Square Enix Does not care about Stalking/Harassment In Game

[hagare]

Oh they do their jobs. It's just that lots of people think harassment is something other than what it actually is. Having a guy jump around inside an FC house to be annoying is not harassment and in fact, FCs can restrict who can enter the FC house to strictly FC members so I'm not sure why they haven't done that. I mean, I've seen true harassment in the game before and the extreme lengths some folks go to on it. Think reactivating an old FC website that everyone forgot exists just to backdoor into a discord to write a gaslight post based on some set of events that happened about 5-6 years ago, and was willing to pay the monthly fee to reactivate said website.

Like, truly weird stuff happens in long running MMOs.

irrelevant. They were asked to leave private property and they didn't.

[LianaThorne]

irrelevant. They were asked to leave private property and they didn't.

Thinking neighborhood style housing where people purposefully keep their doors unlocked to allow for people to enter their homes is private is a choice.

If the OP locked their doors and the person still refused to leave, that would be more in line with your logic of thinking. It's not private unless you make it private.

[hagare]

If the OP locked their doors and the person still refused to leave, that would be more in line with your logic of thinking. It's not private unless you make it private.

They did.
And they asked her to leave. Which she refused.
Anything else?

[LianaThorne]

They did.
And they asked her to leave. Which she refused.
Anything else?

They stated multiple times they don't want to lock their doors because it prevents their FC members inviting people over and something about static members not being able to be inside.
Where are you getting that they did?

Also, still doesn't change the fact that unless the person is pushed to actually violate the ToS, they're not going to do anything. Being in someone's FC house and not doing anything other than existing there isn't enough. They have to either resort to spamming something or verbally insulting someone. My person simply following me from zone to zone was not enough for the GMs, it was only at the point of her resorting to spamming slap emotes and sending messages in whisper to myself and friends that they stepped in. They expect us to handle issues that arise unless it gets to the point of someone actually being threatened or someone committing harmful acts.

[hagare]

They stated multiple times they don't want to lock their doors because it prevents their FC members inviting people over and something about static members not being able to be inside.
Where are you getting that they did?

Also, still doesn't change the fact that unless the person is pushed to actually violate the ToS, they're not going to do anything. Being in someone's FC house and not doing anything other than existing there isn't enough. They have to either resort to spamming something or verbally insulting someone. My person simply following me from zone to zone was not enough for the GMs, it was only at the point of her resorting to spamming slap emotes and sending messages in whisper to myself and friends that they stepped in. They expect us to handle issues that arise unless it gets to the point of someone actually being threatened or someone committing harmful acts.

lemme try this another way, not locking your house does not turn your house into public property.

[DPZ2]

lemme try this another way, not locking your house does not turn your house into public property.

Technically, in a game, not locking your house turns it into "anyone can get in, no one gets kept out, being in your house is not a violation of the Terms of Service". The privacy setting is binary - either you lock everyone who doesn't belong out, or you let everyone in.

[Jojoya]

lemme try this another way, not locking your house does not turn your house into public property.

Not public property per se but for game purposes it does grant public access to anyone that wishes to enter.

I think a lot of FCs could stand to review their rank settings if they're worried about unwanted visitors to their FC house but want their members to be able to invite friends in. Just assign trusted members Guest Access/Estate Tag Settings in the rank hierarchy settings. That way the door can be kept locked most of the time but if someone's friend is visiting, a member can briefly unlock the door to let them in.

If that one FC would stop reacting to their unwanted visitor and giving them the attention they crave, they'd probably get bored with their little game and find something else to do. People who do things like that are attention seekers who only know how to play stupid games to get it.

[hagare]

Not public property per se but for game purposes it does grant public access to anyone that wishes to enter.

I think a lot of FCs could stand to review their rank settings if they're worried about unwanted visitors to their FC house but want their members to be able to invite friends in. Just assign trusted members Guest Access/Estate Tag Settings in the rank hierarchy settings. That way the door can be kept locked most of the time but if someone's friend is visiting, a member can briefly unlock the door to let them in.

If that one FC would stop reacting to their unwanted visitor and giving them the attention they crave, they'd probably get bored with their little game and find something else to do. People who do things like that are attention seekers who only know how to play stupid games to get it.

Technically, in a game, not locking your house turns it into "anyone can get in, no one gets kept out, being in your house is not a violation of the Terms of Service". The privacy setting is binary - either you lock everyone who doesn't belong out, or you let everyone in.

it's kind of amazing how people are defending stalking and harassing because they didn't lock the door.
That is as dumb as people saying. "You can't scan the item, it must be free"

[Bobby66]

irrelevant. They were asked to leave private property and they didn't.

This is not IRL, even if you ask someone to leave if their house door is open that means it is open to the public. The OP has two choices, lock the door and blacklist, or blacklist and ignore.

All the OP has done is make excuses as to why they do not wish to use the tools SE has provided, yet in the same breath complain SE has not done anything nor does not care. SE has given us tool. OP needs to take personal responsibility for their actions and their own “safety” and not solely expect those with authority to help.

Is it unfortunate that as the victim they have to be the one to make concessions and alter their play style / enjoyment of the game because of the one person? Yes, but that is the nature of online interactions. You cannot control others, only thing you can do is your control your own actions and how they effect you.

Yes a person is behind the screen, but this is far from IRL and even so one of the questions the police would ask if someone walked into their house and did not want to leave and the door was unlocked. Why was your door unlocked in the first place. The ignoring part is moot in the IRL context but even irl we have a duty to do the bare min to protect ourselves.