Recent Developments of TOS Actions Taken

[ForteNightshade]

So, are we mad they are finally enforcing things they should have been or are we mad that streamer guy we liked who was a complete and utter jerk got banned for it?

I wager the majority are mad at the lack of consistency. Arthars is merely the catalyst for that argument. If he can be banned based off a twitch vod. All players should be subjected to that same criteria; i.e. people can stream botters, speed hacks and etc to show evidence of those players cheating.

If this is merely a one off, then it shows a blatant double standard. They'll punish someone for being a jerk but not someone for cheating. Why? Because the guy being a jerk is more popular on a third party platform.

[Melichoir]

I wager the majority are mad at the lack of consistency. Arthars is merely the catalyst for that argument. If he can be banned based off a twitch vod. All players should be subjected to that same criteria; i.e. people can stream botters, speed hacks and etc to show evidence of those players cheating.

If this is merely a one off, then it shows a blatant double standard. They'll punish someone for being a jerk but not someone for cheating. Why? Because the guy being a jerk is more popular on a third party platform.

They punished him not cause hes popular, but because his actions have a direct impact on another player and he was (IMO) trying to be cute and clever by doing this in a live stream and not in game with the impression that he would not get punished for it cause 'its not in game'. He was completely ignoring the fact that the point of anti parser ToS is to stop harassment but still did it thinking he would use the literal rules to be safe. If you want to argue he did get made an example of, thats fine, but lets not try and be cute and say "WELL SE SHOULDNT HAVE DONE THIS CAUSE NO RULES WERE VIOLATED!" Because if we want to really have a system where everything is clearly labeled and spelled out with no room for interpretation, thats gonna create inflexibility for SE and their response to that will be to create very harsh and draconian ToS.

For all the "SE has to be clear about the rules" shtick, it typically overlooks that Parsing is against the ToS but SE turns a blind eye to it for our sake. Being too specific is just as bad as being overly vague. At the end of the day, he used his parser and streaming power to go after a specific player publicly. We dont live in the 90s. He knew that this would rile up some of his viewers and cause trouble for that player. Frankly, if he was a real boss about things, hed just have the anatomy to talk that smack in game and deal with it. But he wanted to have his cake and eat it too.

[Seddrinth]

They punished him not cause hes popular, but because his actions have a direct impact on another player and he was (IMO) trying to be cute and clever by doing this in a live stream and not in game with the impression that he would not get punished for it cause 'its not in game'. He was completely ignoring the fact that the point of anti parser ToS is to stop harassment but still did it thinking he would use the literal rules to be safe. If you want to argue he did get made an example of, thats fine, but lets not try and be cute and say "WELL SE SHOULDNT HAVE DONE THIS CAUSE NO RULES WERE VIOLATED!" Because if we want to really have a system where everything is clearly labeled and spelled out with no room for interpretation, thats gonna create inflexibility for SE and their response to that will be to create very harsh and draconian ToS.

For all the "SE has to be clear about the rules" shtick, its typically overlooks that Parsing is against the ToS but they turn a blind eye to it for our sake. Being to specific is just as bad as being overly vague.

Follow the money. Bottom line is SE cares about subscription and revenue, as any company should. Arthars suspension was inconsistent on SE's part but was probably done to protect FF14's image of being welcoming to casual players. Casual players pay the majority of the bill. The same thing with Parsers- if SE started banning everyone who used parsers, so many people would stop playing. The "use it but don't harrass people with it" rule was to keep parsing players paying the sub, and to keep casual players playing as well who might be turned off if people give them a hard time about their dps numbers. So of course SE hasn't been consistent in enforcing their ToS/rules, but from a revenue perspective, SE is always consistent in doing what they can to protect their brand. I'm not saying it's wrong or right, just how it is.

[ForteNightshade]

They punished him not cause hes popular, but because his actions have a direct impact on another player and he was (IMO) trying to be cute and clever by doing this in a live stream and not in game with the impression that he would not get punished for it cause 'its not in game'. He was completely ignoring the fact that the point of anti parser ToS is to stop harassment but still did it thinking he would use the literal rules to be safe. If you want to argue he did get made an example of, thats fine, but lets not try and be cute and say "WELL SE SHOULDNT HAVE DONE THIS CAUSE NO RULES WERE VIOLATED!" Because if we want to really have a system where everything is clearly labeled and spelled out with no room for interpretation, thats gonna create inflexibility for SE and their response to that will be to create very harsh and draconian ToS.

For all the "SE has to be clear about the rules" shtick, it typically overlooks that Parsing is against the ToS but SE turns a blind eye to it for our sake. Being too specific is just as bad as being overly vague. At the end of the day, he used his parser and streaming power to go after a specific player publicly. We dont live in the 90s. He knew that this would rile up some of his viewers and cause trouble for that player. Frankly, if he was a real boss about things, hed just have the anatomy to talk that smack in game and deal with it. But he wanted to have his cake and eat it too.

That isn't what I said.

I said if they're going to use Twitch videos as evidence now, when they haven't in the past. It should apply to everyone, regardless of their popularity or verification status on Twitch. If I go and record someone botting right now and submit that evidence to a GM, the botter should be dealt with accordingly. If they opt to ignore it or fall back on "we cannot accept outside evidence," it shows a blatant double standard. Put another way, they would be picking and choosing when they want to enforce their ToS outside the game. And in this hypothetical, it'd be when a popular Twitch streamer potentially hurt their image compared to an otherwise unknown botter or speed hacker cheating. Not exactly a good look for their moderation.

As for parses. Lets be honest. They tolerate them out of necessity. If they were to ever ban ACT or FFlogs at this junction, their raid scene will die. And they know it. Not to mention, people would just go underground with that information. ACT and FFlogs essentially give them the same benefits WoW has but none of the responsibility since they can always say "you shouldn't be using it."

[Melichoir]

snips

I oversimplified what you said, so sorry bout that. And yes, you are right. It shouldn't matter how big your channel size is. If youre gonna be a jerk and post names and what not to start crap on public streams to directly impact another player, than that should be addressed; channel size shouldn't be a factor.

As for botting, thats a separate issue. Here's the distinction and why it matters. In this case, we have a specific player (arthars) being an ass to another player and using his parsing and streaming to publicly shame another player. He is the one doing the aggression and recording himself doing it. This isnt like recording a botter or hacker. In that case, you are providing evidence on another player's wrong doing from your perspective and there is some level of possibility that things are being skewed or framed in a bad faith way. Let me try to frame this another way: There is a difference between you recording yourself running a red light and bragging about it, and someone taking a picture of a person crossing an intersection on what appears to be a red light. That red light in the picture could be a broken traffic light blinking red intermittently. The picture in of itself is not inherently indisputable evidence of wrong doing. And thats why SE doesnt typically use player provided evidence on another player because theres a chance of it being tainted evidence. But I also wouldnt be surprised that while they wouldnt ban on it, they may investigate it quietly themselves if there are enough compelling reports.

As for parses, it doesnt matter if its bad for SE, or its for money, or whatever. They have rules and they bend those rules for our sake. Arguing that they should be listing every little thing and only adhering to the specifically listed rules and there should be no 'spirit of the law' flexibility is gonna make things way worse for us. It's like saying "How dare that officer let me off with a warning for that rolling stop! I shouldve been given a ticket cause its clearly illegal!" Dont think anyone is gonna be super in favor of every rule and by law being enforced with teh addition of new rules that address every nuance and its up to US to know all the rules and abide by them.

[Noitems]

Update from Arthars. Nutkin censor for my own sake.

[Jybril]

Update from Arthars. Nutkin censor for my own sake.

This really isn't rocket science and the guy can't seem to understand.
Literally, just don't be jerk. That's all he has to do.
He can do what he's been doing as long as he isn't blasting people
out the water like he just did. If he can't understand what he did wrong
then have fun eventually getting permabanned.

[Alaray]

This really isn't rocket science and the guy can't seem to understand.
Literally, just don't be jerk. That's all he has to do.
He can do what he's been doing as long as he isn't blasting people
out the water like he just did. If he can't understand what he did wrong
then have fun eventually getting permabanned.

It's more of a desire for a defined line. Since, while:

- Maybe he got in SE trouble due to the link he had attached to a lodestone character, placing his content technically within SE's jurisdiction (and they have used this to action people before).

- Maybe he overstepped a limit with how hard he went on the guy, though as he's been doing it for so long at this point, it's sudden for it to be over the line now. Which means, other things that could be seen as fine/innocuous on twitch, could potentially also be actioned on in the future with no hard defined limit as to what constitutes a TOS break on third party platforms, to the point where SE will action it. (Like, if someone's streaming with mods and is reported for using them, would SE choose to come down on that? Or if someone did say an expletive on their stream, or even just called someone "an idiot" in a "that idiot just got me killed on this fight"-level way). And this extends outside of twitch -- if your character can be linked to, for example, your Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr account etc... could things you say on these platforms get you actioned? We do know SE actioned people who lewdly modded their characters, but what about people who use Reshade? What about more wholesome/innocent mods? They haven't been actioned so far, to my knowledge, via these other venues, but who's to say it'll remain consistent? And suddenly something people have an understanding is okay, such as streaming the game with the ACT overlay on as another example, is suddenly not okay?

- Maybe it's only being actioned as someone went through the trouble to actually report it. Which means, what else would be a violation if someone decided to report it? Since, the TOS includes things like: not swearing in-game, but that can extend to third party platforms where the game is featured. Do I think they would action someone saying an expletive in a moment of celebration, or a moment of frustration? Probably not. But that's just it: "Probably".

(My guess is: He went too far, had the link of his content on his lodestone character & was reported through an in-game means. That's what makes the most sense, but even then, it's still a guess. I can't say I know exactly what he did to get himself in hot water, because I don't: The GM does).

It's not about did he deserve to be suspended, and more about: well if the evidence in question is a third party platform where the TOS is being applied to, are there limits to what SE would action from that platform? Does a case need to be extreme, or excessive, or reported by a player in-game with the attached clip? Does it need to be a verified source? Does this only cover excessive cases? Does it cover any case?

And it'd also help situations in-game, too. Where people are dealing with stalkers, harassment of a different nature than a "you suck at this game" nature. Since a lot of those interactions aren't often dealt with, and the things that are actioned and not actioned never feels particularly consistent from the GM's. And wanting a clear-cut limit that's defined is... normal. Not in a "how can I twist it in my favor" normal, but in a "okay, so it is absolutely guaranteed that if I don't do x/y/z I won't get in trouble, so I'm going to adjust what I'm doing around that to avoid problems going forward."

The limits should be more defined, especially when there are people who rely on twitch income for their livelihood built off streaming the game. Because anyone who puts forth a reason for the suspension, who is not a GM, is only able to presume and guesstimate (and maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong: either way, there's still a maybe).




It's already accepted that, yes, he got in trouble for being excessive in ripping into a player. But that's not what the overall focus should be on: it's just wanting clear, defined limits involved in handling cases outside of the game, rather than a nebulous "Everything in the TOS may apply at individual GM discretion" since that... covers a lot of things. Like... why, specifically, this case over a case where someone is being actively harassed/stalked etc... in game? Or why is this case allowed to be used as grounds for punishment, but another player who said far more egregious things, is not? What makes this case different from the other two cases.


I'll add that: sometimes having not-super-clearly-defined rules is a positive thing, since it can circumvent rules-lawyering, people getting out of stuff on technicalities etc... but the way things do get enforced often times feel, and seem, very "well... why did this get actioned, but not this other event that occurred in-game?"

Do I, personally, care? I don't personally care on a level wherein I think I'd ever run amok with things, but at the same time I can understand the side of people who stake their livelihood on the game/supplemental income on the game, desiring a more clear process.

(and, again, I'm not defending a stance of "We should all be allowed to beat on each other/mean to each other" but just a general "some lines of absolute Don'ts would be good for out-of-game interactions that involve the game." Like, maybe it is purely in just being a massive dick to someone, that's fine, but it's not a 100% that's absolutely the only thing that could ever get you in trouble)

[Cyreil]

Update from Arthars. Nutkin censor for my own sake.

This is why I will never want SE to show where the line is drawn and why no one will ever get that response from the moderators. If you can't figure out how to be a decent person and need to know how far you can go, chances are you are problem already and are going to use it as a baseline to skirt that said line and intentionally make people as uncomfortable as possible. But when push comes to shove, they will run away and hide, then point to the ToS and say they didn't break any rules while saying it is clearly okay for them to do what they are doing and act the way they act.

The ToS is fine the way it is. Learn some morals and practice common sense.

[Vahlnir]

This is why I will never want SE to show where the line is drawn and why no one will ever get that response from the moderators. If you can't figure out how to be a decent person and need to know how far you can go, chances are you are problem already and are going to use it as a baseline to skirt that said line and intentionally make people as uncomfortable as possible. But when push comes to shove, they will run away and hide, then point to the ToS and say they didn't break any rules while saying it is clearly okay for them to do what they are doing and act the way they act.

The ToS is fine the way it is. Learn some morals and practice common sense.

Hey, if someone deserves to be punished then SE can have at it. They broke the ToS. However, they shouldn't cherry pick who to punish on a 3rd party platform. Everyone should be held accountable for their actions, whether it's naming and shaming, botting, hacking, etc. What they've done here is opened a door that they told us was closed and completely off limits prior to this incident. And that's fine, but they should probably leave the door open now.