Regarding the Revision of the Prohibited Activities and Account Penalty Policy

[Sigma-Astra]

The people who continue to still go on about the new ToS are more than likely the ones who will be most affected by it because they can't control themselves in a public, social environment.

Seriously, calm down guys. It's not hard to act civilized. There will be cookies.

If you're freaking out in shout or alliance chat and calling people memes, racial slurs, and other nasty things then yes, you should be worried.

[Fyce]

The people who continue to still go on about the new ToS are more than likely the ones who will be most affected by it because they can't control themselves in a public, social environment.

Seriously, calm down guys. It's not hard to act civilized. There will be cookies.

If you're freaking out in shout or alliance chat and calling people memes, racial slurs, and other nasty things then yes, you should be worried.

It's impressive that after 92 pages on the topic there are still people thinking that the only ones who should be worried are jerks, trolls and sociopaths.

Here's the tl;dr: these new vague rules, on paper, can punish "nice people". We need SE to clarify that and tell us and how strictly they want to enforce their new policy in order to make sure that "nice people" won't get impacted. And this is an answer only SE can provide.
Tl;dr of the tl;dr: We want to be sure that "nice people" won't get hit by the banhammer. Also, we don't care about other people's assumptions that it won't happen.

[Sigma-Astra]

It's impressive that after 92 pages on the topic there are still people thinking that the only ones who should be worried are jerks, trolls and sociopaths.

Here's the tl;dr: these new vague rules, on paper, can punish "nice people". We need SE to clarify that and tell us and how strictly they want to enforce their new policy in order to make sure that "nice people" won't get impacted. And this is an answer only SE can provide.
Tl;dr of the tl;dr: We want to be sure that "nice people" won't get hit by the banhammer. Also, we don't care about other people's assumptions that it won't happen.

Nice people won't have anything to worry about if they're actually "nice". Again, spreading this paranoia isn't going to help yourself or anyone else. You're just going to make people more paranoid. If you've never received an in-game ban beforehand from just acting the way that you've been currently, then you're probably going to fine.

There's no reason why everyone has to become chicken little right now.

[Vahlnir]

Nice people won't have anything to worry about if they're actually "nice". Again, spreading this paranoia isn't going to help yourself or anyone else. You're just going to make people more paranoid. If you've never received an in-game ban beforehand from just acting the way that you've been currently, then you're probably going to fine.

There's no reason why everyone has to become chicken little right now.

Pretty much. But any time some sort of change is made people freak out whether it's justifiable or not (this time it is not). That is how it has always been.

[Wolf_Heartnet]

Nice people won't have anything to worry about if they're actually "nice". Again, spreading this paranoia isn't going to help yourself or anyone else. You're just going to make people more paranoid. If you've never received an in-game ban beforehand from just acting the way that you've been currently, then you're probably going to fine.

There's no reason why everyone has to become chicken little right now.

There is no paranoia spreading. He is asking for reasonable changes and making reasonable arguments. I think you and other people need to just stop belittling everyone with an opposing view and actually provide constructive conversation rather than just yelling "FEARMONGER! PARANOIA! ARGUMENT INVALID!" You're not contributing to the conversation, just trying to dismiss everything. If you have nothing to add to the conversation, then don't insert yourself pointlessly into it to end it.

[Sigma-Astra]

There is no paranoia spreading. He is asking for reasonable changes and making reasonable arguments. I think you and other people need to just stop belittling everyone with an opposing view and actually provide constructive conversation rather than just yelling "FEARMONGER! PARANOIA! ARGUMENT INVALID!" You're not contributing to the conversation, just trying to dismiss everything. If you have nothing to add to the conversation, then don't insert yourself pointlessly into it to end it.

In light of what you just said, then you should probably start following your own advice as your post contributes absolutely nothing to the conversation and is incredibly belittling and hostile sounding for no reason. If you have nothing to add other than being a smart mouth towards the conversation, then don't insert yourself pointlessly into it. I bet when your own words are turned around, it doesn't feel nice does it? Don't be a hypocrite about things, please.

The entire reason we're here is because things that weren't punished before will be punished now, and we don't have a clear enough picture of what that actually entails. It's entirely possible that amidst a discussion about the game, you called someones idea "stupid", and they reported you. That would normally be seen as "Negative, but not severe enough to take action." Precisely like what these changes are designed to focus on, said so by Foxclon himself, aka the man who sits beside Yoshida in most of the live letters. And even if you were to trust his judgement, who's to say that his judgement is reflected in each and every GM?

A number of people are dismissing our opinions outright without consideration, describing it as "panic inducing" among other things. No one here seems to think that the sky is falling, or that it will fall if someone gets banned unfairly. No one here seems to be trying to communicate that, either. I propose that many here who are using the term "panic" have an unfair definition of the term itself. Same with "fear mongering".

In a world as varied as ours people are bound to disagree. Ironically this discussion centers around a set of rules that includes a rule to not dismiss another's opinion. I find myself defending that notion, not as a rule, but as an ideal. Surely if you all tackle the discussion with consideration rather than rejection fueled by pre-formed opinions, you'll come out as better people than you were before.

And the rules prior regarding the ToS before the changes were just as vague as beforehand, but a lot of people probably didn't bother to ACTUALLY read them the first time and just clicked the "Yes, I agree" so they could get towards playing the game faster. They literally took the the rules that they already had beforehand that were still vague mind you, tweaked them a little bit, and yet somehow they're still just as vague as they were before. This will blow over in a few weeks.

The only reason people are suddenly worried about the rules now is because they actually made it a Lodestone topic, and that got people to actually read parts of the ToS in more detail instead of just agreeing towards everything blindly in the beginning.

As someone else had said prior, they made these changes to remind people that the ToS does in fact exist and perhaps SE is tired of people ignoring it and acting out against it while creating a toxic environment for other players across all three regions. We don't know how many report tickets get sent in on a daily basis before the ToS revision. Perhaps it was a lot, and so they're hoping that these new changes will curb it.

At the same time, I can understand why the rules need a certain amount of vagueness simply because these are rules that must address the conduct of players from all three different regions with tons, TONS of language barriers. What one country may find offensive, another may not, and so on and so forth.

The rules are probably left vague because it would be either too wordy or impossible to convey all of the types of social culture from different countries, their own morals, behaviors, and how to enforce it without upsetting one region over the other.

For example, "the Japanese players have a different set of rules than we do! That's not fair!". It's left vague for fairness and ambiguity for the GM's more than likely and for SE to have a neutral stance, or at least "appear" to have one in regards to how they enforce players from all three regions: never favoring one over the other in terms of the ToS.

[Wolf_Heartnet]

In light of what you just said, then you should probably start following your own advice as your post contributes absolutely nothing to the conversation and is incredibly belittling and hostile sounding for no reason. If you have nothing to add other than being a smart mouth towards the conversation, then don't insert yourself pointlessly into it. I bet when your own words are turned around, it doesn't feel nice does it? Don't be a hypocrite about things, please.



And the rules prior regarding the ToS before the changes were just as vague as beforehand, but a lot of people probably didn't bother to ACTUALLY read them the first time and just clicked the "Yes, I agree" so they could get towards playing the game faster. They literally took the the rules that they already had beforehand that were still vague mind you, tweaked them a little bit, and yet somehow they're still just as vague as they were before. This will blow over in a few weeks.

The only reason people are suddenly worried about the rules now is because they actually made it a Lodestone topic, and that got people to actually read parts of the ToS in more detail instead of just agreeing towards everything blindly in the beginning.

As someone else had said prior, they made these changes to remind people that the ToS does in fact exist and perhaps SE is tired of people ignoring it and acting out against it while creating a toxic environment for other players across all three regions. We don't know how many report tickets get sent in on a daily basis before the ToS revision. Perhaps it was a lot, and so they're hoping that these new changes will curb it.

My post merely pointed out that YOU contributed nothing to the conversation. There was no hostility in that. It was pointing out YOUR dismissiveness that is still VERY apparent. You just feel offended because I told you the truth of that. Offense can only be taken, not given. The only person who felt insulted here is you and it's pretty clear that you're the only one here with the intent to attack others. My post was constructive with the aim of getting real conversation going while your previous post was aimed at destroying any conversation that was ongoing. Just like this post you have right now where your just trying to insult me for pointing out exactly what you are doing.

Instead of poorly trying to flip my argument against me, you can choose to learn from your mistakes and grow. Your response to Freyt is a good start at trying to be constructive.

[Sigma-Astra]

My post merely pointed out that YOU contributed nothing to the conversation. There was no hostility in that. It was pointing out YOUR dismissiveness that is still VERY apparent. You just feel offended because I told you the truth of that. Offense can only be taken, not given. The only person who felt insulted here is you and it's pretty clear that you're the only one here with the intent to attack others. My post was constructive with the aim of getting real conversation going while your previous post was aimed at destroying any conversation that was ongoing. Just like this post you have right now where your just trying to insult me for pointing out exactly what you are doing.

Instead of poorly trying to flip my argument against me, you can choose to learn from your mistakes and grow. Your response to Freyt is a good start at trying to be constructive.

And here you are still trying to be dismissive of someone else's opinion because it doesn't mesh with your own. Your post was no where near being constructive, Freyt was, but yours was not and added nothing to the debate other than you wanting to make sure your misguided anger got heard. Nothing more or nothing less than that. You offered no form of an idea other than "stop having an opinion that I don't like". I can't feel offended over someone throwing a tantrum with capslock and no, you didn't tell me the truth of anything. All you did was basically stand on a soapbox with a shaky foundation and shake your fist that other people aren't allow to say certain things. You can't police language and it seems like, overall, you're the one who took offense towards what I said in the first place. There was plenty hostility in your post because context does matter and so does the tone of what someone writes.

Again, stop lecturing others for doing something while being a hypocrite at it yourself. You haven't contributed anything so far other than trying to get an argument out of me. And, like it or not, but it doesn't matter how much you scream that my opinion offers nothing, it does because everyone is entitled towards having one and one's own opinion is no more invalid than the next. It offers nothing to you and that's fine, but it still offers something to the conversation, and no matter how hard you want it to be otherwise, you can't magically wish that away.

[StarRosie]

-snip-

I'm sorry to butt in here but I think a different set of eyes would allow a broader perspective. While I'm sure your heart was in the right place with your post and what you were trying to convey, your post did come off aggressive and even like you were brow beating Sigma. There wasn't much I would consider constructive and it came off far more as if you are talking down to people. This is again my perspective but I think maybe dialing back the 'real talk, I just say it as it is.' attitude would go a long way in coming off more constructive rather then arrogant. I would also say that this post is also coming off in a similar vein, from telling people how they are feeling to insisting you are just telling the truth and that the truth somehow offended Sigma. This whole thing just comes off as incredibly arrogant and rude. Again, while I'm sure your heart is in the right place, the execution is less then stellar.

But again, this is merely my perspective, do with it what you please.

-snip-

I think you are missing what I am trying to say. I agree that it could happen, there is no argument there. The rules are rather broad and could hurt the more innocent part of the player base. But it is the insistence that it could happen therefore it will, is where you lose me. I am not saying it will never happen, I'm saying that I think people are over stating the ramifications and possible outcome, while also putting a little too much into the "It will happen" bucket.

Again, to clarify. I agree that it could happen, and we need to voice our concerns clearly. However I don't think it will be to the level some have been billing it as. I am also not saying it will never happen.

Anyways, I'm going to bow out here, because I think we're just going to ultimately argue around each other and I have to be up for wok in 6ish hours. So, I'm gonna hit the hay, and we'll see where things land tomorrow. Have a lovely evening and please understand, I bear no ill will or anything like that towards you and others arguing similar to you. I just mildly disagree with some points. Anyways, I'm rambling. Take care.

[Freyt]

Nice people won't have anything to worry about if they're actually "nice". Again, spreading this paranoia isn't going to help yourself or anyone else. You're just going to make people more paranoid. If you've never received an in-game ban beforehand from just acting the way that you've been currently, then you're probably going to fine.

There's no reason why everyone has to become chicken little right now.

You're just flat out ignoring this:

Under the previous policies, some issues were difficult to address due to them being on the cusp, such as actions that were “Negative, but not severe enough to take action.” Additionally, we felt that the 3-day suspension did not have the desired inhibiting effect for some of the more severe issues.

The entire reason we're here is because things that weren't punished before will be punished now, and we don't have a clear enough picture of what that actually entails. It's entirely possible that amidst a discussion about the game, you called someones idea "stupid", and they reported you. That would normally be seen as "Negative, but not severe enough to take action." Precisely like what these changes are designed to focus on, said so by Foxclon himself, aka the man who sits beside Yoshida in most of the live letters. And even if you were to trust his judgement, who's to say that his judgement is reflected in each and every GM?

A number of people are dismissing our opinions outright without consideration, describing it as "panic inducing" among other things. No one here seems to think that the sky is falling, or that it will fall if someone gets banned unfairly. No one here seems to be trying to communicate that, either. I propose that many here who are using the term "panic" have an unfair definition of the term itself. Same with "fear mongering".

In a world as varied as ours people are bound to disagree. Ironically this discussion centers around a set of rules that includes a rule to not dismiss another's opinion. I find myself defending that notion, not as a rule, but as an ideal. Surely if you all tackle the discussion with consideration rather than rejection fueled by pre-formed opinions, you'll come out as better people than you were before.