If you don't like being target for violating TOS...how about don't violate the TOS?

[Vrankyl]

If you have zero faith in this team to do anything, why are you even playing this game then? At least hold out some good hope, not everything they delivered has been a total wreck.

It is perfectly possible to enjoy a game while not having faith in a dev team to deliver on things. There are things the Dev team is great at delivering on, though those mostly amount to visual things and music. Then there is a mountain of things that the Dev team has proven time and time again that they will never get something right even after the third try, even if the first iteration is fun. Take PvP. It has been revamped countless times and is for the first time in an amazing place, but even still while I enjoy it I can definitely agree there are countless glaring errors present that shouldn't have made it live. PotD, very well done and very workable right out of the gate. It was one of the very very few new content types that they got right on the first try.

Now let's look at Diadem... poor poor Diadem. The zone that has been remade so many times that it was just turned into a gathering zone and tossed to the side. Nor were the lessons properly learned there as they went into Eureka, making it to Pyros before they seemed to have gotten something good. Even now with Bozja, they've continue to improve on the idea but there are still issues that they have not acknowledged and this content type has been in the game since HW. Healers are another good example, they've been waiting years to be properly fixed and it still hasn't been done. LD has needed a fix since it launched in HW and DRKs only just got a fix for it.

So it is perfectly possible to enjoy a game, but still not trust that the dev team will make changes properly or even in a timely fashion. Nor does not trusting them to do that take away from all the great things they have done. It's just a fact, these supposed UI changes should be taken with a massive grain of salt and not expect to see them for quite some time.

[Bobby66]

I'm not here to educate you, and in all likelihood you are not here to be educated either. Maybe you should try actually reading the threads on the issue and take what people say into context, because it's really not rocket science.

I have read the reasoning still does not make sense to me, the intent behind the tools does not negate the fact that a rule was broken. Sure accessibility tools for FFXIV are limited as an example but it is a binary situation. Break a rule someone reports you, you will most likely be punished. The reason for why one broke the rule is moot tbh. One can still advocate for change in the rules without getting upset at those that did the mass reporting or trying to play a victim card for getting reported in the first place.

[SwingLifeAway]

I have read the reasoning still does not make sense to me, the intent behind the tools does not negate the fact that a rule was broken.

Because the rule is not being enforced according to the foundational reason behind its existence. It is being abused and weaponized, which SE allowed and sanctioned by handing out the bans. I do not think it is unreasonable for people to be frustrated when a rule is not enforced for its foundational purpose and instead used to target people who have not harmed any other player, and it is certainly more than reasonable for people to criticize it and call it out. Now if only people didn't try and derail the thread with waste of time arguments like "who cares it's against the rules" which offer absolutely nothing.

[Bobby66]

Because the rule is not being enforced according to the foundational reason behind its existence. It is being abused and weaponized, which SE allowed and sanctioned by handing out the bans. I do not think it is unreasonable for people to be frustrated when a rule is not enforced for its foundational purpose and instead used to target people who have not harmed any other player, and it is certainly more than reasonable for people to criticize it and call it out. Now if only people didn't try and derail the thread with waste of time arguments like "who cares it's against the rules" which offer absolutely nothing.

If it went against the foundational reasoning then the GM team would not have punished them. At the core ot has always been they cannot punish what they do not do not know. People making their rule breaks public is what fostered this weaponized apporch.

You may not like the argument but being against the rules is a valid argument. So if change wants to happen we should focus on why such tools were created, and less about how it is unfair to get punished for breaking such rules.

[Saraide]

If it went against the foundational reasoning then the GM team would not have punished them. At the core ot has always been they cannot punish what they do not do not know. People making their rule breaks public is what fostered this weaponized apporch.

You may not like the argument but being against the rules is a valid argument. So if change wants to happen we should focus on why such tools were created, and less about how it is unfair to get punished for breaking such rules.

I'm sorry do you consider the GMs as infallible?

[Semirhage]

If it went against the foundational reasoning then the GM team would not have punished them. At the core ot has always been they cannot punish what they do not do not know. People making their rule breaks public is what fostered this weaponized apporch.

You may not like the argument but being against the rules is a valid argument. So if change wants to happen we should focus on why such tools were created, and less about how it is unfair to get punished for breaking such rules.

The argument against parsers is a Motte and Bailey argument. People defending it will swear up and down that it's about harassment, until they come across a stream where nobody is harassing anybody. Then they'll gleefully report, and retreat to the Motte, "because it's against the rules!"

Now, Square is perfectly within their rights to forbid something because they don't support it and don't want to he liable for it. It's an *annoying* position given their refusal to implement a lot of the pretty basic QOL plugins provide, but it's their prerogative.

But that's not the argument the anti-parser Inquisitors trot out every single time. It's because such tools create an atmosphere of harassment you see. So why mass report someone who isn't harassing someone? Shutup, it's against the rules! Round and round we go...

I agree, parsers do evidently cause harassment. Anti-parser zealots harass anyone they suspect of using one, with the full blessing of the TOS. Seems to me like harassment isn't their actual target. It's just the parsers. The objects, not the behavior. They're book burners hiding behind excuses.

[Bobby66]

The argument against parsers is a Motte and Bailey argument. People defending it will swear up and down that it's about harassment, until they come across a stream where nobody is harassing anybody. Then they'll gleefully report, and retreat to the Motte, "because it's against the rules!"

Now, Square is perfectly within their rights to forbid something because they don't support it and don't want to he liable for it. It's an *annoying* position given their refusal to implement a lot of the pretty basic QOL plugins provide, but it's their prerogative.

But that's not the argument the anti-parser Inquisitors trot out every single time. It's because such tools create an atmosphere of harassment you see. So why mass report someone who isn't harassing someone? Shutup, it's against the rules! Round and round we go...

I agree, parsers do evidently cause harassment. Anti-parser zealots harass anyone they suspect of using one, with the full blessing of the TOS. Seems to me like harassment isn't their actual target. It's just the parsers. The objects, not the behavior. They're book burners hiding behind excuses.

We have always known the real reason behind anti parsing is the desire to not want to take accountable for ones play. It has always been that at the core, arguments around harassment have always been cherry picked and based around anecdotal accounts. The thing that differs in this situation, while unfair and messed up at the core a valid rule break can be found, this is also why I fall in the camp that SE should have never changed the ToS or started to enforce such actions using information outside of the game. Many called that this would be the product of such a change. We can be against it, but at the core a rule was broken, and they got punished.

Sure we can be fairly certain that something malicious is going on, but we have no way of proving it objectively unlike the issue with people using 3rd party tools while streaming. That can be proven objectively, so trying to argue the why is moot. What we should be doing is sending feedback to SE requesting certain features to be added. I get I use a 3rd party tool to add some must needed colorblind features. I know the risk, and I accept it.

[Semirhage]

My renewed dislike for Yoshi's stance on parsers mainly comes from the fact that the population that dislikes them has revealed themselves to be malicious, self-righteous busybodies, and now I'm just done with this ACT silent truce. The parsers were minding their own business. The toxic casual Karens were not. If the TOS should tell anyone to go sit in a corner and stop being moralizing Puritans, it's them.

Why on earth does the TOS prescribe punishment for streaming with a parser, but protect toxic casuals when THEY want to harass people they weren't even interacting with? Sounds like bad rules to me.

[EagleDynamics]

My renewed dislike for Yoshi's stance on parsers mainly comes from the fact that the population that dislikes them has revealed themselves to be malicious, self-righteous busybodies, and now I'm just done with this ACT silent truce. The parsers were minding their own business. The toxic casual Karens were not. If the TOS should tell anyone to go sit in a corner and stop being moralizing Puritans, it's them.

Why on earth does the TOS prescribe punishment for streaming with a parser, but protect toxic casuals when THEY want to harass people they weren't even interacting with? Sounds like bad rules to me.

yup. theyre just people who like to wag their fingers at other players. very petty. in the end it doesnt stop anyone from using act anyway.

[DamianFatale]

Counterpoint- victimless crimes are nonsense, and the TOS enshrining them is equally nonsense, and baying for blood and punishment regarding victimless crimes is the most Gladys Kravitz nosy old lady neighbor behavior I can think of.

Counter counter point:

Third party tools are unfair, and they lead to bullying. Hows that for your victimless crimes.