Roleplay/Partyfinder Discrepancies & Policy Enforcement by GM's

[Aslae]

I'm inclined to agree with everything, I just find the enabling factor of PF is too great. Far too great.



Arguably...

3.3 Profanity and Offensive Language. You may not use profanity or any language that a reasonable person would find offensive. The Game is for players aged 13 and older. You agree to behave accordingly.

3.6 Any Illegal Activities. You may not conduct any illegal activities whatsoever in connection with the Game. This includes every illegal activity not specifically highlighted above, including without limitation gambling, defamation, harassment, and fraud.

To ERP in private is 1 thing. To publicly announce such activities, one could argue violates both 3.3, and 3.6

Very few of the venues that were taken down "Publicly" announced such activities. I hardly think having a message that says [E/RP 18+] is publicly ERP'ing. And that's the extent of what most venues advertise with.

[Kaurhz]

Very few of the venues that were taken down "Publicly" announced such activities. I hardly think having a message that says [E/RP 18+] is publicly ERP'ing. And that's the extent of what most venues advertise with.

It is publicly disclosing the possibility of it, which makes it open to those who are considered vulnerable/minors. So I am inclined to say that it could be interpreted as violating 3.3 (Agree to act accordingly. - I hope you don't plan on arguing against this point). Since I didn't make it clear and worded it poorly. Let's say it creates an easily accessible situation whereby a minor would have access to something they otherwise quite arguably shouldn't, which arguably violates clause 3.6. Whether or not it specifies 18+ doesn't matter. There's nothing actually enforcing it.

I mean there's nothing illegal with erotica in the real world. Also I might be biased but I consider myself a reasonable person that never really considered the RP/ERP advertisements offensive? Most of them are pretty on the nose. "Come visit us, here is our theme!" About sums it up.

This just seems rather puritan to me, at a certain point we can say short skirts are offensive or wearing no armor in Limsa.

Sure there's nothing against erotica in the real world, or online if you completely ignore the factor of potentially doing it with a minor. There's a reason I emboldened the Ages 13 and up section.

I don't consider them offensive, personally. But there are situations where making it openly and easily accessible is dangerous.

[Aslae]

It is publicly disclosing the possibility of it, which makes it open to those who are considered vulnerable/minors. So I am inclined to say that it could be interpreted as violating 3.3 (Agree to act accordingly. - I hope you don't plan on arguing against this point). Since I didn't make it clear and worded it poorly. Let's say it creates an easily accessible situation whereby a minor would have access to something they otherwise quite arguably shouldn't, which arguably violates clause 3.6. Whether or not it specifies 18+ doesn't matter. There's nothing actually enforcing it.

This is a valid point and would be acceptable if this was the way it was presented to me by the GM, but this isn't the reasoning he gave me, and the violating of 3.3 to me seems like an arbitrary choice given a lack of available, more relevant options to cite me with. No where in my conversation with the GM last night did he mention any of this. I do understand your point, though.

[Kaurhz]

This is a valid point and would be acceptable if this was the way it was presented to me by the GM, but this isn't the reasoning he gave me, and the violating of 3.3 to me seems like an arbitrary choice given a lack of available, more relevant options to cite me with. No where in my conversation with the GM last night did he mention any of this. I do understand your point, though.

Of course, my only argument is there's a lack of interpretation of the guidelines and service agreement. With a lot of it being taken as literal face value. I don't blame them as such for the understanding seeing as it comes with understanding possible real-world implications that can occur.

[Aslae]

Of course, my only argument is there's a lack of interpretation of the guidelines and service agreement. With a lot of it being taken as literal face value. I don't blame them as such for the understanding seeing as it comes with understanding possible real-world implications that can occur.

I agree with you, but the problem is this isn't what the GM expressed to me when I was jailed. Like nothing even close to that. So we're extrapolating his intentions from his, again seemingly arbitrary, choice of ToS. Basically, we like we've all been saying in this thread, we need a clear and concise reason this happened, and if it's against ToS, I'd prefer it to be more clearly stated.

[Nakarumi]

It is publicly disclosing the possibility of it, which makes it open to those who are considered vulnerable/minors. So I am inclined to say that it could be interpreted as violating 3.3 (Agree to act accordingly. - I hope you don't plan on arguing against this point). Since I didn't make it clear and worded it poorly. Let's say it creates an easily accessible situation whereby a minor would have access to something they otherwise quite arguably shouldn't, which arguably violates clause 3.6. Whether or not it specifies 18+ doesn't matter. There's nothing actually enforcing it.



Sure there's nothing against erotica in the real world, or online if you completely ignore the factor of potentially doing it with a minor. There's a reason I emboldened the Ages 13 and up section.

I don't consider them offensive, personally. But there are situations where making it openly and easily accessible is dangerous.

Then this becomes an issue of proper moderation and observation of the child whose parents/caretakers are not monitoring their children's activities. Pornhub is accessible at just a couple clicks of a mouse but it's not the website's fault for a teen that lies and sneaks onto their website.

But there would be a much more comfortable level if there was a designation for more mature content of some sorts as to help childproof it more as we have no way of age verification.

[Kaurhz]

Then this becomes an issue of proper moderation and observation of the child whose parents/caretakers are not monitoring their children's activities. Pornhub is accessible at just a couple clicks of a mouse but it's not the website's fault for a teen that lies and sneaks onto their website.

But there would be a much more comfortable level if there was a designation for more mature content of some sorts as to help childproof it more as we have no way of age verification.

Granted, I will just summarise by saying irrespective both can have significant, devastating RL implications on all who participated. So it's more about not advertising it to ensure you protect not only yourself but those whom the game was designed for on the minimum age level. That Website is a little more complex, but with ERP it's a direct conversation exchange between 2 individuals both of who are wholly responsible. . But I'd appreciate halting it here since it's quite deep. So I'd appreciate not having any further replies on this specific topic.

I agree with you, but the problem is this isn't what the GM expressed to me when I was jailed. Like nothing even close to that. So we're extrapolating his intentions from his, again seemingly arbitrary, choice of ToS. Basically, we like we've all been saying in this thread, we need a clear and concise reason this happened, and if it's against ToS, I'd prefer it to be more clearly stated.

I do agree, the GMs can be quite arbitrary with their interpretation and punishment of the guidelines. So I feel they could be more.. In-line and consistent with it. Not only that but more transparency. Some people don't even know what they're getting punished for.

[Nakarumi]

Granted, I will just summarise by saying irrespective both can have significant, devastating RL implications on all who participated. So it's more about not advertising it to ensure you protect not only yourself but those whom the game was designed for on the minimum age level. That Website is a little more complex, but with ERP it's a direct conversation exchange between 2 individuals both of who are wholly responsible. . But I'd appreciate halting it here since it's quite deep. So I'd appreciate not having any further replies on this specific topic.

Certainly, although I am glad that the conversation did take place. This kind of feedback goes a long way for the game creators to be conscious of the world they build and refine to make it safer for everyone involved.

[Kaurhz]

Certainly, although I am glad that the conversation did take place. This kind of feedback goes a long way for the game creators to be conscious of the world they build and refine to make it safer for everyone involved.

It's a worthwhile topic for sure, just belongs behind closed doors I think rather than a public forum. Have a good day and thanks for the discussion