Tank entitlement vs group entitlement

[Mavrias]

These messages do not provide anything I asked for.

look, man, if you'd rather cherrypick than use basic reading comprehension, thats on you not on me. you asked for where i saw differing playstles and where it said the party is allowed to remove other players they dont wish to play with and i gave it to you. heck, the third one literally says verbatim "this feature is in place for a party to collectively decide whom they wish to play with."

personally, i dont really care what those players think. they can report at their leisure if they get kicked, if something happens as a result then it happens. but in my personal experience it doesn't.

my entire stance in this near 50 page thread is "if the party doesnt want to play with you, they dont have to. if they ask you to try something and youre unwilling to attempt it, you shouldnt be surprised that they may decide to kick you." youre applying weird motivations to me that i havent said. never said anything about requiring healer dps and honesty havent said anything about big pulls other than in the OP's context (which again boils down to working with your party if theyre asking you to do so).

[Physic]

look, man, if you'd rather cherrypick than use basic reading comprehension, thats on you not on me. you asked for where i saw differing playstles and where it said the party is allowed to remove other players they dont wish to play with and i gave it to you. heck, the third one literally says verbatim "this feature is in place for a party to collectively decide whom they wish to play with."

personally, i dont really care what those players think. they can report at their leisure if they get kicked, if something happens as a result then it happens. but in my personal experience it doesn't.

my entire stance in this near 50 page thread is "if the party doesnt want to play with you, they dont have to. if they ask you to try something and youre unwilling to attempt it, you shouldnt be surprised that they may decide to kick you." youre applying weird motivations to me that i havent said. never said anything about requiring healer dps and honesty havent said anything about big pulls other than in the OP's context (which again boils down to working with your party if theyre asking you to do so).

thing is, you said that was an old response, the new TOS says that even talking about forcing a playstyle maybe actionable, so kicking for playstyle may not be a thing anymore. i'll look for the quotes, sec.

■Nuisance behaviour
"Nuisance behaviour" means speech or behaviour that hurts others or obstructs game play, but which is not classified as harassment. Even if it was not the intention, a penalty may be imposed if the end result was that another person was hurt or obstructed.

Below is a non-exhaustive list of examples of nuisance behaviour:

◆Offensive expression
"Offensive expression" means an expression in general that inflicts emotional distress by being offensive to another person. Offensive expression may include:

・Aggressive expressions such as violent language/slander/insult/threat.
・Expressions that provoke or belittle another person, such as excessive criticism, negation/ridicule
・Expressions that significantly lack consideration for another person
・Expressions that unilaterally reject another person's opinion
・Expressions that any reasonable person would find offensive
・Expressions that compel a playing style
・Expressions that attempt to unilaterally exclude someone from the game or content/community, etc.
(Except when in accordance with rules set by an administrator such as a Free Company Master)
・Expressions that contravene public order and morals
・Other expressions that are offensive to another person

so, expressions that compel a playingstyle are nuisance behavior, which if it is found to be extremely hurtful, or obstructive can lead to action.

here they explain some obstructive behavior, which on its own is actionable.

◆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:

・Spamming
This means using chat (including Quick Chat and Emote) to obstruct another person's conversation, or obstruct the use of mog letters, etc., for example, by sending an excessive number of unnecessary items in mog letters, etc. Even if obstruction was not the objective of the behaviour, it may be deemed a violation if another player is actually obstructed by the behaviour.

・Obstructing transit/progress
This means obstructive behaviour such as group blocking of passages or facilities along which many players pass or obstructing another person's game play progress, for example by overlapping an important NPC deliberately for a long time.

・Improper expulsion voting
This means excluding another person by manipulation of expulsion voting.

・Intentional leaving or disconnection
This means obstructing another person's game play by intentionally leaving the game or disconnecting from the server.

・Other obstruction of play
This means all other behaviour that deliberately obstructs another person's game play by some means.

i think kicking someone from an instance is on par, especially if leaving the party can be seen as obstructive.

seems the gms probably needed more in the TOS to cover them taking action.


also id like to point out, premades in discord kicking some guy to get their discord guy in, is pretty much manipulation of expulsion voting. Which is one reading of the story in the OP.

[Mavrias]

thing is, you said that was an old response, the new TOS says that even talking about forcing a playstyle maybe actionable, so kicking for playstyle may not be a thing anymore. i'll look for the quotes, sec.






so, expressions that compel a playingstyle are nuisance behavior, which if it is found to be extremely hurtful, or obstructive can lead to action.

here they explain some obstructive behavior, which on its own is actionable.




i think kicking someone from an instance is on par, especially if leaving the party can be seen as obstructive.

seems the gms probably needed more in the TOS to cover them taking action.


also id like to point out, premades in discord kicking some guy to get their discord guy in, is pretty much manipulation of expulsion voting. Which is one reading of the story in the OP.

thing is, i dont see "we dont see eye to eye so lets go our seperate ways" as the same thing as compelling a playstyle. and since square is choosing not to elaborate further with how their new ToS interacts with the differing playstyle retoric, we can only assume that it has not changed.

i dont think that they queued with the intention to kick the pug tank, just that thats where it led and they had another tank in discord that they could call on.

[Physic]

thing is, i dont see "we dont see eye to eye so lets go our seperate ways" as the same thing as compelling a playstyle. and since square is choosing not to elaborate further with how their new ToS interacts with the differing playstyle retoric, we can only assume that it has not changed.

i dont think that they queued with the intention to kick the pug tank, just that thats where it led and they had another tank in discord that they could call on.

the latest law is going to be the one you hold people to. They say that compelling a playstyle is bad now. Thats the new rule.

And its not a case of lets go our seperate ways, its a case of you lose your progress and i keep my progress. If they cloned the instance on kick, it would be as you say, no big deal. But this is two players being able to control the dungeon, and punish players, just because they fired off vote kick first.

[Mavrias]

the latest law is going to be the one you hold people to. They say that compelling a playstyle is bad now. Thats the new rule.

And its not a case of lets go our seperate ways, its a case of you lose your progress and i keep my progress. If they cloned the instance on kick, it would be as you say, no big deal. But this is two players being able to control the dungeon, and punish players, just because they fired off vote kick first.

those two "laws" are not mutually exclusive.

being kicked is not a punishment. stop taking it so personally. your progress is not lost, you can queue again with zero time penalty unlike if you chose to leave the instance.

the one time i got kicked as when i first started healing at level cap. i accidentally let the tank die, he said he was gonna kick me, and then he did. you know what i did in response? i just requeued.

[Feidam]

those two "laws" are not mutually exclusive.

being kicked is not a punishment. stop taking it so personally. your progress is not lost, you can queue again with zero time penalty unlike if you chose to leave the instance.

the one time i got kicked as when i first started healing at level cap. i accidentally let the tank die, he said he was gonna kick me, and then he did. you know what i did in response? i just requeued.

If it was one death and not repeated deaths in excess then that tank was just being a jerk. And that kick shouldn’t have happened. Yes you just queued and continued because at that point it is all that is left to you.

I would definitely blacklist that tank.

[Mavrias]

If it was one death and not repeated deaths in excess then that tank was just being a jerk. And that kick shouldn’t have happened. Yes you just queued and continued because at that point it is all that is left to you.

I would definitely blacklist that tank.

aye, just the one death. he decided he didnt want to play with me and apparently the dps agreed so i was swiftly booted. that party just wasnt the one for me. no harm, no foul.

apparently the other option i had left to me was to report him and consider quitting healing.

[Physic]

those two "laws" are not mutually exclusive.

being kicked is not a punishment. stop taking it so personally. your progress is not lost, you can queue again with zero time penalty unlike if you chose to leave the instance.

the one time i got kicked as when i first started healing at level cap. i accidentally let the tank die, he said he was gonna kick me, and then he did. you know what i did in response? i just requeued.

your progress is literally lost.

you lost your queue time, and you wasted however long you were in the dungeon. The loss of progress is not debateable. you can claim that losing 10-25 minutes is no big deal, but if thats the case, there isnt much reason to kick some one to save 5 minutes. And also, why not just ask them vote kick you.

Its objectively taking some ones time, and it doesnt require the majority of people to agree. Its biased towards the iniatitor. 2 People have a disagreement, and one gets to vote and the other doesnt.


Just because you dont care if you got kicked doesnt mean its not a loss of progress.

[Mavrias]

your progress is literally lost.

you lost your queue time, and you wasted however long you were in the dungeon. The loss of progress is not debateable. you can claim that losing 10-25 minutes is no big deal, but if thats the case, there isnt much reason to kick some one to save 5 minutes. And also, why not just ask them vote kick you.

Its objectively taking some ones time, and it doesnt require the majority of people to agree. Its biased towards the iniatitor. 2 People have a disagreement, and one gets to vote and the other doesnt.


Just because you dont care if you got kicked doesnt mean its not a loss of progress.

no offense, but i dont really consider having to kill a bunch of trash mobs and maybe an easy boss again "resetting my progress." neither is losing 10-25 minutes in a game in which i have hundreds of hours played. and if youre at levelcap you have at least ten (assuming a level/ story skip pot was used.)

[Gemina]

look, man, if you'd rather cherrypick than use basic reading comprehension, thats on you not on me. you asked for where i saw differing playstles and where it said the party is allowed to remove other players they dont wish to play with and i gave it to you. heck, the third one literally says verbatim "this feature is in place for a party to collectively decide whom they wish to play with."

personally, i dont really care what those players think. they can report at their leisure if they get kicked, if something happens as a result then it happens. but in my personal experience it doesn't.

my entire stance in this near 50 page thread is "if the party doesnt want to play with you, they dont have to. if they ask you to try something and youre unwilling to attempt it, you shouldnt be surprised that they may decide to kick you." youre applying weird motivations to me that i havent said. never said anything about requiring healer dps and honesty havent said anything about big pulls other than in the OP's context (which again boils down to working with your party if theyre asking you to do so).

What are you even talking about? Don't use arguments such as, "if you can't use basic reading comprehension" if you, yourself are incapable of such. You stated that the kick feature is a tool to remove a party member via majority rule, and asked you to provide something that validates this as anything more than just your opinion. You were unable to do so. I'm not cherrypicking. I'm providing sources and facts. A GM's inability to act does not prove that this system is being used as intended.

You basically came here and said the cure for having anxiety as a tank is to not tank at all. At least not for randoms. This couldn't be more dismissive of the issue at hand. You then come back and say that you are not saying that anyone has more or less right to use the duty finder. If I'm confused, then it might have something to do with your contradictive statements and not my inability to comprehend them.

If your whole stance is if the party doesn't want to play with you, they don't have to; then that's fine. I have no quarrel with that or with you. I completely understand that this is your opinion. And for the record, I didn't bring up big pulls and healer DPS because you stated them yourself, but because they are the crux of the expectations in these discussions. I should not have put them in the same response to you. That was not necessary and for that I do apologize.