Regarding the Revision of the Prohibited Activities and Account Penalty Policy

[Daralii]

Not jumping down that rabbit hole but this also does seem to outlaw modding... Which is kind of disappointing especially if it also bans the use of reshade.

Since Reshade is a .DLL injector, I think it's been against the rules since the start. Things like it and ACT just don't trigger an auto-ban from the system.

[InkstainedGwyn]

You've seen people saying exit lines when they leave after the first wipe ? oO

Frequently.

"Lrn 2play your classes, dumb***es."

"F*ing retards."

"Omg don't say farm if you're not ready" (we were listed as a learning party)

These are just some of the "quips" I've gotten as people have bailed before.

[InkstainedGwyn]

Since Reshade is a .DLL injector, I think it's been against the rules since the start. Things like it and ACT just don't trigger an auto-ban from the system.

Reshade has been one of those "nobody's going to ban you if you don't talk about it" mods from the beginning - but if someone had logs of you saying you were using it and decided to report you, could get you a suspension, if not a ban.

[Reinha]

・Expressions that unilaterally reject another person's opinion

I interpret this as not taking into account other people's views and dismissing them as invalid. (You don't raid so your input isn't needed here, the content isn't out so don't comment on it, a new player like you wouldn't know, the game isn't designed for solo players so their experience doesn't count, etc.)

・Expressions that compel a playing style

So, don't tell anyone that playing a certain way isn't optional. (Always Be Casting for example.) This part is going to be hardest on Mentors because they are often the first to introduce new players to the in-game culture which includes play style conformity. Another rule stated that abuse of the kick feature is forbidden so it may not be possible to kick based on differing play styles anymore. A neutral way to instruct a player is telling them how they could be playing differently and what benefit that would bring. (Whenever there isn't much damage coming in, if you use your damage spells then we clear this dungeon noticeably quicker and you will be less bored.)

・Expressions that attempt to unilaterally exclude someone from the game or content/community, etc.

I think this one means, don't advise anyone to quit the game or tell them their participation in content or in the community isn't ever welcome. (Never do hunts, you shouldn't be raiding, no one wants to see you posting on the forums, etc.)

Some other parts imply that bypassing the penalty for leaving a duty, parser/dps talk and disrupting the game play for other players in a non-harassing way can be reported and will be looked into, but time will tell if anyone is actually going to be penalized for those reasons.

[Kohdo]

The only thing I've seen in-game that *might* be worthy of intervention is JP players kicking competent English-speaking players from raid parties for not speaking Japanese. Only the English-speaking player in question didn't run to the GMs and whine about it like a child, he just went and found another party.

◆Offensive expression
"Offensive expression" means an expression in general that inflicts emotional distress by being offensive to another person. Offensive expression may include:

・Expressions that unilaterally reject another person's opinion
・Expressions that compel a playing style

No telling tank to use tank stance or mitigation, no telling DPS to use Diversion, no telling the healer to use Esuna.
Don't like it? Have a ban. Disagree with them about their "play style"? Have another.

◆Obstruction of play
・Spamming
This means using chat (including Quick Chat and Emote) to obstruct another person's conversation, or obstruct the use of mog letters, etc., for example, by sending an excessive number of unnecessary items in mog letters, etc. Even if obstruction was not the objective of the behaviour, it may be deemed a violation if another player is actually obstructed by the behaviour.

Lmfaooo don't send too many items in the mail! Don't use too many emotes in quick succession! Don't have a conversation with one or more people in local chat! Even if there's no intent to impede another player, if someone gets annoyed or their fee fees get hurt, you can catch a ban.

・Obstructing transit/progress
This means obstructive behaviour such as group blocking of passages or facilities along which many players pass or obstructing another person's game play progress, for example by overlapping an important NPC deliberately for a long time.

So every time new MSQ content drops they should just ban half the population of each server.

◆Monster Player Kill (MPK)
"MPK" means the act of sending a monster towards another person so that they are knocked out, or obstructing another person's game play.

Anyone pulling random mobs and their AOEs into the crowd forming at an NM gets righteously decimated by the Banhammer.

My favourite so far has to be this one:

・Other expressions that are offensive to another person

So literally anything. They could have just put this one and nothing else, it covers all the bases.

This change honestly feels completely unnecessary and sounds like a green light to ban anyone for anything and label any kind of discourse or disagreement 'toxic'. Only persistent harassment and the most egregious violations of the ToS should require GM intervention. People should be able to handle the run-of-the-mill annoying player on their own by using a modicum of common sense and discipline, not using the GMs as their own personal Hurt Feelings Hit-squad.

[Alaray]

The chat logs would confirm that:

He said the Tank should be playing Shield Oath instead of Sword Oath (based on prior posts) AND that he left first.
As a result of him leaving the party had to abandon and then disbanded. Reported.

It's GM discretion is my point. The rule you're citing is more likely to be used towards the Duty Finder system, than the Party Finder system. As one's a long queue you opt in for with the understanding you might end up in an instance you don't like, while the later has it's already defined rules and if the party doesn't meet those expectations laid out or someone needs to leave due to running out of available time, they can. Especially since PF groups don't have a time limit attached to them.

The disconnection point likely has to do with people taking advantage of d/cing in order to get kicked from instances, to exploit aspects of instances, or to circumvent design intention from SE.

If someone was reported for leaving a PF, the likelihood anything would be done even under these rules is basically nil. If someone was reported for "Compelling a different playstyle" that's up to GM discretion to decide whether or not the exchange warranted it, and the note of "reasonable people" is used in the ruleset. If it was overtly rude, or laced with vulgarities, then yeah you'd get punished as per the other rules that dictate conduct with strangers they have set forth.


Kind of like if you're in a Seiry Ex Farm Party but no one understands what they're doing, or your shield oath-only tank is part of the reason the party can't beat the enrage. The likelihood a GM would action someone for leaving that instance is low, and I'd be more surprised if they actually did unless there were other variables in the chatlogs involved. And even if they did, it wouldn't be a ban. Or even a temporary suspension. Probably not even a warning. At worst it'd just be a caution, and in the most likely scenario it'd be nothing.


There's not a lot of clarity with a lot of the rules they made, such as the "unilaterally disagreeing with opinion" one, but this example you're making is a bit of a reach.

[KaivaC]

Came to the forums expecting salt.

You guys did not disappoint.

[InkstainedGwyn]

So I get the worry at SE going too far, and I'm not going to even try to predict if they will or not.

However, I find it interesting that everybody has immediately jumped to the conclusion that "free speech is dead I can no longer be myself or I'll be banned" and not thought more about situations like the ones we read about "my ex is stalking me and won't remove me from their friends list and constantly makes alts to send me rude/disturbing messages, but SE says they can't step in so all I can do is blacklist them".

I honestly believe this sort of thing at least was created more for the latter than the former. Is there room for the former? Probably. But for people who assume that's why these were put in place, I don't agree.

[Rockette]

Boy, I can't wait to try the new Super Hard eureka dungeon content with 56 other people where we are on the chopping block for suggesting game play.

[MorbolvampireQueen6]

I think if ppl dont like what others say it shouldn't be reportable ppl need to learn blacklist thats what its 4