Recent Developments of TOS Actions Taken

[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.

[Arrius]

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.

Thing is, when SE starts drawing lines everywhere about this, then people will try to blur those and try to get away with things that are of very questionable nature but not necessarily something that is considered rule-breaking.

Same happened when they stepped up against in-game harassments a while ago - Suddenly people wanted to know what exactly is bad, and what is still good. And cherry picking arguments like this is just making the situation not better since the player will start twisting words and arguments in a way that still can be seen as a negative comment, but are masked enough that throwing in a support ticket might not be worth the time.

When SE remains vague with their ways of how they detect toxicity and enforce their ToS like they did now, they remain somewhat in control and that keeps the player wary of what they can or cannot do in streams. And most of the time, the players will keep their voices down (so to speak) to avoid any ramifications that could risk their account.

[Vahlnir]

Thing is, when SE starts drawing lines everywhere about this, then people will try to blur those and try to get away with things that are of very questionable nature but not necessarily something that is considered rule-breaking.

Same happened when they stepped up against in-game harassments a while ago - Suddenly people wanted to know what exactly is bad, and what is still good. And cherry picking arguments like this is just making the situation not better since the player will start twisting words and arguments in a way that still can be seen as a negative comment, but are masked enough that throwing in a support ticket might not be worth the time.

When SE remains vague with their ways of how they detect toxicity and enforce their ToS like they did now, they remain somewhat in control and that keeps the player wary of what they can or cannot do in streams. And most of the time, the players will keep their voices down (so to speak) to avoid any ramifications that could risk their account.

People always try to blur the lines though regardless of how lax, strict, clear or vague a company's terms are. Sure, they make things a bit vague to cover a wide range of problems. But regarding 3rd party evidence for what would be considered an in game violation, there shouldn't be many blurred lines. They should tell us what is accepted and what is not and stick to it instead of bending their own rules to fit a situation. The person's ban which sparked this thread was obviously a justifiable thing from SE's point of view. But the same standards should be set for cheaters and botters or other questionable behaviors in that visual evidence of wrongdoing should be accepted. What they do with that is up to them. It wouldn't eliminate every single problem, but it'd be better than what we have now which is basically nothing.

[ShanaMia]

...

Arthars is not arguing that the ban was not warranted. Hell, he even admits that he deserves it. He's arguing that if evidence from outside the game is now fair game, it needs to be very clear that is now the case and, if limited to a specific subset, which TOS violations would accept this evidence from outside of the game. Note that they did not accept evidence from outside the game previously. This isn't even a matter of "learning morals and practicing common sense". This is a matter of whether we are being policed on platforms outside of the game and if this to be applied to all TOS violations. People have brought up cases where, if outside evidence had been accepted at the time of their report, a ban would have been given such as Feast win trading, admitting in private conversations to botting on their main account, etc. If they're accepting outside evidence for slander/profanity, surely these cases should be subject to the same scrutiny? It's about fairness. Being a streamer shouldn't hold him to a distinctly higher standard in the eyes of the TOS.

[Melichoir]

Arthars is not arguing that the ban was not warranted. Hell, he even admits that he deserves it. He's arguing that if evidence from outside the game is now fair game, it needs to be very clear that is now the case and, if limited to a specific subset, which TOS violations would accept this evidence from outside of the game. Note that they did not accept evidence from outside the game previously. This isn't even a matter of "learning morals and practicing common sense". This is a matter of whether we are being policed on platforms outside of the game and if this to be applied to all TOS violations. People have brought up cases where, if outside evidence had been accepted at the time of their report, a ban would have been given such as Feast win trading, admitting in private conversations to botting on their main account, etc. If they're accepting outside evidence for slander/profanity, surely these cases should be subject to the same scrutiny? It's about fairness. Being a streamer shouldn't hold him to a distinctly higher standard in the eyes of the TOS.

ToS is fairly clear about using Parsers and Harrassment. The question is does it count if he uses does it off platform. Yes, it probably does count cause the point of their ToS regarding it is to stop or mitigate harassment of other players. The debate here seems to conflate what 'outside' evidence constitutes. The argument that "Oh this was an outside stream therefore doesnt count because they dont count outside evidence when it comes to things like bots", but these arent equivalents. The distinction lies in a first person account vs a third person account. Unlike bot cases as evidence where it's one player observing and recording another player doing wrong doing, this is the player himself recording themselves engaging in wrong doing. He records himself doing the very thing the rules are designed to help prevent, and is (IMO) fully aware that doing this same action in game would warrant the ban but sought another way to bypass that ban by being clever and claiming its off game therefore doesnt count.

[QT_Melon]

Arthars is not arguing that the ban was not warranted. Hell, he even admits that he deserves it. He's arguing that if evidence from outside the game is now fair game, it needs to be very clear that is now the case and, if limited to a specific subset,.

Just an FYI that's ALWAYS been a case, if you know where to look on SE's site for reporting harassment you can actually submit video evidence that SE can have Youtube for example take down. And that's been around BEFORE this latest issue. For years.

Also, if he is admitting guilt and saying these actions were worth a ban, then him being a spokesperson for a slippery slope issue is probably the worst thing to stand for at this time. It's diluting the message.

[WaterShield]

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.

How are they to learn these "Morals" if they are not taught? Did your parents punish you for doing something as a child, and then refuse to tell you what the specific action was that you did and why it was bad? I think not.

Is the goal of the ToS to ban all players the mods dislike, or is it to reform people into better players for the platform?

[jameseoakes]

How are they to learn these "Morals" if they are not taught? Did your parents punish you for doing something as a child, and then refuse to tell you what the specific action was that you did and why it was bad? I think not.

Is the goal of the ToS to ban all players the mods dislike, or is it to reform people into better players for the platform?

You should have a basic understanding of normal civil behaviour, the kind you would you use at a normal professional place.

[WaterShield]

You should have a basic understanding of normal civil behaviour, the kind you would you use at a normal professional place.

Will children possess this? Because children play the game. This also dodges the point of my previous point. Punishment for punishments sake does nothing to address the underlying problem. Rehabilitation is the only sustainable path forward.