Regarding the Revision of the Prohibited Activities and Account Penalty Policy

[Freyt]

I feel like that's an unfair analogy, because an individual person coming up and saying that to you is a lot more threatening than having those rules (even poorly) laid out in a document like this.

That's actually the point of the analogy. You don't feel the threat because it isn't someone coming up to you, which is why you're so much more complacent about it. The most dangerous threats are the ones you don't even realize are threats, because you're all that more likely to ignore them.

[StarRosie]

-snip-

The video in question puts forth the argument "FFXIV has gone full blown SJW" at its face, by having the thumbnail and title be as such, while it may contain more nuanced opinions, the front end argument is "FFXIV has gone full blown SJW" and one can disagree with such arguments because they used such a term as SJW. Because at this point SJW is such a broad, overarching, ran into the ground term. By all accounts, I could call you an SJW and be on the money. So the argument is built on the shaky ground of such a broad, vague term that the argument itself is weak. So you CAN disagree with the argument because they used such a term, because said term is so vague at this point, that arguing something has gone "SJW" is could mean just about anything..

This also does not mean the fact they reject all of his opinions, means they think FFXIV is a bad game, like you tried to pretty underhandedly suggest. It just means they reject that person's opinions and again, they could easily agree with someone like MrHappy that FFXIV is a good game.

The issue however is the fact that they decided to load the front end with a divisive term and due to this, one can perceive that the argument is built around this. Personally, I would have gone with a more nuanced title and such but it seems they wanted to charge a certain portion of people up and going by the comments, yeah it looks like they were squarely aiming at that crowd and hit that crowd. It is bad form to lead your argument not only with such a charged title but such a basically meaningless term.

Or to boil all this down to a single phrase. It is bad to start your argument by poisoning the well.

[Wolf_Heartnet]

The video in question puts forth the argument "FFXIV has gone full blown SJW" at its face, by having the thumbnail and title be as such, while it may contain more nuanced opinions, the front end argument is "FFXIV has gone full blown SJW" and one can disagree with such arguments because they used such a term as SJW. Because at this point SJW is such a broad, overarching, ran into the ground term. By all accounts, I could call you an SJW and be on the money. So the argument is built on the shaky ground of such a broad, vague term that the argument itself is weak. So you CAN disagree with the argument because they used such a term, because said term is so vague at this point, that arguing something has gone "SJW" is could mean just about anything..

This also does not mean the fact they reject all of his opinions, means they think FFXIV is a bad game, like you tried to pretty underhandly suggest. It just means they reject that person's opinions and again, they could easily agree with someone like MrHappy that FFXIV is a good game.

Edit incoming...

The term SJW and its meaning is not the point in question for this. The argument is not about Lalarrific disagreeing this one time. Lalarrific suggested that anyone who uses the term will get their opinion rejected unilaterally no matter what because they continue to use the term. Not this one time. This does mean that all opinion from this person in the video is rejected until he chooses to stop using the term. No, it is not underhanded either. It's simply pointing out a fallacy in the argument. I don't see what you're not understanding.

[Khanscott]

That's actually the point of the analogy. You don't feel the threat because it isn't someone coming up to you, which is why you're so much more complacent about it. The most dangerous threats are the ones you don't even realize are threats, because you're all that more likely to ignore them.

It all boils down to context, which is something that you cannot easily discern via emotionless text and emotes. Clear cases of harassment are not the problem here, what the person on the other end is perceiving is the problem. Getting a suspension for something unintentional is more likely to get people to leave the game or simply not interact with those they do not know. People play games to relieve the stress of having to walk on eggshells. Why subscribe to stress?

[StarRosie]

-snip-

Except for all we know, unless Lalarrific clarifies, yes, the term SJW and its meaning, are way they reject this person's opinions. How can you take someone's opinions seriously if they have to start their argument with such a meaningless term? I get what you are trying to say, I am just disagreeing with it because that isn't how things work. Life ain't black and white, it's grey. And you seem to be approaching this from a black and white standpoint. And yes, shoving words down someone's throat IS underhanded.

But then again, we are arguing pretty intensely over what very much seems to be a joke. So, yeah, there's that too.

[Wolf_Heartnet]

Except for all we know, unless Lalarrific clarifies, yes, the term SJW and its meaning, are way they reject this person's opinions. How can you take someone's opinions seriously if they have to start their argument with such a meaningless term? I get what you are trying to say, I am just disagreeing with it because that isn't how things work. Life ain't black and white, it's grey. And you seem to be approaching this from a black and white standpoint. And yes, shoving words down someone's throat IS underhanded.

But then again, we are arguing pretty intensely over what very much seems to be a joke. So, yeah, there's that too.

The term isn't meaningless. You just choose to give it no meaning. That is your problem.
and now your getting into pointless philosophy about black, white and grey. I am operating on the mere facts.
And no, pointing out fallacies is not shoving words down throats. By that logic, one could argue that peer review is underhanded.

Then we can just agree to disagree and leave it at that. We seem to be breaking no ground here anyways.

[StarRosie]

Honestly, what are people supposed to use?

Simple. "The new ToS raises some concerns." or "I have issues with the new ToS." or something of a similar vein, then go from there. Opening with "They've gone SJW!" is basically setting the battle lines. "If you agree with the rules, you're an SJW, if you agree with me, you're good." Now in no way am I saying that was the intent but front loading it in such a way does create such a divide and puts a "You're either with us or against us." vibe to the argument. But, that's just from my standpoint. I agree that the rules have some...questionable wording and I would very much like some clarification on some things, the vagueness worries me on both fronts, those who'd abuse the system to silence others and those who'd abuse the system to bully others.

However, SE has basically put forward a call for feedback and I think responding with...well to put it bluntly, hysteria, isn't the best way to give feedback. Be calm, clear and straightforward. No buzzwords, no fearmongering, no hysteria. Just "The wording here is pretty vague, can we please get some clarification and, if possible, I'd suggest maybe changing it to (Insert example here)", cause responding with "THEY'VE GONE SJW!" "THE END TIMES ARE UPON US!" "I'LL GET BANNED FOR BREATHING!" is the quickest way to get your feedback ignored.

[Jaywalker]

Simple. "The new ToS raises some concerns." or "I have issues with the new ToS." or something of a similar vein, then go from there. Opening with "They've gone SJW!" is basically setting the battle lines. "If you agree with the rules, you're an SJW, if you agree with me, you're good." Now in no way am I saying that was the intent but front loading it in such a way does create such a divide and puts a "You're either with us or against us." vibe to the argument. But, that's just from my standpoint. I agree that the rules have some...questionable wording and I would very much like some clarification on some things, the vagueness worries me on both fronts, those who'd abuse the system to silence others and those who'd abuse the system to bully others.

However, SE has basically put forward a call for feedback and I think responding with...well to put it bluntly, hysteria, isn't the best way to give feedback. Be calm, clear and straightforward. No buzzwords, no fearmongering, no hysteria. Just "The wording here is pretty vague, can we please get some clarification and, if possible, I'd suggest maybe changing it to (Insert example here)", cause responding with "THEY'VE GONE SJW!" "THE END TIMES ARE UPON US!" "I'LL GET BANNED FOR BREATHING!" is the quickest way to get your feedback ignored.

I agree with you 100% on all of this haha. I mentioned in a few past posts, but the panic here has been pretty extra for the kind of community in FFXIV.

I guess my question is though, while I'm totally with you on this not being an SJW type situation--is the term itself something that just never should be used in any situation?

My sense is that in FFXIV because things are calmer people are more prone to using it in trivial situations than elsewhere, and folks have been viewing it more as a way to shut down any opposing opinions. Which again, I think is real dumb. There really are communities where this stuff gets that heavy though, and that's the term that tends to get dropped there.

Tbh it's been weird seeing people go over the issue here because when stuff takes hold that kind of worry is warranted, but it's not going on here so it reads kind of like calling a papercut worthy of hospitalization.

[StarRosie]

I guess my question is though, while I'm totally with you on this not being an SJW type situation--is the term itself something that just never should be used in any situation?

Personally, I'd rather it not be used, it's just become another box to shove people into to ignore their opinions. But, I understand why some still use it the way they do. Yes, the stereotypical kind of person the term used to be associated with are real and I'd just call them what they are, extremists. Same for the counter culture of 'Anti SJWs', they're both just two groups of extremes. And I guess, you could use the term when it comes to them but, it just doesn't feel right in my opinion. Mostly because the term has become so broad and vague that you can easily just apply it to anyone.

Ah, but I'm rambling at this point, best way I can put it, I personally don't use those terms but, you can if you want to. It's your life and your words and your right to say those words and live that life. If that makes sense.

[Jaywalker]

Personally, I'd rather it not be used, it's just become another box to shove people into to ignore their opinions. But, I understand why some still use it the way they do. Yes, the stereotypical kind of person the term used to be associated with are real and I'd just call them what they are, extremists. Same for the counter culture of 'Anti SJWs', they're both just two groups of extremes. And I guess, you could use the term when it comes to them but, it just doesn't feel right in my opinion. Mostly because the term has become so broad and vague that you can easily just apply it to anyone.

Ah, but I'm rambling at this point, best way I can put it, I personally don't use those terms but, you can if you want to. It's your life and your words and your right to say those words and live that life. If that makes sense.

Totally fair. Thanks for the thoughtful response on this!

Also you're right on anti-sjws too. People keep spiraling into extremes and it's really a shame imo. For me I think I'll probably reserve the word for when it really is the only one that applies and there's no ambiguity. I know you worried on rambling but you offered a really good perspective on this I think, so again thank you.