Warning for "Grief" Tactics?!

[technole]

Well it is a fairly common occurrence and pretty much well known that people omit certain details pertaining to their sanction because it doesn't conform to their innocent narrative

People will want a little more than "I promise I done nothing wrong".

OP's behavior tells me there was a bit more than what was described. What was described is almost enough that they weren't totally in the clear when it comes to getting a warning.

Even telling people 'hey sorry, internet problems' can go a long way. People can't read your mind, for all they know they had a tank bail on them during their EW experience and the GM probably had to deal with something similar lately. A lot of factors can add up, but attitude and just being honest about what's going on can dispel a lot of situations, and prevent getting reported.

[Kaurhz]

OP's behavior tells me there was a bit more than what was described. What was described is almost enough that they weren't totally in the clear when it comes to getting a warning.

Even telling people 'hey sorry, internet problems' can go a long way. People can't read your mind, for all they know they had a tank bail on them during their EW experience and the GM probably had to deal with something similar lately. A lot of factors can add up, but attitude and just being honest about what's going on can dispel a lot of situations, and prevent getting reported.

9/10 there's always something more to it when the first course of action is to kick up a fuss on the forums and then go for the "Can't beat em, join em" crusade. Especially when underpinned by certain mannerisms. Personally I'd just have tried to dispute it in silence, if said dispute didn't work then I'd try and push for a DSAR so I could at least push to get a copy of the corresponding logs. If I could have done something better then I'll keep it in mind for the future.

[Liam_Harper]

9/10 there's always something more to it when the first course of action is to kick up a fuss on the forums and then go for the "Can't beat em, join em" crusade.

Of course, that means there's 1/10 where it actually was an unreasonable case. After all many players would be rather titled at an unfair account warning out of the blue and while they aren't doing themselves any favors by reacting badly, it's somewhat understandable.

The ToS are a little vague and boil down to GM discretion and GM's are only human. I'm personally skeptical towards either side when it comes to stories like this. There's just no way to know and it's not worth assuming anything. But it is probably a good idea to be cautious in groups with anything that might risk a violation, even if it's not direct harassment.

[Kaurhz]

Of course, that means there's 1/10 where it actually was an unreasonable case. After all many players would be rather titled at an unfair account warning out of the blue and while they aren't doing themselves any favors by reacting badly, it's somewhat understandable.

The ToS are a little vague and boil down to GM discretion and GM's are only human. I'm personally skeptical towards either side when it comes to stories like this. There's just no way to know and it's not worth assuming anything. But it is probably a good idea to be cautious in groups with anything that might risk a violation, even if it's not direct harassment.

Yes an unreasonable case which a reasonable individual would still infer that it is a good idea to dispute the action carried out by the GM - The 1/10 cases are pretty much when it is someone asking for genuine advice relating to a sanction as opposed to trying to play a spiteful crusade, really.. Personally, given how gaming communities are on forums I'm always very disinclined to give benefit of the doubt to the player especially when there's first-hand evidence of their mannerisms beforehand. If it tilts them, then they should focus that energy in such a way that will allow them to get the information they want. In reality it is just people trying to self-victimise.

There's sufficient information in there that if you're able to view something outside of the black and white spectrum and take into account both tone and context then you should have no real issue inferring what examples or situations would and wouldn't constitute as a violation of the Terms of Services. Many players have this irrational anxiety associated with the ToS that they believe they can be reported and banned for absolutely anything. When in reality it stems more from an inability to follow the terms more than anything else, even by a reasonable standard. EDIT: In fact, I would stand to argue that the community wouldn't be happy unless they cite every single example of what would constitute as a violation of a given clause - In which case we would have a thesaurus sized ToS. People barely read it as is, let alone if they would add more clarification to it.

Had this similar thread/discussion before when the whole ToS were initially revised to cover RMT advertisements on PF. Reality of the case then is that they didn't change - People just didn't read them in the first place. Equally so, people felt they weren't asking for a permit to be rude, yet subsequently presenting a rude undertone.

[Senn]

OP's behavior tells me there was a bit more than what was described. What was described is almost enough that they weren't totally in the clear when it comes to getting a warning.

Even telling people 'hey sorry, internet problems' can go a long way. People can't read your mind, for all they know they had a tank bail on them during their EW experience and the GM probably had to deal with something similar lately. A lot of factors can add up, but attitude and just being honest about what's going on can dispel a lot of situations, and prevent getting reported.

It's possible the report was for something else entirely different. Or perhaps they have gotten reported for the same things in the past, and now they finally got a warning. I am not sure how a GM would determine which disconnects are intentional and which aren't. Maybe they take into consideration how often it happens?

Question, why are you on the forum and fighting/crying with someone else then?

When they get called out, they resort to calling people crybabies.
What was said to me went way beyond just a disagreement. Too disgusting to go into further detail, but just know it was pretty bad.

[LittleChickenNugget]

What was said to me went way beyond just a disagreement. Too disgusting to go into further detail, but just know it was pretty bad.

I'll keep you guys posted when I actually start crying, I promise. Though Senn, I'm curious. What DID I say to you that was so disgusting? If it was disgusting, SO bad, I wouldn't be allowed to post on the forums at all. So please, explain how because I didn't want male viera, I'm a monster who left a scar on you through the internet? We can make a new topic for it if you'd like.

On topic; It is possible to get reported for something else that happened at another point down the road. Doesn't mean that people shouldn't be allowed to know what they've done wrong so they can fix it down the road. I've never been in trouble in game, how would I know to fix a problem I didn't see existing?

[Senn]

So please, explain how because I didn't want male viera, I'm a monster who left a scar on you through the internet?

LOL it had nothing to do with that. Are you for real right now?
If I say it, my post would be removed and I'd get a temp ban just like you did, so hard pass.

Ah so we're just making things up so we look like we're painted in a certain light. Gotcha. Thanks for the convo Senn, hope you have a good one.

ooooooh my goodness, I wish I could just say it. girl bye

I feel bad that posters like Senn and Sturm had endured so much over the course of that thread.

wait wait wait wait
excuse me what