Updates to the Prohibited Activities in FINAL FANTASY XIV and Account Penalty Policy

[Kaurhz]

Idk why you’re bringin freedom of speech into when I nor maximum carnage, the person you originally responded to brought it up. Who even are you addressing at this point

Like I said, I've summarized everyone I've replied to, I hate to burst it but I've replied to more individuals than just you and MaxCarnage. But here you go, here's the original quote I responded to and strangely the last person I replied to prior to you and MaxCarnage

People have a right to speak freely. They have a right to speak positive, negative, unpopular, and controversial things.

You don't have a right to not be offended.

Free Speech exists moreso for speech that is offensive, rude, and negative.

But hey, would you look at that:

there are no changes to communication-related matters, and this policy won’t have any significant impact on those who’ve been playing normally without incurring any violations. We hope you’ll continue to be considerate of others and play in your usual manner.

[MilkieTea]

https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodes...6fe7354364902d

nothing, infact, has changed.

[Yencat]

And here I was thinking I would be bored waiting for Endwalker to release.

[Haseno]

The American Constitution does not apply to private businesses and services.

Free Speech doesn't come from the Constitution.

Sincerely, the Enlightenment Era.

[Haseno]

Because player A is targeting someone. If you simply state what is being failed without specifying whose fault it is, no problem.


you are not allowed to single out one person as the problem. ... I have no problem with this (no I am not usually the reason things fail).

As a Business Consultant. My job is to point out flaws, failures, and weak links SPECIFICALLY. As a gamer, I do this to myself daily to improve myself. In a game where it requires cooperation and a level of competitive play to achieve a mutually beneficial goal. You have an obligation to cooperate and compete at a mutually beneficial level. If you can't cooperate, and compete, and as a result you are the weak-link in that circumstance. I'm not sugarcoating it - I'm calling out the weak link.

[Hatfright]

It's like nothing changed and we're all free to proceed as we were so long as we're not belittling anyone. Wild.

[MilkieTea]

It's like nothing changed and we're all free to proceed as we were so long as we're not belittling anyone. Wild.

IKR?? what a wild idea…

[redheadturk]

As a Business Consultant. My job is to point out flaws, failures, and weak links SPECIFICALLY. As a gamer, I do this to myself daily to improve myself. In a game where it requires cooperation and a level of competitive play to achieve a mutually beneficial goal. You have an obligation to cooperate and compete at a mutually beneficial level. If you can't cooperate, and compete, and as a result you are the weak-link in that circumstance. I'm not sugarcoating it - I'm calling out the weak link.

In which case if they report you, you can eat the ban or warning. And tbh, I am ok with that.

[Kaurhz]

As a Business Consultant. My job is to point out flaws, failures, and weak links SPECIFICALLY. As a gamer, I do this to myself daily to improve myself. In a game where it requires cooperation and a level of competitive play to achieve a mutually beneficial goal. You have an obligation to cooperate and compete at a mutually beneficial level. If you can't cooperate, and compete, and as a result you are the weak-link in that circumstance. I'm not sugarcoating it - I'm calling out the weak link.

Furthermore, as a person, and as a person that signed the terms of service, and the 'Prohibited Activities' document, no less. You have an obligation to act in accordance with that. You have an obligation to act in accordance with their rules, and if they deem you as having infringed upon said document, then they are within their right to ban you. Funny how that works.

Call it however you wish, masquerade behind it as much as you wish. If they don't like your behaviour, or if they deem it as unfit then they can ban you, as simple as that.

[FedoraTheExplorer]

It would be great if it were really that simple, but a literal reading of the ToS unfortunately diverges from that interpretation. Here are some examples:

- "There's no way we can clear this with [suggestion]." (Telling someone a suggested strategy isn't viable)
- "Don't join if your equipment is that bad/such a low item level." (Excluding someone from a group based on their item level being unviable for the content)
- "We can only beat [duty/content] by using [something]. You can't do it any other way, so stop doing that." (Explaining an absolute mechanical requirement to someone)

Even if you consider the wording itself above to be kind of abrasive or rude, the ToS specifically refers to the core concepts being expressed, rather than the exact phrasing.

There is content in the game where alternative strategies and playstyles absolutely do not work and will prevent everyone from clearing, and it is explicitly prohibited to explain the absolute nature of that situation to someone if you interpret the ToS literally, regardless of how nicely you manage to phrase it. Again, I agree with you that it's unlikely to actually be enforced in that way, but even having that kind of room for interpretation is a bad thing. This issue just isn't as simple as 'don't be rude'.

So about that update...

Turns out I was right all along.