1 House 1 FC per DC Only

[PaalHenrik]

words

Your first point: It's a guidance. Not a restriction.

Your second point: It is not a bug or an exploit to be able to purchase more than one FC house.

Not against the ToS.

[ChooChooTraaaaaaaaain]

If you have something to offer go for it otherwise the goal post moving is getting pretty trite. But for the sake of posterity I will again post the relevant sections.

As always, no answers produced. No evidence produced. No substance produced. Nothing but the same nonsense repeated over and over again. Your answer serves only to mislead passing readers, because that's what you are good at. Let's break this down for the masses shall we?

What you posted:


The lines you quoted are from two separate documentations.
>> The section you quoted for 2.1 Cheating and Botting is directly pulled from the Terms of Service.

>> The line you quoted about Land Ownership is pulled from Additional Plots and Purchasing Guide. This is a completely different entity from the Terms of Service.

--------

The argument you are pushing about Land Ownership does not reside in the Terms of Service, or even indirectly. Details below:

• Land Ownership guidelines are not included in the Terms of Service.
• Land Ownership that exceeds the amount of 1 FC and 1 House is not detailed, identified, or regarded to as a bug.
• Land Ownership that exceeds the amount of 1 FC and 1 House is not detailed, identified, or regarded to an exploit.
• Land Ownership that exceeds the amount of 1 FC and 1 House does not have a consequence with a violation in the same language or nature as section 2.1 Cheating and Botting or other related sections that have consequences tied to actions in the Terms of Service.
• Owning more than one service account is not detailed, identified, or regarded to as an exploit or bug.
• Circumvention of the suggested plot maximum per the Additional Plots and Purchasing Guide does not fall under the pretense of section 2.1 because it does not fit the criteria of being a bug or an exploit.

You have failed to make a valid connection between bug/exploit and multiple house ownership.

--------

If anything, the content and nature of your posting and the misinformation you continue to feed into this section of the forum repeatedly violates rules detailed in the FFXIV Forum Guidelines.

Enforcement begins with yourself.

[Nepentha]

If you have something to offer go for it otherwise the goal post moving is getting pretty trite. But for the sake of posterity I will again post the relevant sections.

You haven't shown that owning more than on FC house per world is actually a bug or exploit, despite latching onto this idea and pushing it constantly.

Also, what goalpost shifting? You already posted two threads that were removed, we haven't forgotten they were there. This entire crusade of yours came about because you saw something you didn't like and /you/ have been busy goalpost shifting to justify it this entire time.

I'm guessing you'll just shift those goals again.

[Jojoya]

That's what a psychopath does.

While I've got my own issue with that poster to the point I've stopped engaging with him, calling him a psychopath is going too far. That's not how a psychopath behaves at all.

I think the word you should have used is "fanatic".

If you want to try to keep reasoning with him, that's your option. Most of us have given up because he's beyond reason. He's got his opinion and he will not stray from it.

[ChooChooTraaaaaaaaain]

While I've got my own issue with that poster to the point I've stopped engaging with him, calling him a psychopath is going too far. That's not how a psychopath behaves at all.

I think the word you should have used is "fanatic".

If you want to try to keep reasoning with him, that's your option. Most of us have given up because he's beyond reason. He's got his opinion and he will not stray from it.

With all do respect Mr. Jojoya but what I'm about to type somewhat contradicts what I am about to ask of you. Being that you are one of the most active posters in this forum I feel you should lead by example and shelve the picky opinions about trivial things like choice of thesaurus use. It would allow this forum to stay on target more often given the climate of this forum section and how easily people's emotion's are piqued by the smallest things.

Now, let me make it very clear.
This is not a reasoning. I am not asking for a compromise or settlement.

I am here to call out someone who is flatly wrong and using people's emotions (such as the example above regarding trivial details) in this forum to mislead and portray what is actually right and wrong and grey area in a way that serves his personal narrative. He is not here to represent people who are for or against housing ownership and it's future state. He simply needs you to fuel his ridiculous crusade by taking advantage of the chaotic situation.

If this part of the forum were to choose one thing to at least agree on, it should be to slam the report button on this guy until this goblin is purged. Full stop.

[PredatoryCatgirl]

If this part of the forum were to choose one thing to at least agree on, it should be to slam the report button on this guy until this goblin is purged. Full stop.

Considering how seriously people don't take him, that's kind of like trying to kill a gnat with a machine gun, don't you think?

[PaalHenrik]

Considering how seriously people don't take him, that's kind of like trying to kill a gnat with a machine gun, don't you think?

This mental picture made me laugh so hard. Thanks!

[CatStarwind]

It's not a bug or an exploit if the official housing guide describes the conditions and steps required to buy additional houses.

By all means, point to where it explicitly mentions that being the intention; in direct opposition to the listed Requirements. I'll even ignore the fact that what you're referencing is under the Temporary section.

As always, no answers produced. No evidence produced. No substance produced.

Then what are you replying to?

The argument you are pushing about Land Ownership does not reside in the Terms of Service, or even indirectly.

Yes. First, it's not an argument it's a statement of fact. Second, and in this context, both must be observed as we are dealing with an exploit, which is, as the TOS puts it "taking advantage game system[s]".

To put it simply, a requirement is laid out in how a game system ought to work; in this case the FC purchase and ownership. Strictly from the Requirements, in plain language it limits 1 Service Account, on 1 World to 1 FC plot. Circumventing this with a temporary stop-gap can and is considered an exploit as it is taking advantage of a loophole for a purpose not intended.

That's it. That's all there is to it. No gratuitous amount forum styling or toxic posting required. I'm not even sure why the majority of your point included a situation I have not touched on (multiple service accounts), other than for the fact you don't actually have anything to say.

Enforcement begins with yourself.

So true, that's how SE got into this mess in the first place. Too much faith in peoples humanities.

I'm guessing you'll just shift those goals again.

By all means illustrate your point, my post history is public here. Otherwise I'm not sure what the point of gaslighting this is.

While I've got my own issue with that poster to the point I've stopped engaging with him, calling him a psychopath is going too far. That's not how a psychopath behaves at all.

I think the word you should have used is "fanatic".

If you want to try to keep reasoning with him, that's your option. Most of us have given up because he's beyond reason. He's got his opinion and he will not stray from it.

"It is what it is" is hardly a 'reason'. At least it does seem you have some modicum of limit to the abuse thrown around by the people you defend. Good for you.

If this part of the forum were to choose one thing to at least agree on, it should be to slam the report button on this guy until this goblin is purged. Full stop.

Calling for mass reporting on a single user for no legitimate reason? Oh my.

[Nepentha]

By all means illustrate your point, my post history is public here. Otherwise I'm not sure what the point of gaslighting this is..

Accuses me of gaslighting.

Is actually the one gaslighting the forums.

For those of us who have been here for awhile and observed your argument's evolution and goal post shifting, you're not going to gaslight /us/.

[CatStarwind]

I mean considering the fact that I've not changed in position as Jojoya implied, it would be strange to call it gaslighting. I do wonder what it's called, however, when someone fabricates a narrative. I look forward to the examples you have in store for me, I'm sure you just forgot to include them this time.