Regarding the Revision of the Prohibited Activities and Account Penalty Policy

[Keddera_StormMoon]

I agree with you here, but not for the reasons you would think. SE has chosen to intervene because we as a community, failed. They wouldn't have to do things like this if everyone was respectable and courteous to one another, and obeyed the freakin rules. But no. We've forced their hands and there's going to be increased policing as a result. Everyone needs to look in a mirror instead of pointing fingers at SE. It's not their fault. It's ours.

I have to say - it's refreshing to see somebody who actually recognizes this. Because this has been my whole thought through the entire thread.

It's sad that in today's society it needs to be spelled out to people exactly what polite and acceptable behavior is - which tells me there are a lot of parents out there who clearly failed.

[CatfishCassie]

While thats right and proper in principle, I keep getting all these red flags that it can be abused, both ways even. Playing the victim on the part of the player who got critiqued and then filing reports in hopes of banning or warning the one who gave the critique (wheter it was constructive or not, doesn't matter) since you are pushing "playstyle" on others. Then on the other hand, the player giving the critique could see that the player playing sub optimally (wheter it is just some inconsistencies or just flat out Timmy the icemage again doesn't matter) since you could blame the other player from obstructing the gameplay and trolling and whatnot.

Now, instead of people talking about it, and things changing (or not) people are just kinda incentivized to just report, cause the rules are vague enough that you can just say, it really really hurt my feelings or something, and use that to solve your problems instead.

That was definitely my point. Putting the threat of the banhammer behind it changes the tone of what could've been a constructive policy into an ultimately destructive one.

[Gleipni]

And thats how Se put the freedom of speech out of the game,GG !

[Lauront]

Nope. But they can report you for infringing on gameplay, because the advice you're giving is unsolicited. If you want to coach the knowledge you've obtained, I suggest joining a program that allows you to do so instead of imposing your playstyle onto others in a dungeon. If that ice mage bothers you so much, then abandon the duty and form a premade party. DF isn't for your convenience. It's for everyone. Either bite or bail.

LMAO "imposing"

By not playing their job properly, they are weighing down on other players. He's not "imposing" his playstyle on anyone - he is explaining the mechanics of the game to the player. This can be done in a courteous and respectful way, or a matter of fact-ly one, or an abusive one. The rules should SOLELY deal with that latter instance, i.e. abusive behaviour.

If DF is for everyone, why should OTHER players be forced to put up with bad ones? You do realise that the option now will be to simply remove dead weight as opposed to helping players improve? Since that is an option.

DF is very much there for convenience. If you want to render it dysfunctional by having some players never improve as a result of a lack of feedback, that is an awful idea.

Although I don't think most players are so foolish as to ignore advice offered in good faith, this is just the sort of attitude that breeds narcissistic individuals unable to cope with the realities of the world.

The rules are intended to deal with abusive behaviour, harassment and cheating. Yet the way they are written catches much more than this, especially due to being at GM discretion. Hardly transparent.

[CatfishCassie]

I'm not giving advice, I'm pointing out a fact - you don't know how to play your job. I'm not out to coach either. If DF isn't for my convenience, it isn't for theirs either. Why do I have to sit in a dungeon for 40 minutes or bite a 30min penalty because someone is too lazy to read tooltips? And forming a PF is far from being immune from those type of players joining. And I constantly fail to see why do these players have the right to be entitled so much that no one can even point out objective facts about their gameplay. Would you be offended if your hair was covered in mud and I told you 'go wash your hair, it's dirty' because it's an unwanted opinion?
Why don't you tell those players to go through 'appropriate program's to actually learn to play before joining the DF parties?




I don't even need a third party tool to tell me people are bad because Suzaku dies to enrage at 20% health in a farm party. I see what people are doing and what skills they're using anyway. And telling them they should get better is only offensive to people who consider this game to be their personal safe space and who think they have the right to waste other people's time due to their own laziness. And it would be a dangerous precedent to consider 'all opinion that is unwanted' as offensive and punishable, that's just a sick environment. If you want to learn, join learning parties, don't join farm and clear parties when you don't have the skill or knowledge of mechanics to clear it. And anyone telling me that when I have no right to call out those people is just tragicomically ridiculous.

You have to sit in a dungeon for 40 minutes, or bite a 30 minute penalty, because duty finder is expressly a random party matcher. If you only want people of a certain skill level, you are free to form that party ahead of time and skip the random matching part. But if it's not your job to coach people, then it's also not your job to belittle people when you've decided to throw out your primary method of "quality control" so that you can do the dungeon a little faster (or, more correctly, with a little less interpersonal interaction). It never occurred to you, I suppose, that "your job" or not, you could avoid that 30 minute lockout with less than 5 minutes of education, and then you'd both come away better off... you because you weren't locked out for half an hour, and them because they learned something new.

[whiskeybravo]

The commies are coming.

[Xtrasweettea]

I have to say - it's refreshing to see somebody who actually recognizes this. Because this has been my whole thought through the entire thread.

It's sad that in today's society it needs to be spelled out to people exactly what polite and acceptable behavior is - which tells me there are a lot of parents out there who clearly failed.

The thing is that, what your version of "polite and acceptable behavior is" may not be the same as my version of "polite and acceptable behavior" is. I may find it completely polite to hold open doors for everyone: men, women, children, people of non-specified genders, gender-less individuals, etc. You may think that only women need to have the door held open for them. Who's "polite and acceptable behavior" wins here? Yours?

Also, we are playing with people from different culture and sub-cultures. Politeness carries differently in some rural town in Alabama, USA than in London, England. Who's set of societal social norms are correct and need to be followed? Who's parents clearly failed?

[Lauront]

Nevermind that this whole "just use PF" attitude would atrophy DF of more skilled players, who can convey their knowledge to those less capable, since they may just prefer to group with people they know, or make use of the option to remove under-performing players whilst remaining silent as to why they're doing it.

[CatsWithShoes]

vague rules and standards are open to the interpretation of the person making the decision, without knowing there is an peer review for this it seems to be allowing the GMs themselves to interpret how they want and a more free role to interject themselves into the situations. given the types of things that go on with abuses of power in tech companies in the states lately, do you really feel safe not knowing who is going to get to make these sorts of decisions about your behavior? Will it be a detached impersonal arbiter? or will it be a human being with their own prejudices and viewpoints?

as it is written this feels ripe for abuse and has the possibility of being used for people's own ideological crusades.

and I'm just talking about the GMs themselves. I'm sorry, no one is an island. we all have our own viewpoints and such vague rules will allow people to use their feelings to judge these situations rather than a set of rules.

There won't even necessarily be consistency either.

Very troubling. I feel bad about adding 90 days and pre-purchasing expac now :/

[CatfishCassie]

LMAO "imposing"

By not playing their job properly, they are weighing down on other players. He's not "imposing" his playstyle on anyone - he is explaining the mechanics of the game to the player. This can be done in a courteous and respectful way, or a matter of fact-ly one, or an abusive one. The rules should SOLELY deal with that latter instance, i.e. abusive behaviour.

If DF is for everyone, why should OTHER players be forced to put up with bad ones? You do realise that the option now will be to simply remove dead weight as opposed to helping players improve? Since that is an option.

DF is very much there for convenience. If you want to render it dysfunctional by having some players never improve as a result of a lack of feedback, that is an awful idea.

Although I don't think most players are so foolish as to ignore advice offered in good faith, this is just the sort of attitude that breeds narcissistic individuals unable to cope with the realities of the world.

The rules are intended to deal with abusive behaviour, harassment and cheating. Yet the way they are written catches much more than this, especially due to being at GM discretion. Hardly transparent.

Other players aren't forced to put up with bad players. Just like I can choose to leave and take the lockout when someone's being abusive to me, they can choose to leave and take the lockout if they think my play is sub-par. Just like I can choose to only play with people I already know because I've run into so many abusive players, they can choose to only play with people they know if they've run into so many sub-par ones. Duty Finder isn't "for everyone". Duty Finder is for people that don't care about the quality of their dungeon experience. If the quality of the experience means so much to someone that they feel the need to be abusive, they can make a pre-formed party with their friends instead, skip the abusiveness entirely, and be assured that they'll have a higher quality play experience.