they'll eventually starve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HyoMinPark

Honestly, I got it from the mild third-degree I’ve received from you—as if my answer would magically change if you asked me the same question enough times:

---

Interesting recap of our conversation, however taking the position not caring if you are kicked from a party is pretty out there and I wanted to make sure I was understanding you correctly. If you feel this way its fine, but telling others that they should feel the same as you isn't. If OP wants to be upset about being kicked from a party improperly, she has every right to be. Just as you or anyone else has every right not to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HyoMinPark

I’m not bothered by you being bothered by this.

When no one in the thread is saying what that person did was okay or defending the kicker. I think everyone is in agreement that they were stupid for kicking someone for their character’s battle sounds.

---

But you are leaving out what started the discussion between the two of us. I stated that people were defending the action (and currently in the thread someone is still defending the kick) and told op to let her voice be heard. Looking back through your previous posts in the thread I saw no direct defense of the kick so I was a bit perplexed. My point being is that something about my post bothered you enough to start a discussion about it, which I think may have come from a misconception that I was initially referring to something you said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HyoMinPark

You’re free to feel how you want. I am, however, bothered by you insisting that remarks like:

“Don’t let it bother you.”
“Don’t let it get under your skin.”
“Let it go and move on.”
“They aren’t worth your time”

Are the same as people defending someone doing something wrong, though.

It doesn’t take much to tell that these statements are not at all similar. If you cannot understand the difference between a statement basically meant to comfort/give peace of mind and a statement where someone is saying what the kicker did was okay, then again: I really don’t know what to say to you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HyoMinPark

Not letting something bother you is not the same as “being okay” with it, but you seem to constantly equate the two in your counters.

---

Again you still haven't understood the point I was making, I'll try to put it as plainly as possible. Not doing something about a problem, and being okay with a problem both give the same effect, they allow the problem to continue occurring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HyoMinPark

This is my last post because I think I’m close to hitting my posting limit for the day and this thread has gone on long enough with this tangent.

---

Agreed. I'll look forward to more spirited discussions ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TroySoFab

Interesting recap of our conversation, however taking the position not caring if you are kicked from a party is pretty out there and I wanted to make sure I was understanding you correctly. If you feel this way its fine, but telling others that they should feel the same as you isn't. If OP wants to be upset about being kicked from a party improperly, she has every right to be. Just as you or anyone else has every right not to be.






But you are leaving out what started the discussion between the two of us. I stated that people were defending the action (and currently in the thread someone is still defending the kick) and told op to let her voice be heard. Looking back through your previous posts in the thread I saw no direct defense of the kick so I was a bit perplexed. My point being is that something about my post bothered you enough to start a discussion about it, which I think may have come from a misconception that I was initially referring to something you said.







Again you still haven't understood the point I was making, I'll try to put it as plainly as possible. Not doing something about a problem, and being okay with a problem both give the same effect, they allow the problem to continue occurring.




Agreed. I'll look forward to more spirited discussions ;)

---

Is that why politics is in the state it's in? Real world resonance with that statement.