FF14 is not made for hardcore players.

[Velnora]

It's an additional countermeasure for profanity. You don't just have a singular deterrent. If they used the profanity filter as the singular means of deterring people from it, without the inclusion of rules or consequences then people will only seek for ways to bypass the profanity filter, be it with other slurs or alternative and creative use of words or structure. I've seen plenty of people attempt to go through a profanity filter. Be it within this game, or other forums and games,

Profanity filters are not without fault, that is the point. Once again, not intended to be used as a singular deterrent.

So because the filter can be bypassed by creative individuals, which I imagine is a very small portion of swearing that occurs in-game, that somehow makes them not efficient? I'm sorry, but that sounds an awful lot like grasping for straws. This is equivalent to someone not getting vaccinated because it's not 100% effective, then complaining when they get hospitalized.

[Kaurhz]

So because the filter can be bypassed by creative individuals, which I imagine is a very small portion of swearing that occurs in-game, that somehow makes them not efficient? I'm sorry, but that sounds an awful lot like grasping for straws.

That was merely a single example, besides the fact that a vast majority of algorithms used in profanity filters are actually quite inefficient. I'm not so sure what part of "Shouldn't be used as a singular deterrent" you didn't grasp.

You don't simply allow or deny the use of them within the terms simply on the basis that someone may or may not be using a profanity filter. It's just 1 method of 'content' moderation. As someone highlighted they don't take into account the context which is the issue. Like I said, the inclusion of a filter does not preclude you from acting moderately civil. If they removed the potential to report and thus get someone banned because of a profanity filter then a majority of people would just take liberties with it.

Hardly anything about reaching for the straws with that comment. But go ahead make another attempt at trying to justify the use of foul language.

[Velnora]

That was merely a single example, besides the fact that a vast majority of algorithms used in profanity filters are actually quite inefficient. I'm not so sure what part of "Shouldn't be used as a singular deterrent" you didn't grasp.

You don't simply allow or deny the use of them within the terms simply on the basis that someone may or may not be using a profanity filter. It's just 1 method of 'content' moderation. As someone highlighted they don't take into account the context which is the issue.

Hardly anything about reaching for the straws with that comment. But go ahead make another attempt at trying to justify the use of foul language.

It does not need justification. If someone doesn't like swearing, they can use the filter. If an individual tries to circumvent the filter, then yes, they should be reported. The filter is quite effective at blocking f bombs and the like, so I don't know what you're going off of.

[Valkyrie_Lenneth]

It does not need justification. If someone doesn't like swearing, they can use the filter. If an individual tries to circumvent the filter, then yes, they should be reported. The filter is quite effective at blocking f bombs and the like, so I don't know what you're going off of.

Is this the equivalent of "well, if he didn't want to get shot, he should have warn a bulletproof vest"?

[Velnora]

Is this the equivalent of "well, if he didn't want to get shot, he should have warn a bulletproof vest"?

No, that would be a false equivalency.

[Valkyrie_Lenneth]

No, that would be a false equivalency.

"if he didn't want to see swearing he should have the filter on" yeah, but that doesn't prevent others from seeing you swear at someone, or the person themself from knowing they are being cussed out. It just blocks the words

[MilkieTea]

"if he didn't want to see swearing he should have the filter on" yeah, but that doesn't prevent others from seeing you swear at someone, or the person themself from knowing they are being cussed out. It just blocks the words

This is the same person that said I was gaslighting them when I said that SE didn't change ToS in regards to player-to-player interactions. They have... a strange view of the world.

[Velnora]

"if he didn't want to see swearing he should have the filter on" yeah, but that doesn't prevent others from seeing you swear at someone, or the person themself from knowing they are being cussed out. It just blocks the words

Unless those others cared so much, that they too had the filter on.

[Kaurhz]

It does not need justification. If someone doesn't like swearing, they can use the filter. If an individual tries to circumvent the filter, then yes, they should be reported.

Yes, and if someone doesn't like your foul mouth, then they can report you, it's a simple as that. Aside from the fact that in the majority of cases the entirety of the context will be taken into account, so the probability that you get banned solely on using a profanity is a very difficult feat. in the majority of cases where people will and do get banned is because they're incapable of discerning the fine line where something is quite literally harassment and just simply swearing because you failed a mechanic.

Personally if someone pops a profanity I don't pay it any mind, but the moment I see it as harassment then I report it, simple as.

This whole "I think I can be banned for merely swearing", or "I can get banned simply for giving advice" is really getting beyond the point of comedy.