GM Warning for 'Offensive Language', No actual reason given

[JohnSpawnVFX]

Except that it contradicts what it says that if disagree you may terminate but doesnt say you must. So it means you can disagree and continue playing. I was only informed of the old rules and agreed to those old rules but not the new rules. So theres nothing else that can be done unless I am forced to click agree.

It's the same as paying bills. You're not forced to open the letters and pay the bills (agreeing to the ToS), but if you don't there'll be consequences.

I respect that you are trying to explain your viewpoint of the rules to me but there is nothing solid here to make me side with your argument. I can agree to disagree for now.

It says you "may" and not "must" because they can't force people to uninstall. But if you keep playing while not agreeing and you end up breaking the ToS, you're liable to get punished.

[Wolf_Heartnet]

It says you "may" and not "must" because they can't force people to uninstall. But if you keep playing while not agreeing and you end up breaking the ToS, you're liable to get punished.

It says "may" and not "must" because you are allowed to continue playing without agreeing. If they wanted you to agree so bad, they would make a pop-up in the login screen to force you to agree. Also, continued play of the game will not result in you getting punished because it's not the players fault for any incompetence on squares part.

[JohnSpawnVFX]

It says "may" and not "must" because you are allowed to continue playing without agreeing. If they wanted you to agree so bad, they would make a pop-up in the login screen to force you to agree. Also, continued play of the game will not result in you getting punished because it's not the players fault for any incompetence on squares part.

Like I said, "may" is just because legally they can't use "must". They have no way to force you to uninstall or implement software to automatically uninstall the game. They're just saying "If you don't agree to the ToS, keep playing and end up breaking it, we'll punish you all the same."

It's not SE's fault players choose not to read the information they present. You realize you're not the first person in history to present this point, right? You can't ignore the ToS at will and pretend you weren't informed. They'll terminate your account at worst and if you go to court, you have no leg to stand on.

[GenBroadaxe]

Except that it contradicts what it says that if disagree you may terminate but doesnt say you must. So it means you can disagree and continue playing. I was only informed of the old rules and agreed to those old rules but not the new rules. So theres nothing else that can be done unless I am forced to click agree.

I respect that you are trying to explain your viewpoint of the rules to me but there is nothing solid here to make me side with your argument. I can agree to disagree for now.

Think of like you're calling a 1-800 number for support. The company states up front that they record calls for quality monitoring. As the owners of that phone line, they're legally allowed to do so and the reason they mention it before you get to a support rep is so people who don't want their calls to be recorded to hang up. If you continue on past that disclaimer and use the service, you've agreed to the terms of use and have no legal standing to have that call erased.

Same thing with TOS for games. There's a reason they announce it beforehand and it's so people can see it and determine if they want to abide by those terms or leave. And I will 100% guarantee that any changes to the TOS have been vetted by SE lawyers to confirm that it would hold up in case any person who received a punishment for breaching them decided to sue or write a state attorney general to complain.

[Wolf_Heartnet]

Like I said, "may" is just because legally they can't use "must". They have no way to force you to uninstall or implement software to automatically uninstall the game. They're just saying "If you don't agree to the ToS, keep playing and end up breaking it, we'll punish you all the same."

It's not SE's fault players choose not to read the information they present. You realize you're not the first person in history to present this point, right? You can't ignore the ToS at will and pretend you weren't informed. They'll terminate your account at worst and if you go to court, you have no leg to stand on.

And like I am saying "may" is just saying that you can continue to play the game without agreeing. If they don't want you playing the game then they can either take away this part completely so that their rules make more sense or keep it there and allow us to continue playing. Like I said before, they cannot punish you for their incompetence.

Also, I am not ignoring the ToS at will and my argument is not that. My argument is that they have the choice to make us agree by presenting it to us at login and forcing us to agree. They chose not to. Theres plenty leg to stand on for this, you're just choosing to ignore what is presented here which is fine. You're interpretation is clearly different from mine but that is an interpretation that is allowed in the terms that have been presented to us. If you want more clear terms then you can make a thread about that but as we have argued already, there is room to continue playing without agreeing and this is a case where square has worded things in a way to allow us to play without agreeing.

[enthauptet]

TEEN

Content is generally suitable for ages 13 and up. May contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling and/or infrequent use of strong language.

Strong Language - Explicit and/or frequent use of profanity
Suggestive Themes - Mild provocative references or materials
Crude Humor - Depictions or dialogue involving vulgar antics, including "bathroom" humor

https://www.esrb.org/ratings/ratings_guide.aspx

https://filmratings.com/Content/Down...ting_rules.pdf

Film rating for PG-13 allows for 1 f bomb as well.


Not counting that the games rating allows for profanity, the SE policy ishould be descriptive of what is unacceptable. Any corporate policy for employees will have this in place.

[Izanagi_Fiaresu]

Right. So only speaking in regard to RP. I play a fouled mouth mercenary that's an Alcoholic and kinda a bigot..I have yet to be actioned or even warned..I think RP wise they look at it in context

[Astarotha]

Like I said, "may" is just because legally they can't use "must". They have no way to force you to uninstall or implement software to automatically uninstall the game. They're just saying "If you don't agree to the ToS, keep playing and end up breaking it, we'll punish you all the same."

It's not SE's fault players choose not to read the information they present. You realize you're not the first person in history to present this point, right? You can't ignore the ToS at will and pretend you weren't informed. They'll terminate your account at worst and if you go to court, you have no leg to stand on.

one reason blizzard does this right is that EVERY time they update the TOS they make you reread (or at least scroll to the bottom) and reagree to the terms, changing the rules but not telling you whats changed or making you agree to them is a huge legal no no in the us, and this may come down to differences in japanese vs us contract law causing confusion but that doesnt matter, us version of the game, us law applies, and LEGALLY you CAN NOT CHANGE OR BREAK A CONTRACT ON A WHIM, YOU MUST REGAIN CONSENT for the changes to apply because its now a new contract, otherwise i could have you sign a legally binding contract that says "you agree to not post X imagery here" and then change it later to "i lay claim to everything you own" and it be just as valid

and thats before we get into all the illegal stuff corporations try to get away with in contracts/eulas that got caught like warranty stickers, throttling services with the intent to extort money from their vendors, and price fixing/bid rigging, so contracts in and of themselves are not above the law as much as they try to make them out to be

[Ceridwenae]

TEEN

*game age rating stuff*

It's good to include this as it's constructive to the discussion, but I'm going to counter a little: that rating is to cover the content of the game; in terms specifically of profanity, profanity is not directed at the player directly (the WoL - the player character - yes, but never the player themselves). It cannot conceivably cover what players themselves will do, how they will speak to others or in the "earshot" of others, therefore there's a ToS which tells you what's expected of you. Yes, it may be vague, but read on as to why that might be:

In terms of profanity again, the general legal approach to "offensive language"* is any profanity in a public space, to or in the earshot of others, with the intent to distress, threaten or abuse others, and can be deemed a public order offence (your local laws may vary on the name or the nature but it's broad strokes here for brevity). Given profanity is aggressive by its very nature, intent can easily be misconstrued. You can even be charged for a public order offence for this as an actual crime, though what happens will really depend on a case-by-case basis. You can receive a prison sentence in in the worst scenario. It's also a huge gray area as different countries, jurisdictions and so one can and will have differing approaches, which probably means all SE can do is be vague. The ToS is their best legal workaround, and they deal with reports the only feasible way they can.

At the bones of it, we can argue all we want about SE's practices, but they're governed by larger legal practices - they are beholden to the law, they do not make the laws - and it's those we really should be looking at. I also would say we have more pressing matters given:

What we can and should do regardless is to each take responsibility for how we conduct ourselves in a public space. We can argue at the age of 13 (or 15, 16, location dependent), we all know what profanity is, and we all know how to conduct ourselves with decorum.

As I said earlier in this thread, everyone's best bet is to shup if they can't utter a sentence in a public space** without swearing. Keep it for the people you know in your FCs / linkshells / wherever you feel you know people well enough and they know you. Again, we all know what profanity is, so it really shouldn't be too hard to keep it for our loved ones. I know I do!


*I've taken a very swift look today at US, UK & Australian law regarding this, but I am not an expert and would expect this to be more complicated than my quick summation. I would love some input by an actual lawyer with experience in this field. Note once again not just countries, but jurisdictions within those countries will have different approaches to how to deal with offensive language.

** This game is a public space, if that even needed to be said.

[JBee]

On one hand, I get that they don't want to escalate something into something worse... If you were reported for calling someone "a purple nosed loquat" - well, I doubt that you've called something that more than once. You know immediately who did it, and you could take that information and try to retaliate, especially if you felt that there is nothing wrong with a purple nosed loquat. Likely, you wouldn't retaliate in game, but you might try other places, like Discord or Reddit or whatever. And now that person is upset, and it gets worse again.

On the other hand, how can you correct something if you don't know what you did wrong? Can't correct behavior without the incorrect behavior - or at least it's significantly harder to.

No win situation.

And from their perspective, they are following their own rules and regulations. Probably a blanket no was instated to prevent any issues escalating - when if the offending thing was "dark humor in shout" or something, would be innocent enough to relay... Shout has a lot of witnesses. But then where does that line of "this is ok to disclose, this is not" fall? Best to protect all sides, I guess.

But yeah. Messed up.