It does not and, ironically, you are being unreasonable in your interpretation of the rules. These rules have originally been put in place to protect their employees from harassment, which does have a specific legal definition, which is the one that would be employed in the policy. So, with the fact these policies are designed to protect the employees, I will go back and look at some of the claims you have made.
Starting with this post:
Post 1
1. "For example, what qualifies as intimidating, a personal attack, or discriminatory can depend on the person."
If you do not attack a person specifically, you cannot, by definition, intimidate, personally attack or discriminate someone. This is the same as walking into a store, going up to a member of staff and start shouting in their face, calling them stupid and discriminating against them. n this example, the store has every right to not serve you at all and can kick you out. SO why would it be any different here? Harass the staff, be denied service and yes, this includes cases where you have either paid for a service or are paying a subscription. Just because you have paid does not give you the right to harass the staff.
2. " In other words, they can terminate your service just because they decided that you made too many posts asking for viera hats, or complaining about the English localization, or asking for more content, or asking for a previous worker to come back instead of some new one, etc"
Asking for Viera hats is fine, that is a reasonable criticism, other races can wear all hats after all. However, spamming the forum every day with the same topic over and over could be considered harassment, you already have a topic, keep it to that.
English localisation, as long as it is criticism, it is fine. If you then went and attacked the localisation team, calling them stupid or something, we then tread into harassment. You can criticise the localisation without attacking the team.
Asking for more content is fine. I can make a topic asking for relic weapons to start earlier in the expansion, as long as I don't attack the team for it.
I can ask for a previous member of staff to come back, no problems, as long as I explain why and don't harass the current one.
You can leave criticism/feedback as much as you like, just do not attack the employees over it.
Which is where we get into 'unreasonable', legally speaking, something is reasonable if it is accepted by the general population that it is considered publicly acceptable to do. I would guess in the vast majority of the world it is acceptable to leave criticism and feedback, however, it is not acceptable to attack employees. Going back to the store analogy I made earlier, you can, 100%, go to a member of staff, ideally one at customer services so it goes to the right place, and say, there is something I do not like, here is why, can you please look into it. This can be taken away and looked into and decided on whether to address it or not. Perfectly fine so far. Again, start shouting and screaming at them etc. it then become harassment, and you can be denied service.
Which brings me to the comment about content creators. As long as they review the game and criticise it without attacking anyone, that is perfectly fine. If you make a bad choice in a game, and everyone is saying X and Y is bad because of this, it is all just feedback the devs can use to, potentially, improve the game. If you, however, add into it how the devs are incompetent and stupid and that is the main theme of your video, then you get into harassment territory.
As you have likely noticed, there is a clear line. Do not attack the employees.
In one of your
later posts you then ask the question: "In regards to nobody getting banned for just complaining and criticising, would you put your neck on the line over it?" My answer, yes. Nowhere in the policy does it say you cannot criticise/leave feedback for the game. It is all about protecting the employees. Be respectful when leaving the feedback, you have nothing to worry about.