Tank entitlement vs group entitlement

[van_arn]

Umm... the examples you give for the WHM and the DPS are actually valid and acceptable reasons to kick those jobs respectively. The example you give of the tank is not a valid reason. You're attempting to shoehorn a "reason" that doesn't actually exist for purpose of your narrative.

In the WHM case, they are wasting significant amounts of time by going AFK constantly.
In the DPS case, they are wasting significant amounts of time by not completing the content in a timely manner.

But in the case of the tank you bring up, the tank isn't wasting significant time at all. Pulling single groups rather than mass pulling has been proven time and again to not have a significant affect on clear time. At best there is no difference in time, and at worst it's a few minutes slower (kinda like how people who speed 10 miles over the speed limit only gain about 2 minutes on average).

You are completely correct about your healer and dps examples, however.

Throw out the examples, then.

If two people in the party really hate your glamour -- perhaps they find it offensive -- you are kicked.

If two people recognize your name and want you gone, you are kicked.

If someone blindly clicks yes to a vote kick, you are kicked.

If you get hung up on justifications for this or that, you'll miss the more important fact of the matter: you are kicked, and Square is going to see that as the party didn't want you there. That, in itself, carries more weight than any sort of rule Square can put up on their TOS. They cannot force people to want to play together.

[Kaedan]

If you get hung up on justifications for this or that, you'll miss the more important fact of the matter: you are kicked, and Square is going to see that as the party didn't want you there. That, in itself, carries more weight than any sort of rule Square can put up on their TOS. They cannot force people to want to play together.

If SE determines that the reason for kicking the person is an abusive one, they can and have warned and banned people for abusing the kick system. This "SE doesn't have the right to..." BS is just that. SE has every right if they think it breaks their ToS.

Calling your bluff on that. Any incidence where you've heard of people getting actioned had been down to harassment in chat, not the kick itself.

It's not a bluff. My cousin works for SE's CS. She has told me about quite a few cases where people have been warned/banned for abusing the kick feature (kicking without valid reason), among other reasons people get banned. Kicking without a valid reason is and of itself considered harassment by SE's CS.

[Vnolan]

Huh? You're not serious, right? It's the very definition of forcing their style of play on tank. "Play our way or get kicked"

You're free to report it, but nothing will happen as it's not against the ToS. Similarly, players are free to kick no-dps healers and DPS that don't know a proper rotation or how to use AoE.

but their actions were petty, immature and irrational. Especially since I guarantee they wasted more time waiting for a tank replacement than they would have saved by mass pulling.

It's more about the kicked player's lack of respect for the party's time than it is about the time itself. That run may have taken longer, but if the tank starts pulling more in future runs as a result, that kick will end up saving many hours for other players.

snip

The party that kicked was completely in the right. Tanks can usually get away with being divas because their role is played by so few, but if the party doesn't have an issue with waiting for a rep, tanks can be held to the same standards as other roles.

Pace is considered a group effort in the sense that it is expected for DPS to AoE, yet if the overall group is capable of larger pulls and the tank says otherwise then in that case the tank is correct is dictating the pace, but I thought pace was a collective effort.

"Spamming Flash/Overpower/Unleash is too hard so I'm only going to do small pulls"
That's their only argument. Laugh at them and then kick.

If two people in the party really hate your glamour -- perhaps they find it offensive -- you are kicked.

If two people recognize your name and want you gone, you are kicked.

Those have no effect on gameplay so those reasons wouldn't be allowed. Same for race.

[van_arn]

If SE determines that the reason for kicking the person is an abusive one, they can and have warned and banned people for abusing the kick system. This "SE doesn't have the right to..." BS is just that. SE has every right if they think it breaks their ToS.

Calling your bluff on that. Any incidence where you've heard of people getting actioned had been down to harassment in chat, not the kick itself. (Past the addition of the time and loot lockout)

Furthermore, the TOS can't make players want to play together. Square can encourage players to do that, such as when they include a duty finder penalty, but they can't make players act together.

If the party wants you gone, hell or high water will not keep you there tos or no tos.

[Greven]

Calling your bluff on that. Any incidence where you've heard of people getting actioned had been down to harassment in chat, not the kick itself. (Past the addition of the time and loot lockout)

Furthermore, the TOS can't make players want to play together. Square can encourage players to do that, such as when they include a duty finder penalty, but they can't make players act together.

If the party wants you gone, hell or high water will not keep you there tos or no tos.

Of course, if majority vote dismiss on a player that player will get kicked. That's for sure. The question posed by the OP was another though, more about understanding the context and the feeling of entitlement.

BTW do we have any proof that vote dismiss abuse is not against ToS and can't incur punishment?

[van_arn]

If SE determines that the reason for kicking the person is an abusive one, they can and have warned and banned people for abusing the kick system. This "SE doesn't have the right to..." BS is just that. SE has every right if they think it breaks their ToS.



It's not a bluff. My cousin works for SE's CS. She has told me about quite a few cases where people have been warned/banned for abusing the kick feature (kicking without valid reason), among other reasons people get banned. Kicking without a valid reason is and of itself considered harassment by SE's CS.

If this is true, and I have no reason to believe it is anything more than "my dad works at Nintendo" then it's so rare as to be insignificant compared to the vast majority of cases.

[Feidam]

Of course, if majority vote dismiss on a player that player will get kicked. That's for sure. The question posed by the OP was another though.

BTW do we have any proof that vote dismiss abuse is not against ToS and can't incur in any punishment?

We only have the TOS and policies put in place by SE. anecdotal evidence is hard to believe because there tends to always be more to the story.

Edit. I just googled being banned from ffxiv with a few different reasons and there are stories of being banned for all that I googled. Of course it is again anecdotal so hard to say they have any validity.

[van_arn]

Of course, if majority vote dismiss on a player that player will get kicked. That's for sure. The question posed by the OP was another though, more about understanding the context and the feeling of entitlement.

BTW do we have any proof that vote dismiss abuse is not against ToS and can't incur punishment?

We have a gm post explaining the four options for kick are not an exhaustive list, and there are an infinite number of ways to be considered disruptive and to justify calling something disruptive. Something like glamor being something you can kick over would be hyperbole, but can't really be ruled out due to how wide open their explanation is-- ultimately that would have to be glamor used in such an obnoxious, unintended way as to take the party out of the dungeon and want to argue.

For anything less, you'd have trouble getting the vote unless it was never spoken about.

Gm aside though, if people don't want to play with you, you can't compel them to do so. That's like kindergarten tier social skills.

[Vnolan]

BTW do we have any proof that vote dismiss abuse is not against ToS and can't incur punishment?

Vote dismiss abuse is against the ToS and is punishable, but it has to be classified as abuse. Dismissing a tank that doesn't want to pull more mobs, a healer that doesn't use offensive spells or a DPS that doesn't use AoE wouldn't be considered abuse.

[Feidam]

Vote dismiss abuse is against the ToS and is punishable, but it has to be classified as abuse. Dismissing a tank that doesn't want to pull more mobs, a healer that doesn't use offensive spells or a DPS that doesn't use AoE wouldn't be considered abuse.

Eh. Think I’ll error on the side of I want to play the game and not risk being suspended or banned after they went through the effort of adding to the TOS. The extra few minutes that the run might take are not worth possibly losing access to the hobby I enjoy. Just my take. I find it hard to believe that SE would post rules and then not enforce them. I mean I doubt they suspend or ban on one offense, assuming the offense wasn’t a large one, but I imagine they look for patterns. So for me to vote kick the “offense” needs to be more notable than doing normal pulls or a healer not dpsing.