Recent Developments of TOS Actions Taken

[RyuSaarva]

Define the "normal civil behaviour" in the game that is not real life.
Is spamming one emote making angry someone is civil behaviour?

clearly not especially when it's a custom emote with vulgar words, you know what civil behavior is there is no need to pretend otherwise.

[Nyxn607]

I feel the main reason SE took action on this is two fold.

1. Arthas had his character and twitch linked through the lodestone, which is a SE owned and maintained webiste.

2. Arthas publicly on stream bashed the player using the players in game name, highlighting it and basically humiliating the person. This is also fairly recent to the TEA incident with Sfia's group on the world first clear.

In my opinion, Arthas deserves punishment from twitch more so than SE. The only question I have is, does having your twitch/player info linked to the lodestone remove the third party restriction for SE to take action? If not, then SE is in the wrong and should clarify what line you can and can't cross with third party programs explicitly. Not just "you shouldn't but we will look the other way unless ..."

[KageTokage]

It's obvious that parsers are okay to them, but I'm wondering where their line is for "going too far" in terms of third party programs, because things like ACT can be set up to automate callouts for mechanics based on debuffs (IE, it can call out positionings for both Limit Cuts in TEA based on what number you get), other add-ons can automatically set up markers based on what mechanics are happening, etc.

[Vnolan]

It's obvious that parsers are okay to them, but I'm wondering where their line is for "going too far" in terms of third party programs, because things like ACT can be set up to automate callouts for mechanics based on debuffs (IE, it can call out positionings for both Limit Cuts in TEA based on what number you get), other add-ons can automatically set up markers based on what mechanics are happening, etc.

The only things against the ToS that officially get a pass are parsing and some graphical mods. While they don't go after trigger use, they can at anytime they want.

What?! Avoid detection? From what?

What basis does SE have that proves said non in-game evidence actually came from the accused party, and not someone acting under an assumed name? How can SE know that evidence may or may not be doctored?

I really want to hear SE justify this, and their basis for how they KNEW the evidence was legit - How did they know the twitch streamer was actually the player and not just a "reaction video/stream", and how did they know how to link those social media accounts of the data miners to the SE accounts?

You know how everyone is aware that GMs can access chat logs and it's regularly suggested to not give them any proof if you're doing something you shouldn't? Like that, but for whatever method SE is using to verify the "third-party" info.

Right now, it seems like saying a single swear word accidentally or not is a grounds for a ban, but we have no idea because SE isnt transparent enough. How is not knowing if cursing is a bannable offense "avoiding detection"?

Profanity is not allowed:
User Agreement
"3.3 Profanity and Offensive Language. You may not use profanity or any language that a reasonable person would find offensive. The Game is for players aged 13 and older. You agree to behave accordingly."

There have been several cases on here and Reddit of players being suspended for it.

If you're talking about streaming, you'd have to ask a GM about that. I don't know why you would be concerned with that when there has been one case and it involved actions that affected another player.

If you want to know if something is allowed, you can attempt to contact a GM to get an official answer. Start to file a report like you would for harassment and ask your question there.

[VenKitsune]

Profanity is not allowed:
User Agreement
"3.3 Profanity and Offensive Language. You may not use profanity or any language that a reasonable person would find offensive. The Game is for players aged 13 and older. You agree to behave accordingly."

There have been several cases on here and Reddit of players being suspended for it.

If you're talking about streaming, you'd have to ask a GM about that. I don't know why you would be concerned with that when there has been one case and it involved actions that affected another player.

If you want to know if something is allowed, you can attempt to contact a GM to get an official answer. Start to file a report like you would for harassment and ask your question there.

That's the thing though - Words and language that others might find offensive is such a nebulous thing. To one person, saying "Darn" could be offensive to them, and as i said in an earlier post, some people even get offended by a simple "good morning" - They need to be clearer to what "Offensive language" is - There needs to be a certain level of maturity from players, sure, but when someone can get suspended or banned or even contacted by a GM in the first place for saying "Damnit"...Then thats when the rules need to be clearer.

[Valkyrie_Lenneth]

That's the thing though - Words and language that others might find offensive is such a nebulous thing. To one person, saying "Darn" could be offensive to them, and as i said in an earlier post, some people even get offended by a simple "good morning" - They need to be clearer to what "Offensive language" is - There needs to be a certain level of maturity from players, sure, but when someone can get suspended or banned or even contacted by a GM in the first place for saying "Damnit"...Then thats when the rules need to be clearer.

It specifically says :REASONABLE PERSON:


any language that a reasonable person would find offensive.

A reasonable person will not find darn or good morning offensive.

[monk-dps]

Why are people trying to paint this to whatever made up or over blown cause they have? Dude was in the wrong and clearly there was 98% real proof he was in said wrong. The wrong being he named and shamed. When even REDDIT has a no naming and shaming rule you KNOW it's a rule. Dude broke that on all accounts, so thats why he was banned. Honestly I don't think he was banned hard enough, clearly since he out right stated he'll never change. But that's another story and I'm not trying to talk about that. This has nothing to do with meters and whatnot, I guess the only reason it should come up is cause the player's name wasn't blocked out. Do I think SE over stepped? No. Dude has a massive following, dude broke rules even reddit has - naming and shaming- SE was provided clear proof it was said dude, AND he has the same info linked to his SE account so they know it was hi. SE did what any other company would've done. They did not over step, if anything all they need to do is apply that same logic to other things like the bots and sellers. Tho to be honest those are a bit harder to prove as those are in places like discord where you can easily fake things. It's alot harder to prove vs a live stream where the streamer's info is linked to SE site. Why does his massive following matter? Naming and shaming. The person in question could've had a massive amount of people trolling him ingame.

[Gula]

man_blinking_repeatedly.gif

Well, this happened.

I, personally, laugh. Because while I recognize parsers as a tool for improvement- this is why we can't have them. Especially with streamers who if they so much as sneeze in someone's direction, the attention will zero in on that individual. And in this case, it was in clear violation of the ToS. What I don't like is how inconsistent it is. Because I had video evidence of someone literally harassing me, following me [LIVE] and GMs wouldn't accept outside sources as proof. That person was never banned either.

Streamers with tact will modify the stream and/or make it so a witch hunt can't be initiated. This was not the case, they deserved the ban, and depending on how much money their slave fans throw at them, they could easily re-buy an account and do it all again.

[QT_Melon]

Yeah the parser is just a tool, and I distinctly remember Live Letters with Yoshi saying that he knows we use them, it was harassment that he was more concerned about. It was the Koike incident that put a nail in the coffer for having parsers in game. http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post4540031

It was NOT a nail int he coffin for using them in general even if it's a technical violation of the ToS.



In addition (and repeating), Arthars is unfortunately the worst example and person to back behind as a spokesperson for SE's recent stance. While I find Arthars entertaining, the problem is this situation and his smoke and mirrors game of a punishment he admits he deserves disheartening. It seems rather childish to try to use this as some kind of champion cause. He should have just quieted down, made a better statement about admitting guilt and said that the other slippery slope type questions regarding SE's stance should be taken up by those that those actually experiencing this issue.

He should have said he welcomed the dialog, but doesn't want to make a mockery of the issue by being the incident or being a mouthpiece.

The fact that he didn't hurt this situation far more than it helps to be honest.

(tl;dr it's like the equivalent of an admitted child molester/serial rapist murderer asking for more ethical treatment of prisoners)

[Kusanagi7]

he should have been banned for much longer and this whole thing is another reason sqeenix wont get behind official parsers.