So it appears there has been some Important changes in the way SE deals with complaints between players, harassment, ...
I saw a very well described video by a gamer/youtuber (Meoni) that I leave here to share as I had no idea about these changes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCS0wcSUsLM
Feel free to give your opinion as I believe it might affect us all one way or another
(this video was made by Meoni, check his content, it has improved my experience with the game)
Changes in Safety policy
Printable View
-
02-13-2019, 03:36 AMJibChanges in Safety policy
-
02-13-2019, 03:38 AMRowde
-
02-13-2019, 03:41 AMJib
Lol, I didnt see it at all. Guess I missed it. Sorry about that guys ;)
-
02-13-2019, 03:57 AMCatfishCassie
I agree with most of the policy, but the "Offensive Expressions" portion is troubling to me. No one has a right to be heard, understood, or considered by another... in fact, there are often cultural or other barriers preventing that understanding. So the idea that administrative action can be taken because I "unilaterally reject another person's opinion" is something that I think needs to be reconsidered. If I have an opinion that I have considerably researched and found supportable, and someone else has a contradictory opinion with no factual evidence to back up their contradiction, their opinion deserves to be rejected... I'm not likely to accept it until they can submit some form of evidence to demonstrate why I should change my mind. And while that may not count as "unilaterally rejecting" someone's opinion, the guidelines are vague enough that I can see that being the case.
I also disagree with the portion about "Expressions that significantly lack consideration for another". While I do try to be considerate toward others, I'm not always as tactful as I want to be. Moreover, sometimes my attempt at being considerate toward another person is missed (or sometimes willfully ignored) by someone else who is looking to be hurt and offended. I'm certainly not innocent in this... there are times where I'm mad at someone and want to continue being mad at them as some sort of misguided way of punishing them for something I should've already forgiven them over. Part of the problem, also, is that there is no such thing as universally offensive behavior, no matter how much we might wish there to be. Murder is something that's offensive to most people, yet obviously not to some murderers. Cannibalism is something we'd think would be universally offensive, yet some cultures venerate it with religious respect. If those things can be offensive to some, but not to others, I think we can agree that there is no objective standard of offense. Offense is something taken, not given, and I cannot control nor predict what another person finds offensive. All I can do is react to things that I personally find offensive with as forgiving a heart as possible until it becomes clear that offending me is the point of the behavior. I give people the benefit of the doubt, because chances are they're not trying to be offensive. If they persist... if they refuse to apologize or at least amend and bring the conversation into perhaps a less-offensive manner of addressing the same subject... then I'm going to start to assume that offense, rather than debate, is the goal and act accordingly. That said... free speech isn't about protecting speech you agree with or find fine. If it was, you wouldn't need it. Free speech is about protecting what you find offensive... even hateful. There's a difference between offensive speech and harassment... offensive speech can simply be stating facts or opinions you disagree with, or using wording that you find distasteful, but it gives you the chance to respond and say "Maybe don't use that word...". Harassment is when it continues afterward, after you've made your objections known. But even then, there's a thin line there... perhaps the person is just trying to explain themselves, and explain why they're using that word. Maybe they're not trying to offend, but rather using a word for hyperbolic effect, as happens with many words which we find offensive.
The point is... we can't just police everyone's speech because we find some speech distasteful. The main reason we can't do so is because there's no objective standard by which we can judge that speech. We can, however, police harassing behavior... people continuing to be offensive, for the purpose of being offensive, after they've been asked not to. A good guideline, and a needed change, would be to revert to such a standard... one that does not punish people for using the wrong words but, rather, punishes people for intentionally seeking to offend others. -
02-13-2019, 04:07 AMNedkel
I will now kick instead of saying anyone what they did wrong, and wont use chat at all.
The only thing SE will achive with this is newbies not being able to run a duty, well if they dont care why should i? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Kicking will not be bannable offensive still, but saying someone he isnt playing the right way will get you ban, so pff good luck -
02-13-2019, 04:35 AMRowdeNerp...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedkel
They got that covered.
◆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 voting
This means excluding another person by manipulation of expulsion voting.
This is all being discussed in the other thread already. But yah, if you habitually kick ppl without providing a "valid" reason that could ultimately lead to you getting report for abusing the vote kick system. -
02-13-2019, 04:45 AMNedkelThis means that, you cant kick out someone for free with your friends in party or saying others to kick the X person.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rowde
For sure it could mean many many things, but you are more likely to get banned for harassment in chat than from kicking someone since its easier to prove, thats my guess. xD
Still i dont care i am going to kick players left and right, my tank privilege allows me to. lel