Roleplay/Partyfinder Discrepancies & Policy Enforcement by GM's

[ZackZero]

In the support centre, they clarify what could be considered harassment, and obscene comments fall into this category.

"■Harassment
"Harassment" means speech and/or behaviour that inflicts deep emotional distress on another person. It is an extremely serious violation. Where Square Enix determines that harassment has occurred, a penalty equal to or higher than "Temporary Service Account Suspension" may be imposed.

Below is a non-exhaustive list of behaviour that could constitute harassment in Final Fantasy XIV:

・Discriminatory expressions based on race/nationality/thinking/gender/sexual orientation/gender identity
・Discriminatory expressions about a state/religion/occupation/organisation, etc.
・Obscene/indecent expressions
・Actions that inflict emotional distress using content related to historical events or crimes
・Stalking
・Disclosing or indicating personal information such as contact details with the aim of meeting up in the real world
・Disclosing or indicating another person's real world personal information without permission
・Other actions that are generally regarded as actions that inflict deep emotional distress on another person

These are prohibited in all places where expressions can be made, including chat (including Quick Chat and Emote), markers, comments and names. With regard to character names, if a phrase equating to harassment is formed within the full name, this is also regarded as harassment. In the case of a group action, all of the members involved will be subject to penalties."

So yeah, Obscene/Indecent expressions are prohibited and can get ya banned.

To be fair, here it's explained as part of what could be considered harassment towards a person. This is not the same as a general obscenity clause, which may or may not be present.

[NessaWyvern]

To be fair, here it's explained as part of what could be considered harassment towards a person. This is not the same as a general obscenity clause, which may or may not be present.

"These are prohibited in all places where expressions can be made, including chat (including Quick Chat and Emote), markers, comments and names."
So even if you're not actively harassing a particular player, they might still be considered prohibited.

It's probably why a character called Chad Thunder-name for male bird/rooster- had to change his name, even though he wasn't harassing a particular player with it.

[ZackZero]

"These are prohibited in all places where expressions can be made, including chat (including Quick Chat and Emote), markers, comments and names."
So even if you're not actively harassing a particular player, they are still considered prohibited.

Within the context of harassment, as they're expanded in that section of the Terms. Also, note that the operative term "could" does not mean that they do in all cases (though I would argue that discriminatory statements certainly do fall under a "would"). This places this under their discretion for enforcement.

EDIT: Before you claim that this is a defense of explicit advertisements, don't. As the saying goes, there's a time and a place, and that sort of ad certainly doesn't belong in a public search index.

[NessaWyvern]

Within the context of harassment, as they're expanded in that section of the Terms. Also, note that the operative term "could" does not mean that they do in all cases (though I would argue that discriminatory statements certainly do fall under a "would"). This places this under their discretion for enforcement.

EDIT: Before you claim that this is a defense of explicit advertisements, don't. As the saying goes, there's a time and a place, and that sort of ad certainly doesn't belong in a public search index.

I guess you'll have to refer to the ToS:

"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."

Sexual Language can be considered Offensive Language in many situations, especially in the context of which you're supposed to behave in a game where there may be those as young as 13 playing.
Combined with the "These are prohibited in all places where expressions can be made, including chat (including Quick Chat and Emote), markers, comments and names." part of the support desk, and the fact that players have to change their names if they're too sexual, despite not harassing a specific person, I think it still holds up.

You know what? I'll make a ticket asking about it and see if I get a GM response on the issue. Something along the lines of "If Sexually explicit material is said in chats, despite not being targeted at a particular person, is it still a violation of ToS?" because this probably should be clarified.

[ZackZero]

I guess you'll have to refer to the ToS:

"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."

Sexual Language can be considered Offensive Language in many situations, especially in the context of which you're supposed to behave in a game where there may be those as young as 13 playing.
Combined with the "These are prohibited in all places where expressions can be made, including chat (including Quick Chat and Emote), markers, comments and names." part of the support desk, and the fact that players have to change their names if they're too sexual, despite not harassing a specific person, I think it still holds up.

You know what? I'll make a ticket asking about it and see if I get a GM response on the issue. Something along the lines of "If Sexually explicit material is said in chats, despite not being targeted at a particular person, is it still a violation of ToS?" because this probably should be clarified.

I should have known a bad-faith option would be presented here. This reads as trying to box those of us arguing for clarification into a specific situation, whereas others like JanVanding have raised critical points of consented venues (private chats where consent between the involved parties is clear, etc.)

EDIT: A number of times, things are rather quick to go towards minors. Seems there's a lot of people with an axe to grind, seeing as there's been suggestions of grooming (a serious accusation that can be considered harassment if unfounded), open attacks against unspecific "degeneracy", and even one user later claiming sarcasm over unclear posts that suggest LGBT+ groups should go next because of - again - allegations of child grooming. Not necessarily from you, mind, but scattered amongst this whole thread.

[NessaWyvern]

I should have known a bad-faith option would be presented here. This reads as trying to box those of us arguing for clarification into a specific situation, whereas others like JanVanding have raised critical points of consented venues (private chats where consent between the involved parties is clear, etc.)

But in an online game, where minors play, and you can't easily determine if someone is actually the age they say they are, and that minors cannot legally consent, then doesn't that throw the "consent between involved parties" thing get thrown out the window a bit here?

I'm fine with ERP if you have substantial grounds for knowing what the age of a person is, in that you two can actually legally be consenting, but engaging in ERP in 18+ player houses that was advertised publicly, you can't really tell just who is coming through the door, and have to take them at their word.

[ZackZero]

But in an online game, where minors play, and you can't easily determine if someone is actually the age they say they are, and that minors cannot legally consent, then doesn't that throw the "consent between involved parties" thing get thrown out the window a bit here?

Nevermind, I think we're done here. The "think of the children"ing is too common in this thread, enough to argue that the mention itself is being used to sink peoples' arguments without merit, as a suggestion that they're advocating for unopposed interaction with minors.

Sticking to EDITs because I appear to be capped, but... it continues. A lot of insinuation that there's exploitation of minors and/or grooming, and it's going unchecked.

[Kaurhz]

I should have known a bad-faith option would be presented here. This reads as trying to box those of us arguing for clarification into a specific situation, whereas others like JanVanding have raised critical points of consented venues (private chats where consent between the involved parties is clear, etc.)

EDIT: A number of times, things are rather quick to go towards minors. Seems there's a lot of people with an axe to grind, seeing as there's been suggestions of grooming (a serious accusation that can be considered harassment if unfounded), open attacks against unspecific "degeneracy", and even one user later claiming sarcasm over unclear posts that suggest LGBT+ groups should go next because of - again - allegations of child grooming. Not necessarily from you, mind, but scattered amongst this whole thread.

That is because the game has been stated to be considerate with that age range in mind and to act accordingly. Advertising this in a public space like the Party Finder creates a situation in which people not of the appropriate age of maturity can get involved in such activities, with many of them not even understanding the gravity of the decision they're making or the implication as such. Be it obscene or not. None of this is acting in accordance with that in mind.

I wouldn't even care if there were a section specifically for 18+ on the PF which states and highlights the implications in no uncertain terms of opening up such a section which by default wouldn't appear within the default category of the PF. However, there isn't, so yes people will be inclined to morally grandstand and say you should not advertise mature content on a public space such as the PF which minors will have access to such advertisements, and unsolicited. no less