The 3-Strikes Policy - Is it really a good thing?

[Ralph2449]

A strict three-strike policy would work if they gave us clear cut rules and guidelines, but they intentionally have not to give them as much wiggle room as possible.

people who have been told by GMs that anything is bannable in the proper context

Yet there have been many more people who never had any issues, you cant really have a clear cut guideline in a game with real people because there will always be people who tip toe around that line and pretend "technically this is within the ToS" which is why GMs need a flexible position to judge the situation and stop unwanted behavior.

People simply need to adapt and learn to behave, something they might have not needed to do in any of their previous games which is why most online game chats are so bad these days to the point in WoW even popular streamers say things like 'You have to be trolling" if you play a non meta spec/class/build and I am very thankful SE has a policy against this type of "compelling a play style" attitude some people have in other games and would happily bring it here if they were allowed, thankfully they are not.

You probably have control over your temper and think before typing and talking. Some people don't though and just like we make accommodations for those who don't handle blinding speed dungeon runs we should probably make accommodations for those who run a little more hot blooded sometimes.

I can get that argument but someone could also say what about the opposite minority which would be people who get hurt by online comments, both of those groups are probably small but you can only support one in this case, this is where we get to the more grey area which either choice is understandable really, maybe it wouldnt hurt to have very specific minor cases have a 6 month expiration date(As long as nothing happens before those 6 months)

Honestly FF14 community is a breath of fresh air compared to pretty much all other popular game communities I ve played.
I dont really have this fear of saying anything because I know how to speak without being offensive, I remember it took me like 5 groups to get extreme Ramuh down and in many I would point out things like, "be careful of stacking lightning circles, they hurt", "Think you need to get 3 orbs if you get the linking lighting thing", none of those comments target or attack anyone nor they command people to do X, they very casually explain how something works without aiming anything at anyone.


Though I get the feeling SE is extra draconian in their measures specifically to send a message to the average western gamer who is far to used and accepting of insults, attacks and slur filled "banter" we sadly see in most online games these days

Knowing that fact the only way to fix this kind of normalized behavior is with draconian measures and honestly it is good that someone is actually trying to fix that.

[Nakarumi]

So, for those who want a premise, read this reddit thread. No, it's not a link to something dumb - but it heavily ties into the big fiasco regarding Party Finder usage and the unreasonable account suspensions.

The thread itself already gives a few points as to why Final Fantasy XIV's policies need some reform, as the current system is built in a way that pushes many people who have made mistakes and gotten account strikes in the past into reclusion.

We're talking like ALLLLLL the way back in 2.X, or even 3.X, when FFXIV was on the rise as an MMO giant. Why can't these strikes be forgiven? As stated from the reddit thread, it has to do with their policies in regards to Account Strikes. Considering you are unable to remove an account strike regardless of your own reasoning, it's basically a zero-tolerance system that is unforgiving.

Humans make mistakes - everyone here knows this to some extent. Yet, why can they not forgive after a set amount of time? Does it have to do with their culture on the developers' side of the world? Does it have to do with how they want to stand out? I don't know the reason, but with how SE is heavy handed in their policy, it forces the thought that if they screw up again for some benign reason or another they basically can't play the game anymore.

I'm looking to open this thread for discussion about this topic because aside from reddit, I want to see what people on the Forums think in regards to how things are.

The third point that was made in the Reddit post is actually one of the major points I'm still trying to get an official statement from either a Senior GM or Square Enix on.

During the whole Roleplay/Partyfinder fiasco that occurred just within the past couple of days, one of the biggest things I noticed during the development of events was the lack of clear and definitive information that was being shared by the GMs in question. When a player was pulled or flagged for... whatever reason, there was a SEVERE lack of reasoning as to specifically WHAT they did wrong or HOW they exactly broke policy. The vague information that was sent out to every person that was either warned or suspended was an email saying you broke "X" policy from our very vague and poorly descriptive rule found at "www.whatever.com". None of the GMs who were questioned by the players were able, or willing, to give a clear answer to anyone that simply wanted to know specifically what they did wrong. In fact, during a live stream of one player that was still in /player jail/ and speaking with a GM, the player was forcibly booted from player jail while still trying to talk to the GM. I found this to be reprehensibly unprofessional and unfair to both the player and the player base in general. You can't expect to punish someone for doing something against a vague policy without telling them exactly what it was they did that was wrong. How does a person learn or fix what they did wrong if you don't clearly state what the incorrect action or statement was??? That player just ends up confused and angry and then has a mark on their account that SE is not willing to abolish. ((Which thank God for the recompense the GM team made for the whole roleplay community fiasco or a serious PR problem would have been on their hands.))

Nonetheless, both their GM practices and disciplinary policies need to be under serious review as it's terribly flawed as it stands. Because had the situation with the RP community not been resolved, and those that may have had marks on their account been marked AGAIN (marked unjustly I might add), it would have caused a lot of accounts to have been compromised. If that would have occurred, and had any one person decided to escalate and pursue it to the highest degree... there could have been legal ramifications to have been sought out.

With all that being said, I'm not out for SE or any staffing associated with the game, in fact, I'm actually a huge supporter for them... but I do worry this could be problematic if improvements are not looked into.

[DreadCrow]

On one hand, I want to say yes. I don't think that anyone ever has a reason for not being decent to their fellow human beings... But I also think that people grow. The games been around for a decade now, if you count count 1.0. I knew people who said a lot of hateful things when they were younger, even directed towards me... But they grew up and became better people. They let go of a lot of their toxicity. Even if someone was said the worst possible things ten years ago... They would be a much better person now.

On the other hand, I want to say no. Since I think it sort of keeps peace... Although I think it should really depend. If you call someone a slur? That stays on. Call them something else that isn't charitable but not intended to disparage their identity? That'll leave in three years. Rage quit a dungeon? That'll fall off in a year.

[SturmChurro]

I've gotta admit when a lot of truth started coming out about the reasoning behind many of the warnings, I was in support of SE, and the GM(s) in question. I was saddened to see SE having to rollback the warnings, over what looks to be because of the highly public outrage. I was also amazed to see the moderators of this forum step in and stop the downward spiral that one particular thread was going in. While I may have my own criticisms of SE's enforcement of the ToS, or moderation in general, sometimes it has to be harsh to stamp out certain behaviors.

[Nakarumi]

I've gotta admit when a lot of truth started coming out about the reasoning behind many of the warnings, I was in support of SE, and the GM(s) in question. I was saddened to see SE having to rollback the warnings, over what looks to be because of the highly public outrage. I was also amazed to see the moderators of this forum step in and stop the downward spiral that one particular thread was going in. While I may have my own criticisms of SE's enforcement of the ToS, or moderation in general, sometimes it has to be harsh to stamp out certain behaviors.

I too was strongly upset at the direction of that thread too. Heck, I was the one that started it and tried my best to keep it on track. Little did I know that there is a post limitation on the website and once I started getting the message telling me that I could no longer reply for the day... the thread spiraled out of control and there was nothing I could do about it beyond that point.

However, the mass and systematic actions of the one GM was in error and unjust for the players. Especially given the lack of reasoning that is provided when a player is pulled for whatever the reason may be. And while the other thread did get wildly out of control once I could no longer regulate it myself, the angry calls for the GMs removal or demotion were also uncalled for. We had no way of knowing what the source of the problem was or how it was caused and therefore we couldn't solely place blame on that one GM... however, the situation it produced was still utterly wrong and unfair and has been corrected as it rightfully should have been.

[SturmChurro]

I too was strongly upset at the direction of that thread too. Heck, I was the one that started it and tried my best to keep it on track. Little did I know that there is a post limitation on the website and once I started getting the message telling me that I could no longer reply for the day... the thread spiraled out of control and there was nothing I could do about it beyond that point.

I thought you were incredibly respectful, calm, and measured given the types of responses in that thread over time. Even when I crashed that protest or whatever, I think it was you (?) who said it was okay for me to have my machinist gun out, I was just having fun. I apologize for my fake "roleplay". While I may have eventually lessened my support, I can respect others for remaining calm and collected.

It is too bad there is a post limit, I do not think it is needed in general, or rather it is too low, especially in any topic where there is actual discussion going on. However, also serves the purpose of stopping continuous posts like those seen that may have caused that thread being locked.

However, the mass and systematic actions of the one GM was in error and unjust for the players. Especially given the lack of reasoning that is provided when a player is pulled for whatever the reason may be. And while the other thread did get wildly out of control once I could no longer regulate it myself, the angry calls for the GMs removal or demotion were also uncalled for. We had no way of knowing what the source of the problem was or how it was caused and therefore we couldn't solely place blame on that one GM... however, the situation it produced was still utterly wrong and unfair and has been corrected as it rightfully should have been.

While I disagree on them being unjust, I can respect your opinion. What I think happened was a severe lack of communication with the players involved. I really wish SE would communicate more when it comes to moderation. I wish what they ended up doing with that thread in terms of moderation, would happen more often, you usually see no communication.

[DreadCrow]

I've gotta admit when a lot of truth started coming out about the reasoning behind many of the warnings, I was in support of SE, and the GM(s) in question. I was saddened to see SE having to rollback the warnings, over what looks to be because of the highly public outrage. I was also amazed to see the moderators of this forum step in and stop the downward spiral that one particular thread was going in. While I may have my own criticisms of SE's enforcement of the ToS, or moderation in general, sometimes it has to be harsh to stamp out certain behaviors.

But a lot of the moderation actually weren't fair? A lot of the people hit had perfect safe venues and the idea that you can't use Party Finder's "other" section for advertising role-playing venues... Well, it's about six years to late for that since people have done it since it's introduction. And most other GMs, over the course of the game, seemed to think it's okay.

[SturmChurro]

But a lot of the moderation actually weren't fair? A lot of the people hit had perfect safe venues and the idea that you can't use Party Finder's "other" section for advertising role-playing venues... Well, it's about six years to late for that since people have done it since it's introduction. And most other GMs, over the course of the game, seemed to think it's okay.

I thought moderation in this instance was fair. As far as I am aware, most of what was received were warnings - which yes, it's a mark on their account, but it isn't a strike. I think if SE had communicated the whole issue better, it would have been more understandable and well received. Rather than warning individual players, they could have made an announcement. I can truly get behind SE trying to curate the party finder in their game. Personally, I do not think ERP has any place in it, nor RP for that matter. I feel for regular, actually innocent, rpers for the lack of proper social features.

However, as this thread is about the 3 strikes policy I should say, if they had intended to continue curating the PF, and had handled communication better, I think handing out warnings is a great way to discourage this type of behavior. Not an actual strike, but just harsh enough. Because it is known 3 strikes and your out (!), players would be more careful knowing their account was at risk. I do think that, in general, depending on severity, some strikes or warnings should go away over time, however.

[XiXiQ]

When you take into consideration the longevity of the game alone they do need to adjust. Even 3 strikes in 3 years is very strict and more than enough.

[Sove92]

While an account action should indeed stop being considered active for mandatory escalation purposes after a year or so, all strikes should still remain in the account history and be considered whether or not they should matter this time.

If you get a warning, after a year, you are not 100% on the hook for a 3day ban for a warning-worthy offense, but the GM should still consider your earlier offense for penalty determination, it's just no longer mandatory to issue a 72h
If you have had a 72h suspension, after a year, you could receive a warning and a 72h again, instead of the mandatory 240h, but it should still not be a guarantee, your earlier history should still be considered.

There are always people who try to game expiration systems and keeping the history of earlier, now inactive strikes is a way to combat that. If over a few years, someone has accumulated strikes in double digits, it should be grounds for a more severe punishment, regardless of the status of the old strikes.

On the other hand, minor infractions done 6 years ago shouldn't really be a factor for an offense done today.

Now, coming up with a system like this that works consistently is another matter, because it forces a GM to use their own human discretion, something SE seems hesitant on.