Regarding the Revision of the Prohibited Activities and Account Penalty Policy

[HyoMinPark]

Correction. It is only dividing the American playerbase. The Japanese playerbase, from what others have said, don't seem to give a crap.

Shocking that Americans are freaking out that they can't be dicks to others now. Whatever will they do?!

Incorrect. The JP thread has posters asking for clarification about the new guidelines because they seem intentionally vague, and one even comments about how the wording seems sly and weasel-like.

Also, in response to someone who posted that the rules need to be exact and much more focused, they actually need to be subtle so that individual context can be considered. If they were exact, people would carefully scrutinize them to find the best way to get around them using the 'letter of the law' rather then intent. Being vague allows the GMs more leeway to truly examine each situation and apply the rules as needed.

On the flip-side, vague guidelines with no examples or concise rules lead to people questioning what exactly is “okay” and what is “not okay”. People keep going on and on about “common sense” and “common courtesy” and “decency” and “manners”, but all of these vary between individuals, as do levels of tolerance for things that may conflict with a person’s personal values/common sense/courtesy/decency/manners/etc..

Considering one of these guidelines literally says “other expressions that offend another person”, it gives the connotation that “anything goes”. Especially nowadays where there’s those out there who are offended by anything and everything. Others are downright difficult to enforce—enforcing statements that go against/offend someone’s “morals”? There are so many morals out there that it will be difficult to even apply this guideline to such a diverse community. “Unilaterally rejecting a person’s opinion”? What do they even mean by this? Because it carries the connotation that we have to be careful even telling someone that we disagree with something they say in the event they lose their mind over it (and this does happen).

Providing more concise guidelines/examples and then adding an addendum of “anything else that GMs consider against conduct policies given the context of the report” is much better than what we have now. Even the JP thread is asking for examples and clarification.