Regarding the Revision of the Prohibited Activities and Account Penalty Policy

[WaterShield]

That sounds accurate.
The NN today was particularly combative - people complaining they can't act horribly to people without being called out on it.
'Freedom of speech'/snowflakes/trolls... all the limited vocabulary children and maladjusted adults roll out when someone questions their stupidity.

You just broke the new rules. You could be reported for that in game as you have caused them distress and are rejecting their thinking. You are also insulting them and could be triggering someone using those pejoratives to describe them.

Also I'm actually serious.

[LittleArrow]

Leaving feedback on the new policies:

I'm in firm opposition to these new policies due to them being misused and at the discretion of a GM team that I have not experienced as effective. There's too much wiggle room and even declared within the policy to be left at the discretion of an employee who does not have an appropriate set of guidelines for me to believe in any form of fair judgement being used. These rules should be streamlined to address true forms of harassment rather than overreaching over every aspect of interaction. Not every aspect of interaction should be regulated by a GM - that's why you (SE) have given use tools to address these issues ourselves (BList / Blocking / Server transfer / Name change / etc) I understand that some of these options are paid options, but they are options none the less. To SE - I am currently looking to drastically pull my financial support from this game, I will not reccomend this game to my friends or family, and I will be on the lookout for a new game in the future. I am a 1.0 player. I have been on the receiving end of harassment. I also know we're all human. We all make mistakes and sometimes punishment is required to really make those lessons stick. However, this is going too far. Disagreements are diversity of opinion, and more diversity breeds growth in players. Your game has been successful under the previous rules, there was no reason to go this far - please reconsider these policies.

In regards to 2 defenses I've been seeing, just my thoughts: 1. Nothing's changed, banning / punishment has always been at the discretion of the GM's: If nothing's changed, then why roll out these new policies that is dividing the playerbase? Why not make minor changes instead of an entire page of a post? 2. These are big changes, they are needed, but they won't be abused - good people have nothing to worry about: Whether they will or will not is yet to be seen; however, the tools are now there that weren't before. Those tools will cause a shift in the playerbase, and this community will not be the same as it once was - whether for the better or worse depending on your preference. The fact that there is a clear path for abuse when there wasn't, is a problem.

[DarienChiba]

Leaving feedback on the new policies:

I'm in firm opposition to these new policies due to them being misused and at the discretion of a GM team that I have not experienced as effective. There's too much wiggle room and even declared within the policy to be left at the discretion of an employee who does not have an appropriate set of guidelines for me to believe in any form of fair judgement being used. These rules should be streamlined to address true forms of harassment rather than overreaching over every aspect of interaction. Not every aspect of interaction should be regulated by a GM - that's why you (SE) have given use tools to address these issues ourselves (BList / Blocking / Server transfer / Name change / etc) I understand that some of these options are paid options, but they are options none the less. To SE - I am currently looking to drastically pull my financial support from this game, I will not reccomend this game to my friends or family, and I will be on the lookout for a new game in the future. I am a 1.0 player. I have been on the receiving end of harassment. I also know we're all human. We all make mistakes and sometimes punishment is required to really make those lessons stick. However, this is going too far. Disagreements are diversity of opinion, and more diversity breeds growth in players. Your game has been successful under the previous rules, there was no reason to go this far - please reconsider these policies.

In regards to 2 defenses I've been seeing, just my thoughts: 1. Nothing's changed, banning / punishment has always been at the discretion of the GM's: If nothing's changed, then why roll out these new policies that is dividing the playerbase? Why not make minor changes instead of an entire page of a post? 2. These are big changes, they are needed, but they won't be abused - good people have nothing to worry about: Whether they will or will not is yet to be seen; however, the tools are now there that weren't before. Those tools will cause a shift in the playerbase, and this community will not be the same as it once was - whether for the better or worse depending on your preference. The fact that there is a clear path for abuse when there wasn't, is a problem.

It won't be abused.

Banned players = less money

less money = LESS MONEY

Simple

[Keddera_StormMoon]

Reading some of the comments in here, it actually surprises me how much people blindly trust in authority. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It's more a case that I know I behave myself. I also know that losing a game account, no matter how much time I've put into a game, is meaningless in the grand scheme of things.

If these were laws that were about to go live for my country or town, I'd have a different mindset.

[Zanos]

It won't be abused.

Banned players = less money

less money = LESS MONEY

Simple

GMs and lawsuits presumably also cost money. A bigger grey area means there's less pressure on a GM to spend time making a decision that actually fits into the policy, and gives players less room to contend the decision.

[Melichoir]

I am aware irl stalking has little to do with this, but I merely mentioned it to let you know the magnitude of the stalking that took place. People seem to keep only the irrelevant information in mind. (not trying to be rude or mean)

And you can still see them. You just don't get the chat spam. From experience.

That should be corrected, the emote issue that is. SE should address that aspect atleast.

I know yorue not being rude, as Im not trying to be rude either. I guess maybe a bit blunt or inarticulate. In any case, these new rules would help in that specific in game case, but the broadness of them I feel is gonna come back and bite us (the player base) in the ass.

[LittleArrow]

It won't be abused.

Banned players = less money

less money = LESS MONEY

Simple

I feel like I already responded to this in my post, but just to further explain it (and my last post b/c I feel I already got most of my feedback out there to SE):

These policies are an axe over our head - it's suggested that this axe will never be used b/c of many reasons (and many of those reasons are GOOD reasons); however, there is still an axe over our heads that wasn't before. That makes people uncomfortable. No matter whether the axe is used or not, a huge successful playerbase got used to there being no axe and now there is one. That WILL (and already has) changed the perception of how community members interact.

In either case, thanks for the response and reading my post.

[zztoluca]

I feel like I already responded to this in my post, but just to further explain it (and my last post b/c I feel I already got most of my feedback out there to SE):

These policies are an axe over our head - it's suggested that this axe will never be used b/c of many reasons (and many of those reasons are GOOD reasons); however, there is still an axe over our heads that wasn't before. That makes people uncomfortable. No matter whether the axe is used or not, a huge successful playerbase got used to there being no axe and now there is one. That WILL (and already has) changed the perception of how community members interact.

In either case, thanks for the response and reading my post.

Good analogy

[NanaWiloh]

*watches everyone run and jump off the cloud covered cliff*

[Yshnal]

Do you have something against freedom and/or the people who might want to scream freedom!?

No, I just find it funny that people are reacting like this over some rules that any sane person would just take as something that's common sense when dealing with nowadays gaming/online communities, to the point where some of them seemingly are even trying to relate these rules to some kind of world conspiracy against their supposed fundamental rights on a videogame. I can't even help but wonder if the vast majority of these same "keyboard warriors" actually do anything to fight for their rights, or those of their equals, in the real world. Heck, I'm almost sure that a lot of them use other online services with literally terrible and abusive ToS, yet they do nothing against them.

Of course, I might be mistaken, because I don't have the absolute truth. But what I'm seeing is an overreaction when thinking about how ridiculous and out of context some claims and examples are. As I said, yes, the rules are a bit vague. But they need to be this way due to the nature of the people that they're aimed to; the same people that have been bending the ToS and mechanics to their benefit for years, despite the devs clearly trying to fix these attitudes. It's obvious that SE isn't going to change the ToS every single day after these people find any loopholes to abuse, just because some are scared of a game company happily throwing their money to the bin due to handing bans like candy (it's a pretty straightforward cause-effect that even the higher ups can see easily, unlike having games fail due to them being bad/rushed, or do shitty moves with DLC and stuff). If it happens you'll have ground to complain, and I'll be the first one to be there calling them out as I've done countless times. But I don't see any reason to do it right now, at least not like some are doing.