Roleplay/Partyfinder Discrepancies & Policy Enforcement by GM's

[SturmChurro]

They may well be citing profanity. But this doesn't address any of my other points. Heck the citing "profanity" in itself could be in error because "profanity" is about the language used being offensive and not what it is being used to describe. I think "profanity" is being confused with "obscenity". Nothing in the ToS prohibits obscenity.

If the advertisement was:
"18+ ERP lets get down to f***"
Then yes, I say fair enough, that's a profanity.
If the advertisement was
"18+ ERP let's have some fun"
Then no, that's not profanity.

And again, nowhere in the conversations and cases this thread is referencing are they telling people it's over the use of profanity.

What I am referring to is firsthand information, from a player who was talked to by a GM. They received a ToS violation for profanity.

One may choose to believe all that is presented in this thread, but it is not necessarily all true. We can argue for hours, but the fact of the matter, many players are getting hit for adult advertisements, the received email after the GM interaction cites "profanity" as the ToS violation. Simple as that. A person may or may not disagree with SE, or the GM's choice of ToS violation, or even how they handled the jail interaction, but that doesn't change the fact of the matter.

Blanket banning RP advertisements, is a good way of making sure, ERP advertisements stay off the PF. The reason I was referring to SE's moderation is because I was trying, and apparently failing, to agree with some users about how SE is handling the situation.

[Squalalah]

https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...=1#post5512535 (removed to not break 3000 char rule)

I said that ERP is already forbidden "in a way".
What i meant by that, is that if RP PF aren't allowed, ERP PF too since ERP is a "child" of RP (a subcategory if you prefer)

For your explanation and "parenting issue", the problem is much more complicated and i'll give you an example.


You're an adult, you created an account of website advertising adult relations, you paied your sub so you have more choices etc... And you talk to a woman.
At the end, the woman isn't one, a child that just want to prank/do dumb stuff.
If his parents wanted to report you, they wouldn't win.

Why ? Because the website clearly states that it's for adults, so at this point, you don't have any responsability (unless you continue to talk about adult stuff while this child clearly told you that he was one)

What is final fantasy 14 ? A game that allows you to play a hero in a fantasy world, everyone above 13 can play it.
If you are caught having a naughty conversation with an adult, but at the end, this adult is a child and you get reported -> you might get condemned (with extenuating circumstances at best) because the game isn't advertised for that kind of content.

This is not something about parenting issues, FF14 isn't meant to do that kind of stuff, FF14 is meant to play a hero with people above 13.

For my previous comment ->

I've done my homework and checked the User Agreement, i actually see something that might explain why RP PF got a strike.
It says that you must not disrupt the game experience.

In the party finder, when i try to create a PF, i can only choose dungeons/raid/PvP/PotD/Treasure/Gathering etc...
So, if you make a party finder with an objective that isn't what you actually want to do, you, in a kind of way, disrupt the game experience.
However, there's a lot of sorting options to allow you to move away from those "disrupting PFs", so it isn't really a problem.

And furthermore, there is an "RP" tag that you can place next to your name, so it's absurd that SE doesn't provide any useful tool to actually find RP mates directly.

PS : i didn't mentionned the fact that you can choose to not specify any mission because it's actually the same. Do not specifying doesn't mean that you can do everything you want. Just want to clarify that before getting quote for this.

[Saefinn]

What I am referring to is firsthand information, from a player who was talked to by a GM. They received a ToS violation for profanity.

One may choose to believe all that is presented in this thread, but it is not necessarily all true. We can argue for hours, but the fact of the matter, players are getting hit for adult advertisements, the received email after the GM interaction cites "profanity" as the ToS violation. Simple as that. A person may or may not disagree with SE, or the GM's choice of ToS violation, or even how they handled the jail interaction, but that doesn't change the fact of the matter.

Then that's specific to that interaction and doesn't reflect these other interactions where profanity is not cited but PF use and not indicative of them going scorched earth on any RP PF posts. Evidence of the cases in question point to a GM getting the ruling wrong rather than an SE scorched earch approach on ERPer and general RPers being hit as collateral. This is where I am seeing too many assumptions.

[Saefinn]

I said that ERP is already forbidden "in a way".
What i meant by that, is that if RP PF aren't allowed, ERP PF too since ERP is a "child" of RP (a subcategory if you prefer)

For your explanation and "parenting issue", the problem is much more complicated and i'll give you an example.


You're an adult, you created an account of website advertising adult relations, you paied your sub so you have more choices etc... And you talk to a woman.
At the end, the woman isn't one, a child that just want to prank/do dumb stuff.
If his parents wanted to report you, they wouldn't win.

Why ? Because the website clearly states that it's for adults, so at this point, you don't have any responsability (unless you continue to talk about adult stuff while this child clearly told you that he was one)

What is final fantasy 14 ? A game that allows you to play a hero in a fantasy world, everyone above 13 can play it.
If you are caught having a naughty conversation with an adult, but at the end, this adult is a child and you get reported -> you might get condemned (with extenuating circumstances at best) because the game isn't advertised for that kind of content.

This is not something about parenting issues, FF14 isn't meant to do that kind of stuff, FF14 is meant to play a hero with people above 13.

For my previous comment ->

I've done my homework and checked the User Agreement, i actually see something that might explain why RP PF got a strike.
It says that you must not disrupt the game experience.

In the party finder, when i try to create a PF, i can only choose dungeons/raid/PvP/PotD/Treasure/Gathering etc...
So, if you make a party finder with an objective that isn't what you actually want to do, you, in a kind of way, disrupt the game experience.
However, there's a lot of sorting options to allow you to move away from those "disrupting PFs", so it isn't really a problem.

And furthermore, there is an "RP" tag that you can place next to your name, so it's absurd that SE doesn't provide any useful tool to actually find RP mates directly.

I think to a degree fair enough on the parenting one, but I will say that the game's content is rated "Teen" but online interactions are unrated. But I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not going to what the law would say, but to me it would say "the game's content is fine for a kid, but interactions are fair game" and of course within reason of the ToS. A lawyer may disagree, however, they're not exactly stamping down on ERP, so I don't know if the devs agree it's an issue either.

But I don't know how much disruption it really causes? Particularly in the "other" tag, as long as they're correctly advertised, it doesn't really disrupt. If anything, the GM's suggestion of using shout chat is more disruptive.

[SturmChurro]

Then that's specific to that interaction and doesn't reflect these other interactions where profanity is not cited but PF use and not indicative of them going scorched earth on any RP PF posts. Evidence of the cases in question point to a GM getting the ruling wrong rather than an SE scorched earch approach on ERPer and general RPers being hit as collateral. This is where I am seeing too many assumptions.

FINE. Whatever, I was trying to speculate, but apparently I have to waste more posts. I'm done with this; tired of this. Believe whatever you want, I'll believe whatever I want.

The "innocent" RPers can go play in the fellowship finder, and stay off the PF, because that seems to be the stance SE is taking. Both ERPers and the RPers (who totally don't erp, and aren't "escorts") can go use the fellowship finder. Frankly, nobody wants to see ERP, and if RPers are collateral damage? So be it. PF is for running content, RP is not content - and that's official. It's social interaction, and should be utilizing social features.

Honestly, I wish SE would crackdown HARDER, on the erpers, that should be kept off all in-game channels. I think they are too lenient.

[Jojoya]

nah Arthars ban was not justified at all, 90% of FF streamers have their ACT layed out on the screen and SE doesn't care

The Arthars ban had little to do with his use of ACT and almost everything to do with his comments inciting a witch hunt against the player he was talking about. Even without ACT displayed, his comments would have led to the same problems and that justified the ban.

[Awha]

In the end people are not wrong though, what is the easiest way to get rid of ERP adverts? Get rid of all RP adverts. When it came to PvP and people bashing others in chat, what did they do, got rid of the ability to chat. SE does things with wide sweeping strokes so honestly I could see that as the action the GM was told to take.

[Kaurhz]

I think to a degree fair enough on the parenting one, but I will say that the game's content is rated "Teen" but online interactions are unrated. But I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not going to what the law would say, but to me it would say "the game's content is fine for a kid, but interactions are fair game" and of course within reason of the ToS. A lawyer may disagree, however, they're not exactly stamping down on ERP, so I don't know if the devs agree it's an issue either.

But I don't know how much disruption it really causes? Particularly in the "other" tag, as long as they're correctly advertised, it doesn't really disrupt. If anything, the GM's suggestion of using shout chat is more disruptive.

Well practically speaking the design of the game, and what is included within the game therein is a predetermined factor. With buying the game you generally can't deviate from it. On the other hand, online interactions are random, not predetermined. Developers control the game itself, not the interactions occurring online with respect to the game. Otherwise, by this logic, every game that has online functionality should be rated 'Adult Only' because there is always that risk factor. It's just not pragmatic to rate online interactions. But that doesn't excuse what may necessarily happen online. Hence to be precautionary about what you do, and those around you.

[Silverrr]

Don't go making baseless assertions that just because you don't care, therefore, nobody else does. Whether or not anyone uses the roulette section or not is irrelevant since it still spams the Party Finder with advertisements, and many of them being to the same Discord/Service. Don't get started about Filtering it out either. I shouldn't have to use filters because some people elect to ignore basic considerations for people that actually use the Party Finder.

it fills a section of party finder no one ever uses with advertisement... so what? Looking at the picture of Crystal PF it's the exact same with their club advertisements lmao

[Silverrr]

The Arthars ban had little to do with his use of ACT and almost everything to do with his comments inciting a witch hunt against the player he was talking about. Even without ACT displayed, his comments would have led to the same problems and that justified the ban.

Fair enough but the person I was answering to said it was justified just for his use of ACT