Why not a warning?

[hagare]

There were warnings, sure, but very little action. Two wrongs never make a right, but in my opinion, SE is more at fault here than the player base. Don't make warnings if you don't have the balls to back them up, I say. They let this situation get out of hand.

yet when they crack down, you people whine.

You do know that in real world you can get in trouble if you lie to cops that you called?

you do realize the one who got suspended streamed proof of his crime right.
Why would people have the need to lie?

[DamianFatale]

Do people really think a 10 day ban after years of calling things grey areas and 'just don't harass people' is an appropriate response? Don't come in saying "THEY HAVE THE RIGHT", no one cares or argues they are within their rights. I'm not even saying "let them have the tools still..." I'm simply saying that pulling them to gaol, warning them, and then letting them go when they remove the offending material, accomplishes the same effect without making half the userbase angry that people are being pulled mid-prog for sudden 10-day bans.

Please dont reply with no thought comments. Actually think about the question I'm presenting and give real reasons why a ban is better than a warning in this scenario with the context of how things have been treated.

"Its against the rules no sympathy" posts miss the point entirely.

It's a common tactic that authority uses to set an example. The goal here wasn't to warn, or politely tell people to stop, knowing that they might. It was to set an example that you WILL be banned for possibly ten days or more if you use these add ons. As much as I would of loved to see warnings handed out, this is a make an example out of streamers and popular players kind of situation, and It's more common than you think. It just hasn't happened in XIV for a long while. I would normally expect this kind of thing with government, education, or in a job situation.

[Vahlnir]

yet when they crack down, you people whine.

I'm probably one of a few people who have outright admitted to supporting SE on their right to enforce their ToS, so...I just feel it comes too late is all. I'm not whining. Just wondering what took SE so long.

[SturmChurro]

I'm probably one of a few people who have outright admitted to supporting SE on their right to enforce their ToS, so...I just feel it comes too late is all. I'm not whining. Just wondering what took SE so long.

During a high profile world first race, and people submitting mass reports - that's probably what did it. It should have been enforced from the start if this is how they were going to do it.

[Limecat]

[Kes13a]

During a high profile world first race, and people submitting mass reports - that's probably what did it. It should have been enforced from the start if this is how they were going to do it.

what you run into though, is that they likely figured, from the start, that saying, "dont do this, please dont do this, we may start banning over this so please just dont" would work. basically.... people. ran out of chances. and SE ran out of thinking people would just stop.

you can say "oh this is too severe" but its working isnt it? people are talking about it, and anyone going forward who streams while using a 3rd party, knows they could be banned as well.

there is always a first person to be banned.. or caught breaking some new law. the streamer wanted attention, well, I say they got it

[Vahlnir]

what you run into though, is that they likely figured, from the start, that saying, "dont do this, please dont do this, we may start banning over this so please just dont" would work.

Arguably their first mistake, in my opinion. Asking nicely on the internet usually falls on deaf ears.

[Kes13a]

Arguably their first mistake, in my opinion. Asking nicely on the internet usually falls on deaf ears.

I dont disagree. I think they believed however, in the same values as the game they create, people are inherently good and will do the right thing, follow the rules, people will make the right choices....

humanity however, and especially if you spend any forum time at all, will take any advantage they can of rules if it benefits them somehow, despite being warned. Then reserve the right to scream as loud as possible that they have been "wronged"

[Tsukino]

As a bunch of other people already said, a suspension is a warning because it's not permanent. I have hundreds of games I haven't played in 10 days, it's not that big a deal.

Arguably their first mistake, in my opinion. Asking nicely on the internet usually falls on deaf ears.

That's not exactly true. I mean, obviously it is for a certain group of people or we wouldn't be here discussing this, but the vast majority of players do not use any sort of mods to the game and I truly believe that many of those would have if SE had not ever asked them to not in the first place. For most people just knowing the rules is enough, and they are not going around pushing boundaries and risking their accounts.

[MellowMink]

I assume it’s because if there was just a warning without a punishment, then other people who use mods that provide gameplay or HUD advantages (not cosmetic tweaks that don’t affect the gameplay like adding missing Hrothgar hat support, which I hope Square Enix would focus on) would just keep doing it until they hit that harmless warning; this sends a stronger message. That said, ten days does feel kind of high for an initial punishment.