Reasons for Ban

I got three days of ban a week ago for harassment and language. The problem is that I don't even curse to begin with. I submitted an action review request, and after a few days, the only thing they said was you got a ban. They didn't explain what I did wrong or how to prevent it. I tried to talk to GMs in the game, and they all keep saying we can't tell you what you did wrong because it is against our policy. With their new Social Justice Warrior policies, I won't be surprised that the only reason I got a ban is that I disagreed with someone. The only thing I asked is to tell me what words I used and what I was doing for them to ban me, so I won't repeat it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Royalpain

I got three days of ban a week ago for harassment and language. The problem is that I don't even curse to begin with. I submitted an action review request, and after a few days, the only thing they said was you got a ban. They didn't explain what I did wrong or how to prevent it. I tried to talk to GMs in the game, and they all keep saying we can't tell you what you did wrong because it is against our policy. With their new Social Justice Warrior policies, I won't be surprised that the only reason I got a ban is that I disagreed with someone. The only thing I asked is to tell me what words I used and what I was doing for them to ban me, so I won't repeat it.

---

Seems like the ToS claimed their first victim, is it a permanent ban or a temporary? I hope you didn’t lose all your work

Thankfully it was for only three days. I stopped talking in NN or going on roulettes since that what I was doing when I got the ban. I'm not sure if disagreeing with people there was the reason for all of this

We had people who would stalk others around, say disrespectful things in the shout chat, and they didn't get a single ban. The GMs we have here are like another level of not caring about the game. People get a ban for no reasons, and many who break the rules like cheat, fraud, or harass won't get punished at all. It is true what people say that GMs only care about money. I'm guessing that they still ignore you about losing your house as well and won't answer any of your tickets. If what you said last thread is true then I'm guessing this thread will get deleted as well. Best of luck and don't give up until you get your answer

Honestly from what you described this seems like a situation where some GMS are behaving unprofessionally. It makes a bad impression for them and hurts community trust overall. My advice is to make an appeal to technical support or otherwise go through internet/other professional avenues. Especially if you stress you are not looking to cause trouble, have not been looking to cause trouble, and are basically being punished at random as far as you understand they might be more likely to help. You can't even make preventative measures going forward if you don't know what offended in the first place.

Be persistent and polite while reaching out to multiple representatives. Hopefully you'll reach someone who can help. Punishment doesn't mean anything if you don't even know what it's about.

I like to think most GMs are just people trying to do their jobs as well as they can, but I'm sure there are exceptions to that because there are exceptions in every field. Hope you can resolve this! Seeing someone handle things with clarity even if they don't remove the three day ban would speak way better for them.

I understand why the GM doesn't tell you.

If you harassed some one and got reported... Lets say you called some one a "big green lug" (1000x worser ect) and the GM tells you that you said "big green lug" and got banned... You think back... Who did i call a big green lug? Well there was that one person... in my school who i saw in game... or there is that one guy in your FC... And you just happen to know their contacts out side of the game through one method or another....

Next thing you know you are harassing them outside of the game.

You might not be that type of person or maybe it was just over use of the F bomb that annoyed some people in limsa. The GM's don't have any way to tell. Even if they did have a way to tell if you would behave, if they tell you but not some one else who they believe would misbehave that person may think it is not fair. In these cases it best just to have a blanket policy with protecting everyone in mind.

I seriously doubt you're giving all the information because whenever someone comes to the forums going "I got banned and I never did anything" it always turns out that they did. And since you whine about "Social Justice Warriors", it's safe to assume that's the case here.

I've literally never been banned or even got a warning for disagreeing with someone in all the years I've played, so you probably crossed a line. Maybe stop to consider what you say next time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doozer

I seriously doubt you're giving all the information because whenever someone comes to the forums going "I got banned and I never did anything" it always turns out that they did. And since you whine about "Social Justice Warriors", it's safe to assume that's the case here.

I've literally never been banned or even got a warning for disagreeing with someone in all the years I've played, so you probably crossed a line. Maybe stop to consider what you say next time.

---

Well, the OP isn't actually claiming he never did anything. He is saying he don't know what it was he did that got him banned - and thus don't know what to avoid doing in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistakeNot

Well, the OP isn't actually claiming he never did anything. He is saying he don't know what it was he did that got him banned - and thus don't know what to avoid doing in the future.

---

The first two sentences read:

Quote:

---

I got three days of ban a week ago for harassment and language. The problem is that I don't even curse to begin with.

---

>I got banned for language

>I don't curse

Sounds like he's claiming he never did anything to me.

Do want to say that while above points by Oopsy and Doozer seem fair (if either of you read this just wanna say, it was wild to write that with your SNs lol), this seems like a situation where it depends really heavily on the character of parties involved.

If everything OP said is taken at face value, it is a problem. Speaking from personal experience, I have honestly seen people who got falsely accused and penalized before--although not here. That was a big part of why a lot of fans got so alarmed by the updated rules. With too much subjectivity and vagueness, there's room for potential abuse of authority by oversensitive and intolerant people. Sometimes folks twist words to launch serious (but unfounded) accusations against anyone they just don't like, which in turn exploits and weaponizes the good intentions of people who seek to protect victims.

Additionally, with too much subjectivity and vagueness people can't even take preventative measures or stay within bounds effectively because what is considered unacceptable versus acceptable isn't made clear in any consistent way.

If what OP described isn't taken at face value though (like what you two talked about, if OP did actually get nasty and someone was totally justified in reporting) I think you guys have fair points. Idk if having multiple witnesses in a party who are equally possible of having reported might reduce the chances of identifying the offended party?

In general I think having a better block system that's in the hands of players/doesn't require GMs to make so many judgment calls while enabling players to avoid people they don't like would help. It could prevent prospective retaliation better too, although to Oopsy I'd like to raise the point that if someone starts harassing outside of the game that becomes a legal concern and beyond what SE is or should be responsible for. At that stage the person being harassed has responsibility to go to the authorities, because 1) harasser could also be targeting others with illegal/obsessive behavior 2) unfortunately false accusations are a real problem and innocent until proven guilty remains important for this reason. I don't think most players are likely to try out-of-game harassment though, that's super extreme.

Imo it's important to have a clear boundary between someone acting slightly abrasive and a ban-worthy offense. Also more clarity in rules about what would be considered allowed or not. Not how it is currently, but would be nice.

For OP's specific situation the three day ban might be unavoidable, but Royalpain if you sincerely don't know what's going on it's worth raising the point as a concern I think. At the very least it could alert people that this is an issue.

cursing isn’t the only form of language harassment.

That is the problem. What else is considered language that would be harmful? I don't curse or use words that considered worse than cursing. I don't want them to remove the ban I got. I just want them to tell me what I have done wrong, so others and I understand more about their new ToS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doozer

I seriously doubt you're giving all the information because whenever someone comes to the forums going "I got banned and I never did anything" it always turns out that they did. And since you whine about "Social Justice Warriors", it's safe to assume that's the case here.

I've literally never been banned or even got a warning for disagreeing with someone in all the years I've played, so you probably crossed a line. Maybe stop to consider what you say next time.

---

This post right here. I had an unfortunate run in with a player who just casually talked about Russian traps, soy and my wife's son ect. ect. No swearing, but an overall immature and offensive series of comments. FC lead removed them from the FC- and they were called soft, a SJW, ect. Didn't report him, but was it reportable for nuisance behavior? Possibly yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Royalpain

That is the problem. What else is considered language that would be harmful? I don't curse or use words that considered worse than cursing. I don't want them to remove the ban I got. I just want them to tell me what I have done wrong, so others and I understand more about their new ToS

---

Maybe practice some introspection? :v Think back on the things you have done in the past week or so and think what you might have done/said to upset someone? Were you talking about politics? Religion? Trans people? Since you're complaining about the SJWs, I think that it was probably one of those three.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lacan

Maybe practice some introspection? :v Think back on the things you have done in the past week or so and think what you might have done/said to upset someone? Were you talking about politics? Religion? Trans people? Since you're complaining about the SJWs, I think that it was probably one of those three.

---

In fairness, heard there was a situation not long ago where someone got banned because another player kept insisting Omega was trans in a raid chat. When the banned party said they didn't interpret that way, allegedly the person accused them of transphobia and reported. I've seen some people misuse the term SJW in FFXIV over really trivial nonsense, and the person Gula encountered does sound like a brat imo. But hypersensitive extremists who are ready to accuse anyone not in lockstep of bigotry are very much a thing. Tbh just playing FFXIV where there's any concept of beauty whatsoever while not condemning all fanservice would be enough to get us blanket accused of misogyny, body shaming, and objectification in some circles.

While I agree that the most likely case is that the OP used inappropriate language that wasn't curse words, I can see part of their point.

GMs are, by policy, not allowed to give details on the behavior that caused a ban. I don't fault the GMs for following policy, they need to keep their jobs and some of them probably have cats to feed. However, I believe the policy should be changed to allow for more information.

I know the concern is that the offender will know who reported them and be able to retaliate. However, some one who reported once is also likely willing to report again in the event of retaliation, which will lead to further action on the offender's account up to a permaban. And on the other hand, I've known people who suffered account action but honestly wanted to apologize to those they hurt. So I think it will be beneficial to the community at large if more information could be given to ban recipients on the reason for the account action.

Hello Jay,

While SE may not be liable for your action outside of the game it does not mean that they should ignore the possible outcome of their actions. While they may never hear or suffer any repercussions legally it can result in a large PR issue. Some actions taken may not bring up legal or other issue but still servery impact a person. Bullying in schools is a huge issue with very little legal actions taken to correct it. Some retaliation might not be direct, if you are friend with Person A and Person B, they hang out with person C, I meet person C in town and talk but we do not click at all in fact they are like oil and I am water... They touch my reverse scale and say/do something extremely offensive so I report them. This ends up being the straw that breaks the camels back resulting in them getting banned. GM kindly explains the reason to person C and though I am one of many cases they whine about it to Person B and A... Now I have no friends, A lone lalafell is not a happy lalafell. Additionally, I might not report someone if I knew they will know it was me who reported them or maybe I'll think twice about it. If say there is only one time and it was a little harsh of the other person I might forgo reporting them. If they have then do the same in many other cases to other people and none report because they don't want to be known for reporting people, then it is possible many people have a bad experience and new commers to flee from a perceived toxic environment.

As for Innocent till proven guilty, this is a weird concept that is not widely accepted. Even in the US Legal system this may be the case in the court house but until you get to trial most people will treat you as guilty. Even your own lawyer may work under the assumption of guilt. The cops that pick you up make assumptions based off their person experiences and often they respond to a call based off the assumption the callers information was correct. Call first and you get to control the situation. Who started the fight? Well obviously the mother was attacked. She call it in, why would she call in saying she was attacked if that wasn't the case. Though the incident happened after she pushed open the child's door, and placed her hands on their neck... But she has scratch marks on her arms and she did call 911. Certainly she is not lying as we can see obvious evidence of an attack. She even clearly stated the the 3rd child is a liar so why would we believe them or the 2nd child. The 2nd child attacked her after she enter the room obviously lying to not get in trouble. The cops would of course be in the right to tell you that it is wrong to hit a women for any reason, completely ignoring the fact that all you did was pry her arms off your throat and push her out of you room and sit on the door. But innocent till proven guilty right? They wouldn't hold you in a juvenile detention center for 3 month including your birthday.

The US legal system doesn't even apply to in game rules. You agree to Terms of Service. You agree that they will provide you with a service and you will obey certain rules. By violating these rules they can terminate your service. The EUA clearly states the following "SQUARE ENIX MAY SUSPEND, TERMINATE, MODIFY, OR DELETE FFXIV SERVICE ACCOUNTS, CHARACTERS, VIRTUAL GOODS, OR THE SERVICE ALTOGETHER, AT ANY TIME FOR ANY REASON OR FOR NO REASON, WITH OR WITHOUT NOTICE OR LIABILITY TO YOU." in Section 1. This game has no assumption of innocence or guilt. It is not that far in, you should more carefully read the terms and agreements you make when signing up for a game most have a similar clause. It is nice to have light punishments and reasons behind the bans, it would not be a fun environment if we had tyrannical dictators running about. A clear social guidelines might be help full for some users but with out offensive examples that can be a little hard... I do think a nice note to what type of prohibited activity and a link the related terms or prohibited activity post might be helpful in some cases. Here's a link to their summary of prohibited activity http://support.na.square-enix.com/fa...6&id=5382&la=1 It would be great to have mute and friend only chat option so you can only talk to certain people as a punishment for lighter infractions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucerna

While I agree that the most likely case is that the OP used inappropriate language that wasn't curse words, I can see part of their point.

GMs are, by policy, not allowed to give details on the behavior that caused a ban. I don't fault the GMs for following policy, they need to keep their jobs and some of them probably have cats to feed. However, I believe the policy should be changed to allow for more information.

I know the concern is that the offender will know who reported them and be able to retaliate. However, some one who reported once is also likely willing to report again in the event of retaliation, which will lead to further action on the offender's account up to a permaban. And on the other hand, I've known people who suffered account action but honestly wanted to apologize to those they hurt. So I think it will be beneficial to the community at large if more information could be given to ban recipients on the reason for the account action.

---

The problem you have there is that harassment isn't just limited to in-game. Some douche finds out who reported them, they can pursue them outside of the game.

Email harassment, social media, possibly face to face if they know each other IRL, and that kind of harassment is out of SE's hands.

Their policy may seem unusual, but they do it for all the right reasons.

Honestly, any sort of ban involving harassment should require multiple infractions and reports due to the interpretive nature of the violation. The fact that telling a player that they shouldn't be equipping Strength accessories on their Black Mage can be considered "nuisance behavior" and the complete lack of guidelines as to what constitutes "excessive criticism" means telling someone how to do something twice can land you a temporary ban.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jaywalker

In fairness, heard there was a situation not long ago where someone got banned because another player kept insisting Omega was trans in a raid chat. When the banned party said they didn't interpret that way, allegedly the person accused them of transphobia and reported. I've seen some people misuse the term SJW in FFXIV over really trivial nonsense, and the person Gula encountered does sound like a brat imo. But hypersensitive extremists who are ready to accuse anyone not in lockstep of bigotry are very much a thing. Tbh just playing FFXIV where there's any concept of beauty whatsoever while not condemning all fanservice would be enough to get us blanket accused of misogyny, body shaming, and objectification in some circles.

---

I want to assure you, as someone who runs in 'SJW' circles, people who go around screeching about the most minor things being bigotry are a vocal minority. While there's certainly issues of misogyny and whatnot in video games (especially fantasy-themed ones), we don't spend our entire time complaining about it and yelling at people in-game who disagree. The 'SJWs' people oft complain about are a strawman that is extremely rare and/or just someone who hates SJWs and pretends to be a caricature of one to stir up hatred towards them.

But like others have said, OP, cursing isn't the only form of offensive language there is. I can't really go into examples, but they usually relate to -- for lack of a better term -- protected groups, so you need to be aware of what you're saying based on things like race, gender, sexuality, etc. because while you may think it's funny it could be extremely offensive, and not in the "wah I'm offended #triggered" way that people like to make it seem, but it can actually be extremely upsetting; usually because people encounter harassment or language of that kind irl, and really don't need to endure even more of it in a game that's supposed to be fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doozer

--Snip for length--

---

Respectfully, I think you and I might have different standards for what constitutes an SJW.

The spots I come from, I've personally seen "SJWs" commit illegal actions like doxing, forming cyber mobs, trying to get people fired from work, forming professional blacklists, swatting, pushing people to the edge of suicide, promotion of segregation, using slurs against anyone (especially members of underrepresented groups) who disagrees, advocating violence, exploiting those suffering mental illness, committing acts of assault, committing acts of vandalism, going on smear campaigns, looking for acceptable targets for aggression, the list goes on. And all of the things I've mentioned? People will do it over fictional stories to innocent people.

I don't say any of these things lightly, in exaggeration, or without having a huge collection of specific examples to back them up. There's not a trick or a catch where the victims were secretly monsters to warrant the abuse they received. I understand very well how these people went from well-intentioned activism and got twisted into bigots and criminals themselves and I know why they think they're morally in the right for their behavior. It's an ongoing issue and has been for several years. Some of the incidents I mentioned are actually going to court thank god. Being here, I'm currently working to recover from being frankly pretty traumatized by what I've witnessed. The number of people participating in this behavior, where I'm coming from, is alarmingly high too.

I know people misuse both words, but for me personally (and I'm both a woman and a less-visible minority, for what it's worth) I seriously put similar weight on the term SJW as I'd put on neo-nazi. I've had situations where I've been walking down the street and had to honestly ask myself which extremist faction would pose a bigger personal threat. Sometimes there are people who use "activist" as interchangeable with SJW, but honestly I have no problem with regular activists. A lot of my stances could be classed as traditionally liberal, and I'm someone who likes to actively seek out new perspectives in media too. But condemning the abuses I listed above, that alone can make you a target with these people.

I have not seen anyone in FFXIV so far who would constitute an honest-to-god SJW as I know them. I've seen people falsely accuse others of being SJWs, and when that happens I try to point out that they're being ridiculous. I have seen a few people here who are honestly bigoted (mainly targeting Koreans, which I seriously wish they wouldn't) and do know what you mean about people targeting the groups you mentioned. Those things are problems too. In my experience though, the right-leaning identitarianism tends to be (usually) more casual/superficial and limited to a few jerks. Left-leaning identitarianism as I've encountered it is more about systematically destroying people en masse while creating social hierarchies based on what group you're born into.

For the record. The fact that we can have this conversation without accusing each other of stuff and without serious walking on eggshells to me says you wouldn't be an SJW in my book. It's possible to be socially critical and think there's room to improve things without being part of that ideology.

This background is why I'm inclined to hear OP out more too. In other communities it would be extremely likely that they did nothing any reasonable person would find objectionable but had been targeted regardless... often with staff endorsement. My saying that I'm inclined to be more sympathetic to the GMs overall is a really big deal for me with all of this. Any time I say stuff in defense of SE and their staff, it's in light of them being unbelievably kind and professional particularly compared to what I've encountered before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oopsy

--Snip for length--

---

Hi Oopsy, just want to let you know I'm planning to get back to you in a bit! Just did a big reply and all, want to put some thought into my answer for you too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jaywalker

Respectfully, I think you and I might have different standards for what constitutes an SJW.

---

I think the problem is that the term has been diluted to the point that people don't hear it and think of the extreme acts that you're describing.

I've only seen it used as a dismissive term that gets thrown at anyone with a concern for social-justice issues, by people who disapprove of them.

It's the sort of label that might then be gladly "reclaimed" by a group - "you want to call us 'warriors'? We'll take that! We're not giving up this fight!" - completely unaware that some people use that term to describe something quite different to what they're doing.


If you're talking about extremists, you'll need to specify that, because I don't think "SJW" carries that connotation to a lot of people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The_Last_Dragoon

Honestly, any sort of ban involving harassment should require multiple infractions and reports due to the interpretive nature of the violation. The fact that telling a player that they shouldn't be equipping Strength accessories on their Black Mage can be considered "nuisance behavior" and the complete lack of guidelines as to what constitutes "excessive criticism" means telling someone how to do something twice can land you a temporary ban.

---

I think small infractions this might be reasonable to ask for. Bans do not happen with out any form of investigation. They are not banning people purely because the other person did not agree with their political view on global climate change. They could... but I seriously doubt it. Most bans I've heard of like this one were temp bans more as a warning. When you are a child and you say something offensive to another student is it not reasonable for the teacher to separate you from the other children for a while? Even if its the first time you ever said something offensive? I think it is, gives you a chance to think it over and in the future you will be more cautious.

I work at a call center currently, I get 10-50 calls a day. Most are okay but some customers can really grate on me. The next customer might say something that just adds fuel to the same fire. If I come home and watch my Lalafells dance and start getting harassed by some bloke who wants to stand on my lalas it might just wreck my day. I ask them to leave and they insult me... It might be their first time getting reported, but it might have been a big impact on my day. Mind you It is a little over the top example but still you get the point right? Might not be big for the person reported but it could be the proverbial straw. In cases of much worse forms of harassment including those that are race, politically, or sex driven everyone should have a basic understanding that it is socially unacceptable by now. One time is enough. Plus, if SE has 99999 one time reports and someone gets wind of it and they never acted on it... That does not look good in SE's part especially if you see 3 of the most extreme one time reports that happen to be on a similar topic a soar opinion of SE might be formed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

If you're talking about extremists, you'll need to specify that, because I don't think "SJW" carries that connotation to a lot of people.

---

Exactly this. I was there when SJW started getting used, and it definitely started and has continued to be a dismissive knee-jerk term to label someone as overreacting or emotional. If I had a dollar for every time people raved about SJWs because a game developer decided to have a female protagonist in their game, well, I'd be able to buy all those games. Extremists come in all flavors, and it's interesting to me that there isn't a widely used term for the same kind of extremists that are in opposition of SJWs. Funny how that is, isn't it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jaywalker

For the record. The fact that we can have this conversation without accusing each other of stuff and without serious walking on eggshells to me says you wouldn't be an SJW in my book.

---

The fact that people can be considered an SJW based on different things and opinions proves to me that it's entirely subjective whether someone is an SJW or not. Sorry, but I'm nonbinary (specifically genderqueer), gay, and a whole bunch of other things that would instantly get me labeled an SJW by like 70% of people. There's no point in fighting it at this point. But I'm no 'extremist', so until the term gets a concrete definition, it's pretty useless. However, it's very easy to spot people who probably go around being verbally abrasive in an online game if they go around complaining about SJWs, though.

I had a longer response typed but the page ate it when I tried to quote a second person. :c

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

If you're talking about extremists, you'll need to specify that, because I don't think "SJW" carries that connotation to a lot of people.

---

I get you Iscah, and thanks. I have been shifting the terminology I use in the FFXIV community because like you said, people use it differently. Honestly I'd also much rather have the kinds of extremists I'm referencing unheard of here to the point of being considered strawmen than the alternative, it's just been a sort of weird adapting process. From my perspective you guys seem like you're stuck in 2009 haha.

It's also been sort of surreal because of how common the behavior and label use is elsewhere. I've picked up that there are people here who feel terrified to the point of near paranoia that the persecution going on elsewhere could spread to FFXIV, but I've also noticed areas where if extremists did enter they could get an easy hold and cause a lot of damage. I think you guys have some natural deterrents here, like conventionally beautiful body types in-game and using mostly equal-opportunity fanservice instead of none. Part of me is waiting for the other shoe to drop though, because I've seen that happen before. Makes it trickier to tell who's just trying to shut up social criticism and who might have a legitimate issue going on.

I'll keep trying to substitute extremist for SJW or SJ stuff here, but I do want to let you know--in non-videogame and anime communities, SJ will commonly mean left-wing identitarianism. Intersectionality is the way that identitarianism usually gets phrased by the extremists, and the reason it goes bad is because it erases all individual experiences to assume moral character and quality of life exclusively based on demographic. Demographics get judged in ways that are inflexible, absolute, and generalized according to limited parts of the US. It's prevalent to the point that if say, a college course says it uses a social justice lens it can be accurately understood most of the time to promote identitarianism. Extremists who subscribe to that mentality are generally proud of themselves and truly believe what they're doing will help underrepresented groups (even as they beat a pair of Latino marines while calling them racial slurs and accusing the Latino marines of white supremacy, for example) so you might find similar pride in the label with them. I mention this because the extremists are seriously dangerous and I don't want an FFXIV player to run into problems elsewhere because there's a different connotation!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doozer

The fact that people can be considered an SJW based on different things and opinions proves to me that it's entirely subjective whether someone is an SJW or not. Sorry, but I'm nonbinary (specifically genderqueer), gay, and a whole bunch of other things that would instantly get me labeled an SJW by like 70% of people. There's no point in fighting it at this point. But I'm no 'extremist', so until the term gets a concrete definition, it's pretty useless. However, it's very easy to spot people who probably go around being verbally abrasive in an online game if they go around complaining about SJWs, though.

I had a longer response typed but the page ate it when I tried to quote a second person. :c

---

No worries! And yeah I get you on this stuff. It's a pretty messy situation and imo more clarity would be better, but with people in general folks are still trying to figure out how to categorize and communicate these things. That plus there's some social reluctance to admit that sort of extremist is possible. So for the time being we have a lot of use with the too-vague slang and are left to puzzle out what the connotation is there. It's a shame because I think that feeds a divide between folks like you and people in my camp where there's no issue with normal activism or diversity, but the extremism has been causing hell. Sometimes the people I've found who get really angry and upset about far-left discrimination will drop insults like soy-boy for example... while ranting and raging because the far-left was really dehumanizing against their best friend, who is black. I've also seen people do stuff like what Gula described who were just obnoxious and bothering people needlessly. It's a really weird situation, and the way I've been trying to navigate at least is just case-by-case.

I can tell you there's a term for people who are doing the stuff like what Gula described, but it's just as (if not more) useless. "Anti-SJW" usually gets used in my experience, and I actually had some confusion for a bit because for a while I thought it just referred to not liking the extremist stuff. Turns out it's more for petulant people who just don't want anyone else to have nice things.

With OP's situation, that's why I think it's important to still hear 'em out. Sometimes people speak in ways that are more abrasive or less, but there can be any number of reasons and being fair is important I figure.

They should make a seperate thread discussion in which players can ask out in a public why and what for. They don't have to include names, just the the harassment or against policy part. Soon players will be scared to interact with each other if aggressive enforcing tos will be in place like this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jaywalker

I can tell you there's a term for people who are doing the stuff like what Gula described, but it's just as (if not more) useless. "Anti-SJW" usually gets used in my experience, and I actually had some confusion for a bit because for a while I thought it just referred to not liking the extremist stuff. Turns out it's more for petulant people who just don't want anyone else to have nice things.

---

Yes I'm familiar with "anti-SJW", though it's not very widely used, hence what I said. It's funny though, because it initially started as 'anti-SJ' to -- I guess -- oppose the changes that 'SJWs' want, but then it evolved to be 'anti-SJW' to oppose the people themselves. It's easy to see how off the mark they are with 'SJW cringe' videos, because they just pick the ones previously mentioned, the loudest and most extreme ones. You'd never find someone like me in there; not because I'm not an 'SJW', but because I don't fit the narrative of the most cringey and embarrassing actions that they want to showcase as representative of the entire belief system. It's hard for people to accept that entire groups aren't a monolith or hivemind, and have their own morals and ways of communicating and taking action.

But as a piece of advice to OP: If you must openly disagree with someone, consider the language you use. Maybe it's because I'm Canadian, but I always say please and other pleasantries when I'm asking for someone to do something differently. Or if I get spammed with a macro or something I'm like, "Can you not do that, please?" and if they got mad and reported me for disagreeing with them, the GM would clearly see I was being polite. It's very important to consider how you speak to others. People might say that's walking on eggshells or people are too sensitive, but there's literally zero reason to be abrasive or rude. Even if you're irritated, lashing out won't fix the problem. And you don't have to show everyone how mad you are when you interact with them. Something about if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all. When it comes to general interactions with people, I feel like it's important to consider that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oopsy

--Snip for length--

---

Hi Oopsy,

Sorry for the delay! Like I said, wanted to think about this carefully.

I don't think zero action is the answer, but I also think that it's important not to overreact with heavy subjectivity or insufficient evidence because that can go bad really fast too. I also think it's important not to give SE more responsibility than they should have. That both unfairly punishes them if bad situations come up and risks inappropriate action being taken according to what they think will serve the business best. We can see that kind of thing too often with universities already. Criminal acts might get a spank on the wrist while innocent people can be expelled without any kind of hearing.

Looking over your points, my impression is you made a lot of assumptions about the honesty, sincere intentions, and social understanding of certain parties that in practice don't always pan out. When people lie, misunderstand, and/or manipulate they can hurt innocent people. Those innocent people still deserve to be heard and protected. When someone is falsely accused and punished by authority figures, that would be bullying too in my book and it can get deadly serious.

Here's another spin for you. In your first situation, if A and B don't value you enough as a friend to hear you out and stand up for you being bullied, they were not true friends to begin with. Sometimes that does happen, and it sucks a lot. But I think there's a certain level of suck that is just part of life, where you feel really sad about it for a while but ultimately need to pick yourself up, learn what kind of people make good or bad friends, and keep on going with more knowledge for the encounter. People are allowed to not be friends and not like each other, but there's a huge line between that or even some bullying versus extreme, illegal behavior.

I saw someone recently talk about being stalked in-game by an ex-friend. It happened anytime they logged in, made it so they couldn't use the chat function, and displayed their in-game location to the ex-friend. The ex-friend tracks down and identifies their alts and sends inappropriate messages through moogle mail regularly. Apparently (IIRC) the GMs don't know what to do. I would personally say that the accused is crossing a line and should be banned, first for a limited period and then for longer if the behavior continues. I also think this is why block functions are needed. The inappropriate messages might actually get the person in legal trouble, and while in-game stalking I'm unsure I know if it was real life that would be grounds for a restraining order. This situation would be a completely different tier compared to say, someone being a little bit of a jerk in chat one time. I think someone being a little bit of a jerk once should be classed differently from someone being a lot of a jerk, and both should be viewed differently from someone being a serial harasser and/or criminal.

I don't think you get what I mean with innocent until proven guilty thing. To me, "until proven guilty" matters a lot in that phrase and "innocent" would be applied to everyone in the situation. An authority's actions should be, ideally, guided with the goal of protecting the innocent. The innocent might have been the mother calling in an attack but it also could have been the child she was abusing. Presuming the child was guilty purely based on the say-so of the mother would be going against the innocent until proven guilty principle by automatically condemning them. However, if the mother was honestly being abused she would deserve protection. It's important to make sure everyone is safe then examine the evidence to uncover the truth as best we can.

I mentioned in this thread the situation where it sounds very much like someone was banned under false accusations of transphobia. I'm going to try and frame that two ways. First, assuming the ban was justified. Lets say that the accuser admitted to being trans, being comforted by trans representation, or personally considering Omega trans. Someone in the chat starts insulting them, using transphobic slurs, telling them there's no place for them. Really gross, next level stuff. The accuser is upset, reports the person, the person is justifiably banned.

Now consider the alternative. The accuser is an angry, bitter person who doesn't feel a lot of control in their life. This person doesn't engage fiction to connect with others like friends, but because they want to see a character who can stand in for them. Have the adventures and experiences the accuser feels they lack. The accuser doesn't define themself mainly by personality, choices, or interests but by demographic. The accuser is telling a bunch of people in chat about how Omega, for having split into male and female bodies, is trans.

The accused has no problem with trans representation in media, but sees Omega as being a robot conducting an experiment. The accused simply says "Idk, I don't see Omega that way". This incenses the accuser, who feels like by not agreeing the accused is taking representation and agency away from them. The accused is reported for transphobia and wrongfully banned.

But wouldn't the GM have investigated and put a stop to any false accusations, you might wonder? Except there lies the problem. GMs are people with their own biases. In other communities, most people filling the role of GM happen to be filled with individuals in the same line of thinking as the accuser for situation #2. And even if they aren't, transphobia is such a serious accusation that a GM might very well punish an innocent person purely out of fear of enabling transphobia or being called transphobic themself.

If innocent people are falsely accused and banned en-masse, it will kill FFXIV. It has happened in other franchises and properties. Injustice does not benefit SE from a purely practical standpoint and would in fact hurt them financially, because instead of having a fun game environment it creates an atmosphere of terror and mistrust. No one would be able to talk to each other out of fear of offending someone oversensitive. And honestly, an offensive example to show what would not be allowed would be better imo than the alternative. I don't think it needs to be exactly in line with that though, it might be enough to say "slurs are not allowed" for example or "continuing to message, follow, or otherwise stalk another user when requested to stop either directly or by a GM is against the rules".

Will check the prohibited activity info again in a bit, thank you. I think I saw it before and had concerns about some language being imprecise. The mute/friend-only options, and just generally taking steps to just help users avoid people they dislike I think would go a long way to addressing most issues though. Tbh could even have a function that prevents certain users from getting placed in parties together in Duty Finder or Roulette if one party has instated a block.

Omega being Trans could be true or false hard to say, Never asked Omega for its opinion on the matter.
But if you rush in to a raid and say something negative about Omega paired with calling them a transsexual. Or if you imply the reason you are killing them is because they are transsexual. I'm sure that will offend a good number of people. Some people would think it means nothing while others would find it highly offensive. If some one accused Kefka of being homosexual and said lets kill him, would it not be offensive? Sure not to some... but does that make it right? If some one said titan was the N word and that we should kill him, wouldn't most people find it offensive? Transgender does have derogatory terms, though not all know or feel the same way. Though LTGBQ+ acceptance and understanding is still growing many people falsely believe they are using the correct terms. And awareness is not yet to a point where people fully understand. I am not part of this community, though when I was described as A-Sexual in the past I found it offensive. I don't need a label and don't believe love or gender is as simple as one or the other or even directly related. If you want to look into some information on Transsexual terms and what some consider politically correct and not here is a link to an article I believe is useful: https://www.plannedparenthood.org/le...rms-and-labels

I would say if you are going to say something that is funny but touches a topic that can be sensitive it is best to make sure all parties are people who share your tastes in humor or keep it out of the game altogether, discord, ventrilo, mumble, team speak, and/or PS Chat? There are a good number of places where you can be as raunchy as you want.

I admit a lot of jokes, sarcasm, and jesting can easily be taken the wrong way. Banning everyone over everly little dumb blonde joke or your momma joke may be too far, but there is a time and place. FFXIV hopes to be a safe place for all including some minors. The age cut off of 13 still leaves a number of impressionable minds who need protection. The variety of people who play who are of different nationalities, heritages, religions, genders, sexuality, and other classification/labels. The punishment should match the crime and awareness should be spread.

I once worked for Xbox support. They had a shift in policy while I was working there. When players were banned they used to be able to get an explanation from the enforcement team. They would post in the forums and they would get a response with a short explanation. This was not working out, Some of the responses were comical like the blue smurf racism post (Like 3 page story the enforcement team wrote about a historical smurf book, after a user was angry they were banned for modding their characters skin color)... but other just were well straight forward. This took a lot of enforcement teams resources and to simplify they switch to a generic response. When a player got banned they would just reply with the section of the TOS that was violated. This was easier and had a template that could be used. This isn't to say the investigation process changed. They still investigate each claim, some even involve sitting and watching the player or playing with them... They do not ban for no reason but they give a very generic response now. I have known a GM here and they have tools and they do investigate claims. Chat logs and other forms of proof can easily be obtained in most situations. A generic response does not mean there is not a reason or a weak reason. Not that one is required, silly EUA.

We could come up with a dozen reasons to tell people the full reason they were banned and to present evidence of the reason and allow for an appeal or to mount a defense. We could also come up with a ton of reasons to justify vague or template based responses. I do love to debate and feel if I reported some one I would rather they not know, at the same time if I were banned for insulting someone I would have a fair understanding as to why, I do not say much to offend, nor much at all... well okay... maybe Lalafell Master Race may have been said a few times... And I do often say other races are inferior to lalafells and highly recommend people change their race to improve their lives. I am only looking out for their best interests. So If I insult someone I would have some thought as to why, If I was only told I offended someone I would know that I need to tip toe a bit more in the future. If you or others have a hard time raining things in because your beliefs often clash or you have a dark sense of humor or because you are an extremely religious person, or strongly opinionated it might be easier to offend. You may be best keeping to FC private, and linkshells. Though that does not mean you can go above and beyond you are less likely to offend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jaywalker

I get you Iscah, and thanks. I have been shifting the terminology I use in the FFXIV community because like you said, people use it differently. Honestly I'd also much rather have the kinds of extremists I'm referencing unheard of here to the point of being considered strawmen than the alternative, it's just been a sort of weird adapting process. From my perspective you guys seem like you're stuck in 2009 haha.

[...]

I'll keep trying to substitute extremist for SJW or SJ stuff here, but I do want to let you know--in non-videogame and anime communities, SJ will commonly mean left-wing identitarianism. [...] I mention this because the extremists are seriously dangerous and I don't want an FFXIV player to run into problems elsewhere because there's a different connotation!

---

I feel like you might also be biased (in the inevitable way that a person sees what's around them as "normal") about what the correct usage of the term is. Perhaps SJW strictly means those more extreme examples in whatever experience you have, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's the correct or even common usage of the term elsewhere.

I'm not speaking from a little bubble of nothing but FFXIV-ness. I see the term used in discussions on the comments of news sites or other communities. It's not a backwards ten-years-ago thing for people to understand "SJW" as a petty insult and not a serious issue. It continues to get used loosely, and holds no value for describing specific degrees of activism unless you're certain your audience have the same understanding.

Prior to the rise of it as an insult, I understood the term "social justice" as a positive one - and this seems to be supported by the Wikipedia article on that term. It also defines social justice warrior primarily in terms of it being used as an insult - but also that it only began to be used that way around 2011, and was previously considered a "neutral or complimentary phrase".

So no, we're not stuck in 2009 if we think it's a catch-all insult for views that the writer doesn't like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

I feel like you might also be biased (in the inevitable way that you see what's around you as "normal") about what the correct usage of the term is. Perhaps SJW strictly means those more extreme examples in whatever experience you have, but I don't necessarily think that means it's the widespread meaning.

I'm not speaking from a little bubble of nothing but FFXIV-ness. I see the term used in discussions on the comments of news sites or other communities. It's not a backwards ten-years-ago thing for people to understand "SJW" as a petty insult and not a serious issue. It continues to get used loosely, and holds no value for describing specific degrees of activism unless you're certain your audience have the same understanding.

Prior to the rise of it as an insult, I understood the term "social justice" as a positive one - and this seems to be supported by the Wikipedia article on that term. It also defines social justice warrior primarily in terms of it being used as an insult - but also that it only began to be used that way around 2011, and was previously considered a "neutral or complimentary phrase".

So no, we're not stuck in 2009 if we think it's a catch-all insult for views that the writer doesn't like.

---

Social justice has a negative light in an of itself. You can say it has a positive side and has helped some cases, but social justice does not follow any due process and can be founded upon a lie. It is like vigilantes, sure they are trying to do good but should they be the judge, jury, and executioners? Social justice warriors are vigilantes, in some light they are good, but their actions can cause collateral damage and they are not held accountable for their actions. So we should do what they did in The Incredibles and outlaw all super heroes!

In general Social Justic is mostly like Instant Karma. You do something bad, other people hear about it and they treat you with less respect. Do bad things and bad things will happen.

Social Justice Warriors are people who look for injustices (their perspective) and are more verbal and outgoing about trying to put things right by means of public shaming, Excessive and even at time redundant reporting, organizing others to act out against the person(s), or chewing them out.

My definition is also more of the modern ones I think, I did look up information on it (Hate wiki's they are not a reasonable source, please quote original sources from wiki if you use wiki). I found a rather interesting historical take on it: Michael Novak, "Justice: Not What You Think It Is" The Heritage Foundation, December 29, 2009 ruffly a 30 min read. Very different from what we use it for today. Amazing how much a few years can change a phrase.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

--Snip for length--

---

Honestly idek on the bias thing or not. Initially I was going to answer saying "yeah that's probably fair" because my experience has been unbelievably horrible and that'll definitely color opinion, but thing is part of the reason it was so horrible is because I used to be an SJW. My time in SJ basically started off by playing to good intentions, then it took all of my anxieties and worst fears and weaponized those as a way to control my thinking and behavior. "If you don't believe or behave X way you're an unforgivable monster" type stuff. "Intent doesn't matter if someone is offended."

...when I was in it, I remember having a horrific experience essentially kept as an open wound so I would be next level afraid in mundane situations. SJ kept me assuming the worst of people and situations all the time, often using false or dishonestly presented stats. I also remember the movement encouraging me to form a wedge with my family, who got really worried about me and commented that I seemed brainwashed. At the time I thought I wasn't, but in hindsight I absolutely was. I got manipulated and the ideology + social environment of SJ eventually drove me to a really dark place before I got out of it.

I've since lost a relative because of this ideology (one member disowned the rest of my family based on false assumptions of where we stand politically) and a religious community that couldn't resist pushing politics from the pulpit. The religious community handled everything from births, coming of age, and funerals in my family so that was hugely painful for all of us. And the field I dreamed of going into professionally, that I've been training for on a more or less daily basis for over a decade, I've given up on because it hosts a good chunk of the horrifying illegal, extremist activity I mentioned.

The whole thing really has broken my heart on a number of levels, and hurt me in really personal ways multiple times. I've also seen it hurt friends badly. The ones who got out of it (not necessarily going to the right or quitting activism, just leaving SJ) tend to feel WAY better afterward.

Sorry this stuff is heavy and personal and all. Frankly most people when I try to talk about this tend to accuse me of being a straight white guy because I don't like going into too many identifying specifics (my group is considered an acceptable target for extremists on both sides) and they can't imagine someone like me honestly having a problem with SJ. The one time someone put together what my group is I literally got called a slur and accused of being a traitor.

So at this point I have no idea how to evaluate my level of bias. I've caught news stories doing spin and lying about stuff before and am confident about being able to objectively prove that. I also do know there are well-intended people on the fringes of SJ, and I truly worry about them getting exploited and manipulated based on my own experiences. I try to be fair, but idek.

Both sides get so extreme these days though, and criticizing either one tends to result in being pigeonholed in the opposite extreme. Feels like there's not really any place for people like me stuck in the middle just wanting to be left alone. I've put a lot of thought into where I stand on various points, but my opinions really don't fit in neatly to either side. I don't want to infringe on anyone else's life or force them to believe the same things I do (if someone doesn't want to be friends with me or advocate my demographic at this point I don't care as long as they don't make my life harder), but I don't want to be forced to conform either.

Circling back to FFXIV, I guess that's a big part of why I feel the way I do about rule systems though and thinking it's important for OP to get a fair shake. Just don't want bad experiences elsewhere to come here. For what it's worth, I didn't mean the stuck in 2009 thing as an insult or condescending. I meant that things have been so awful for years pretty much everywhere I've been, and I haven't had a community in-general where most people are basically decent like this. Even the way people ague and insult each other is way less threatening and personal overall. I just estimated the last time I saw people being kind the way you guys are en masse to be 2009 or so. This is basically the first time I've gotten a break and it's felt kind of trippy and surreal for me.

I don't mind if people disagree with my positions and all, and to you Iscah in particular I want to let you know from what I've seen of your commenting you seem like a pretty cool and thoughtful person. Like I said, this is a super different environment compared to what I'm used to and idk how graceful I've been with adjusting. But there's no bad-will from me with any of the stuff I post, just getting used to people being more chill without some "gotcha" moment being around the corner.