Guild Wars 2

Martin Kerstein.3071

But we will draw a line when posts include personal attacks on members of the studio (yes, “cleverly” disguised ones as well).

I thoroughly agree with banning personal attacks- they have no place in these forums (or any civilised discussion for that matter).

However, clarification is required regarding what does or does not constitute a “cleverly disguised” personal attack.

This clarification is needed because “cleverly disguised” is a very open ended phrase and, while the quality of moderation on these forms has typically been very high, there has also been a pattern of overzealous moderation of critical posts and threads which over-interpretation of this phrase could continue.

In particular, for the avoidance of doubt please advise which of the following are or are not acceptable on these forums:

• Criticism of Anet in general
• Criticism of changes being made (or not made) in an area of the game for which Anet has an identifiable developer or team
• Criticism of the quality of work Anet are doing in an area of the game for which Anet has an identifiable developer or team
• Criticism of the processes Anet, its teams or developers use to design and/or implement changes to GW2

(I’ve used the word ‘criticism’ in the above instances, because it is posts of a critical nature or tone that are most likely to be (mis-?) interpreted as personal attacks.)

P.s. I’ve posted this in the GW2 General Forum as it’s not clear where else this should belong.

I’m of course no dev or mod or anything, but the way I understand it is just that, criticism is welcome, as long as they don’t end up being disguised attacks, just use common sense (the most uncommon of senses, sadly).

For example (again, the way I understand it), things like “I don’t like the way Anet is handling the game”, “I find this new dungeon path boring because XXXX”, “I think these armor/weapon designs are ugly” are probably ok, but things like (another example), “Anet isn’t competent enough with this game”, “Anet lied to us”, “Fire whoever designed this dungeon/weapon/armor”, “whoever designes this dungeon/weapon/armor clearly has no clue” and things like that will probably (and IMHO with reason) be considered “cleverly disguised” attacks and acted upon.

Zenguy, I’m sure that this question belongs in your email conversation with customer support.

Mirta.5029:

Zenguy, I’m sure that this question belongs in your email conversation with customer support.

Actually not. They are legitimate concerns/questions and the rules need to be clearly stated. As it stands an overzealous moderator or perhaps a mod who misinterprets a post due to a language problem could have a disasterous result. Clear rules regarding posts as well as posted moderator rules would be welcome. As it is now, mods are anonymous and can’t be questioned as to how they issued a ban/infraction etc when the ‘hammer’ is used in situations when it wasn’t needed and the posts intent was misinterpreted. Of course there are posts when it quite clear that a warning should be issued. There should be a way to challenge a decision as well.

Thanks.

Forgot to say first time round: I’m really appreciating the changes Anet is making to the way it’s handling these forums and interacting with this community.

The Living Story sections are generally have more of these kinds of posts.

ArenaNet wants constructive feedback and for us to talk about the game or changes within the game. We should not be including the author in the discussion anyway. ArenaNet developers are human, just like us and they will make mistakes. Our role on the forums should be to help them fix these mistakes instead of berating them for making mistakes in the first place.

Sadly, it doesn’t work this way. It’s the digital age of the internet we live in so some people believe they can make an attack on someone else and get away with it.

These changes are a good step in educating people about what is appropriate to say and what isn’t.

So, i guess, any mentions about Manifesto (unless brought up in a positive way) are no longer allowed, right? Or, in general, commenting about what devs said at some point and how this compares to the current game?

When I read that last part:

You have been warned.

It sounds like a threat. It is just unnecessary to have that line.

I get that you want people to curb the insults and such, but maybe instead of being aggressive about it, you should be more professional about it. Sinking to their level isn’t a good way to get your point across.

So, basically, negative criticism isn’t allowed anymore? Because when you get down to it, NC is a jab at the people who made it, who are part of the ANet staff. And since the post is very broad in it’s description, this could very well fall under it. Even if the poster didn’t mean for it to be that way, any moderator could take it as such and dish out undeserving punishment.

Not to mention the end part makes it seem like it’s a no rules barred dictator style moderation in effect here.

CC Danicia.1394:

This is pretty comprehensive. We absolutely allow constructive criticism. We do not allow insults & rude comments directed towards our staff. This has always been the case.

That all being said, we absolutely do not tolerate personal attacks towards our staff on the forums, in PM, nor in the Appeals system. Profanity, name-calling, and the like will quickly lead up to your forum privileges being revoked permanently.

You did not answer the overall question. Profanity, name-calling pretty easy to define. The issue is the vagueness of the term ‘personal attack’ in light of the fact that the moderation team has a rather…. random approach to moderation.

Also for the record ‘you have been warned’ comment makes people take the official post…. probably in a different direction than intended.

Blude.6812:

Mirta.5029:

Zenguy, I’m sure that this question belongs in your email conversation with customer support.

Actually not. They are legitimate concerns/questions and the rules need to be clearly stated.

Thanks, Blude.

Mirta, I laughed when I saw your post. FYI, I’m infraction free and like to keep it that way even (or especially) when discussing more contentious areas of the game. Fortunately, the evolution of Anet and its moderators’ approach to these forums is making that a lot easier.

I don’t see the issue with “You have been warned” being used in the final line. It’s just there to denote the seriousness of the post. It more or less relates to the paragraph just above it.

I will like another clarification please:

Will you apply infractions (and bans) to those who call other persons “whiners” or “crybabies” just because they complain (or give their opinion) about something they consider “too hard” or “badly designed” (sometimes, certain persons start to insulting even if nobody has complaining yet)?

Or if you praise ArenaNet (and any new content/change in the game), you’ll have a free ticket to insult anyone who disagree?

OptimusPrimo.9547:

I don’t see the issue with “You have been warned” being used in the final line. It’s just there to denote the seriousness of the post. It more or less relates to the paragraph just above it.

The whole post itself is a warning on it’s own to inform you of the consequences. There is no reason to add the “You have been warned” line at the bottom. It is threatening and unnecessary when the whole post already states that.

You don’t need to add the extra emphasis at the end to warn people when the post itself clearly states exactly that. It is aggressive, threatening, and unprofessional.

SpyderArachnid.5619:

OptimusPrimo.9547:

I don’t see the issue with “You have been warned” being used in the final line. It’s just there to denote the seriousness of the post. It more or less relates to the paragraph just above it.

The whole post itself is a warning on it’s own to inform you of the consequences. There is no reason to add the “You have been warned” line at the bottom. It is threatening and unnecessary when the whole post already states that.

You don’t need to add the extra emphasis at the end to warn people when the post itself clearly states exactly that. It is aggressive, threatening, and unprofessional.

Reinforcement of power wielded.

It’s really just unnecessary.

Astralporing.1957:

So, i guess, any mentions about Manifesto (unless brought up in a positive way) are no longer allowed, right? Or, in general, commenting about what devs said at some point and how this compares to the current game?

Well I guess I won’t be welcome to Q&A’s after asking about it at Eurogamer

It is important to have CLEARLY defined standards. I’ve had a couple of posts infracted, most recently one that was in the “Collaborative Development” thread that lamented the downfall of SWTOR and the parallels I’ve seen in GW2.

At no time did my post make a personal attack against anybody, yet it garnered an “Infraction Point” for being rude and inflammatory, despite it simply being criticism and including me saying that I really like the game despite the mentioned flaws.

So yes, “cleverly disguised” is an out for any moderator to remove and infract posts and ban users if the content can be seen as any way negative, which means even constructive criticism will be targeted because its still CRITICISM. And the “you’ve been warned” line sounds straight out of some Bond villain’s mouth, I would say quite unprofessional but I might get banned.

Skan.5301:

So, basically, negative criticism isn’t allowed anymore? Because when you get down to it, NC is a jab at the people who made it, who are part of the ANet staff. And since the post is very broad in it’s description, this could very well fall under it. Even if the poster didn’t mean for it to be that way, any moderator could take it as such and dish out undeserving punishment.

Not to mention the end part makes it seem like it’s a no rules barred dictator style moderation in effect here.

You see negative criticism as a personal jab. I personally see it as an opportunity to improve. Since that article by Raph seems to be pretty popular at the moment:

You are not your work.

Above all, don’t forget this. Oh, be personally invested, of course. Your art will be poorer if you are not. But every little ship we launch is just our imperfect crafting of the moment. And we move on. We create again, and again. Each can only ever express a fragment, a tiny fraction of ourselves. And if you are trying to always improve in your craft and your art, then every old fragment, everything out there in the world already, that’s old news. You are on the next thing. Your next work, that’s who you are. Not the work that exists, but the work that does not yet.

So if someone savages it, who cares? That was yesterday. It’s not who you are now.

Hold on to that, because a lot of people can’t separate the work from the artist. Including a lot of artists.

It’s entirely possible to give negative criticism without saying things like ‘Anet don’t know what they’re doing’.

For example:

“I feel that dungeons at the moment feel like a grind because they’re just re-skinned versions of the same thing; go in, beat the big boss.

Dungeons could be improved greatly if:

• They had a more open layout – something akin to an open world map.
• Mobs had packs and roamed – purposely introduce disadvantageous places for people to fight, so players pay attention to location.
• Introduce a variety of goals other than ‘beat the big baddy’; acquire intel / artifacts, maybe have a dungeon that doesn’t focus on combat so much as exploration and puzzle solving."

Criticism without attacking.

CC Danicia.1394:

locoman.1974:

I’m of course no dev or mod or anything, but the way I understand it is just that, criticism is welcome, as long as they don’t end up being disguised attacks, just use common sense (the most uncommon of senses, sadly).

For example (again, the way I understand it), things like “I don’t like the way Anet is handling the game”, “I find this new dungeon path boring because XXXX”, “I think these armor/weapon designs are ugly” are probably ok, but things like (another example), “Anet isn’t competent enough with this game”, “Anet lied to us”, “Fire whoever designed this dungeon/weapon/armor”, “whoever designes this dungeon/weapon/armor clearly has no clue” and things like that will probably (and IMHO with reason) be considered “cleverly disguised” attacks and acted upon.

This is pretty comprehensive. We absolutely allow constructive criticism. We do not allow insults & rude comments directed towards our staff. This has always been the case.

That all being said, we absolutely do not tolerate personal attacks towards our staff on the forums, in PM, nor in the Appeals system. Profanity, name-calling, and the like will quickly lead up to your forum privileges being revoked permanently.

There’s sure a lot of wiggle room in this “clarification.” What constitutes an insult? What constitutes “being rude?” How do you define those things? There is a lot of opinion involved in making those determinations. Some might even declare that my typing this response out is “being rude.”

And in the same vein, is accusing someone of lying considered an attack? I sure hope not. If I stole a candy bar from the shop down the street, got caught, and then claimed I didn’t steal, I lied. If someone calls me out on that lie, am I being “attacked?” I think not. Now, calling someone a liar edges a little closer to attack. Calling someone a lying kitten edges even closer. But just accusing someone of lying?

Oh, and I thought kittens were tasked with preventing forum profanity?

Zenguy.6421:

Mirta, I laughed when I saw your post. FYI, I’m infraction free and like to keep it that way even (or especially) when discussing more contentious areas of the game. Fortunately, the evolution of Anet and its moderators’ approach to these forums is making that a lot easier.

Yeah, it’s just that I’m used to very strict moderation and was guided to customer support more than once myself when I had a question. Normally even to discuss maderator actions or to ask such questions is highly risky.

CC Danicia.1394:

Niim.9260:

You did not answer the overall question. Profanity, name-calling pretty easy to define. The issue is the vagueness of the term ‘personal attack’ in light of the fact that the moderation team has a rather…. random approach to moderation.

Also for the record ‘you have been warned’ comment makes people take the official post…. probably in a different direction than intended.

We’re definitely working on retooling and improving Moderation and messaging.
Using locoman.1974’s post to reiterate:

Constructive:
“I don’t like the way Anet is handling the game”
“I find this new dungeon path boring because XXXX”
“I think these armor/weapon designs are ugly”

Insulting & non-constructive:
“Anet isn’t competent enough with this game”
“Anet lied to us”
“Fire whoever designed this dungeon/weapon/armor”
“whoever designes this dungeon/weapon/armor clearly has no clue”

You can discuss things we’ve said (manifesto, dev posts, blog posts, interviews) and disagree with them or even criticize. We’re okay with that. When it crosses over to insults is where we draw the line.

I have to ask though, instead of lies, should we call them “U Turns” instead?

Because some say they are the same thing

This “warning” was worded in a very loose and vague manner, which is quite concerning, as it opens the door wide for moderators to moderate according to their personal opinions of individuals, such as myself, who are unhappy about how Arenanet chooses to do some things in the game.

The American legal system should be a perfect example of how just about anything can be taken personally. The users are now basically free to comment, but at the complete mercy of the moderators, even if said mods have had a bad day.

This moderation post, coupled with the collaboration post combine to paint a picture that could be clearly interpreted as “positive input only”.

Vulgarity, threats, wishing real life harm, and so on have no place on the game forum, I think most would agree, but right now the impression that Arenanet is giving is that they are thin skinned. No-one there seems to be willing to consider that the reason there has been a steady growth of negative commentary is that they are starting to upset their player-base.

Skan.5301:

SpyderArachnid.5619:

OptimusPrimo.9547:

I don’t see the issue with “You have been warned” being used in the final line. It’s just there to denote the seriousness of the post. It more or less relates to the paragraph just above it.

The whole post itself is a warning on it’s own to inform you of the consequences. There is no reason to add the “You have been warned” line at the bottom. It is threatening and unnecessary when the whole post already states that.

You don’t need to add the extra emphasis at the end to warn people when the post itself clearly states exactly that. It is aggressive, threatening, and unprofessional.

Reinforcement of power wielded.

It’s really just unnecessary.

Fair enough.

CC Danicia.1394:

Niim.9260:

You did not answer the overall question. Profanity, name-calling pretty easy to define. The issue is the vagueness of the term ‘personal attack’ in light of the fact that the moderation team has a rather…. random approach to moderation.

Also for the record ‘you have been warned’ comment makes people take the official post…. probably in a different direction than intended.

We’re definitely working on retooling and improving Moderation and messaging.
Using locoman.1974’s post to reiterate:

Constructive:
“I don’t like the way Anet is handling the game”
“I find this new dungeon path boring because XXXX”
“I think these armor/weapon designs are ugly”

Insulting & non-constructive:
“Anet isn’t competent enough with this game”
“Anet lied to us”
“Fire whoever designed this dungeon/weapon/armor”
“whoever designes this dungeon/weapon/armor clearly has no clue”

You can discuss things we’ve said (manifesto, dev posts, blog posts, interviews) and disagree with them or even criticize. We’re okay with that. When it crosses over to insults is where we draw the line.

That’s all well and good, but I’ve seen many very constructive threads deleted for no logical reason that I can think of. For example: I remember someone creating a thread that was asking for specific chances of getting items from RNG boxes and they just wanted to know the chances to get certain items in general such as; a precursor, a ticket from an RNG box, and the chance for an ascended chest to drop. He was very polite, he used no sarcasm whatsoever, and he genuinely wanted to know. 2 minutes later, the thread was deleted. I’ve seen at least 15 threads, that were very constructive, get deleted for no reason. Why are those deleted?

Lonesamurai.4852:

CC Danicia.1394:

Niim.9260:

You did not answer the overall question. Profanity, name-calling pretty easy to define. The issue is the vagueness of the term ‘personal attack’ in light of the fact that the moderation team has a rather…. random approach to moderation.

Also for the record ‘you have been warned’ comment makes people take the official post…. probably in a different direction than intended.

We’re definitely working on retooling and improving Moderation and messaging.
Using locoman.1974’s post to reiterate:

Constructive:
“I don’t like the way Anet is handling the game”
“I find this new dungeon path boring because XXXX”
“I think these armor/weapon designs are ugly”

Insulting & non-constructive:
“Anet isn’t competent enough with this game”
“Anet lied to us”
“Fire whoever designed this dungeon/weapon/armor”
“whoever designes this dungeon/weapon/armor clearly has no clue”

You can discuss things we’ve said (manifesto, dev posts, blog posts, interviews) and disagree with them or even criticize. We’re okay with that. When it crosses over to insults is where we draw the line.

I have to ask though, instead of lies, should we call them “U Turns” instead?

Because some say they are the same thing

You can say “xxxxx conflicts with the Manifesto”. Maybe.

Frankly if you’re having to ask how to communicate around the rules, you’re safer just not bringing it up.

EverythingXen.1835:

Lonesamurai.4852:

CC Danicia.1394:

Niim.9260:

You did not answer the overall question. Profanity, name-calling pretty easy to define. The issue is the vagueness of the term ‘personal attack’ in light of the fact that the moderation team has a rather…. random approach to moderation.

Also for the record ‘you have been warned’ comment makes people take the official post…. probably in a different direction than intended.

We’re definitely working on retooling and improving Moderation and messaging.
Using locoman.1974’s post to reiterate:

Constructive:
“I don’t like the way Anet is handling the game”
“I find this new dungeon path boring because XXXX”
“I think these armor/weapon designs are ugly”

Insulting & non-constructive:
“Anet isn’t competent enough with this game”
“Anet lied to us”
“Fire whoever designed this dungeon/weapon/armor”
“whoever designes this dungeon/weapon/armor clearly has no clue”

You can discuss things we’ve said (manifesto, dev posts, blog posts, interviews) and disagree with them or even criticize. We’re okay with that. When it crosses over to insults is where we draw the line.

I have to ask though, instead of lies, should we call them “U Turns” instead?

Because some say they are the same thing

You can say “xxxxx conflicts with the Manifesto”. Maybe.

Frankly if you’re having to ask how to communicate around the rules, you’re safer just not bringing it up.

It’s kinda my job to, I actually TRY and cover GW2 as a games Journalist

I am thinking of giving up though

CC Danicia.1394:

We absolutely allow constructive criticism.

Skan.5301:

So, basically, negative criticism isn’t allowed anymore?

^ This is what I call disguised trolling.
If this update serves to remove “smart trolling” like this from this board I welcome it.

Constructive criticism has never been punished on this forum.

Some guidance to make a constructive critic:
- Don’t bash anyone or anything; even game features are still work of some people and it is offensive to them to call features as garbage because you don’t like them.
- Entitled statements i.e. “this thing sucks/fails because..”; just because something isn’t of your taste it doesn’t mean it fails in general and it is pretty insulting toward who worked for it.
- Acting like you speak for someone else beside you is also irritating; every single poster represents himself only.

Anything can be made constructive really, there is no excuse.

I can take a flaming complaint like this:

Omg sPvP sucks! Anet really? How haven’t you added more modes yet and the whole rock-paper-scissor garbage is totally stupid

And turn it into constructive criticism:

I feel that sPvP could use some more developing. It lacks variety as it only has one mode so far and I feel that the current system of bunker/roamer/bunker-killer could be improved into something more articulated.

Really easy.
All it takes is a breath of fresh air before posting.

SpyderArachnid.5619:

When I read that last part:

You have been warned.

It sounds like a threat. It is just unnecessary to have that line.

I get that you want people to curb the insults and such, but maybe instead of being aggressive about it, you should be more professional about it. Sinking to their level isn’t a good way to get your point across.

This. Was gonna say something like this, but this gentleman has beat me to the punch.
Just because you are “thin skinned” and / or cannot take the more harsh comments, posts (with all do respect and with the fact that this is totally fine), does not mean you need to stoop to the same level as some of these comments and basically threaten the whole forum community.
Very annoyed by this last sentence, and this is coming from someone who is always objective while posting / discussing.

What gets me is if this is a real issue for ANet, why not shut down the official forum and let the community forums take over again?

CC Danicia.1394:

Insulting & non-constructive:
“Anet isn’t competent enough with this game”
“Anet lied to us”
“Fire whoever designed this dungeon/weapon/armor”
“whoever designes this dungeon/weapon/armor clearly has no clue”

You consider these personal attacks?

So, I suggested that ANet shouldn’t branch out into new Activity X, because it relied on Skills Y, which the Devs have not displayed great aptitude so far and it got moderated.

Evidently even hinting that they might not be good at something by direct observation of past performance is a personal attack. Because an awareness of history is evil, I guess.

I really don’t see how this ultimatum is going to enhance ANet’s ability to learn and improve. Its not that the punishments are more severe – its that the offenses are now so subjective as to border on moderator whim.

Niim.9260:

CC Danicia.1394:

Insulting & non-constructive:
“Anet isn’t competent enough with this game”
“Anet lied to us”
“Fire whoever designed this dungeon/weapon/armor”
“whoever designes this dungeon/weapon/armor clearly has no clue”

You consider these personal attacks?

Yeah… nothing insulting about being called an incompetent, clueless liar who’s useless at his job.

Predator.9214:

SpyderArachnid.5619:

When I read that last part:

You have been warned.

It sounds like a threat. It is just unnecessary to have that line.

I get that you want people to curb the insults and such, but maybe instead of being aggressive about it, you should be more professional about it. Sinking to their level isn’t a good way to get your point across.

This. Was gonna say something like this, but this gentleman has beat me to the punch.
Just because you are “thin skinned” and / or cannot take the more harsh comments, posts (with all do respect and with the fact that this is totally fine), does not mean you need to stoop to the same level as some of these comments and basically threaten the whole forum community.
Very annoyed by this last sentence, and this is coming from someone who is always objective while posting / discussing.

Likely it’s to cover the case where they’re gonna ban someone for the week and that person says “I didn’t know, why didn’t you warn me?”.

They made a post, they gave a big red link to the post that won’t go away until you go to the main forum page, and they basically said “This is the warning, we are going to enforce this from now on”.

Lonesamurai.4852:

It’s kinda my job to, I actually TRY and cover GW2 as a games Journalist

I am thinking of giving up though

what magazine do you write for?

I think this kind of moderation should apply in game as well. Many people think they can get away with it.

While i agree with ANet when pertaining to personal attacks, i also agree that negative criticism should be allowed. We all are evaluated for our work in our jobs, and the ones who can evaluate devs are the audience in which their work is directed to.

Many players have completely lost their faith in the game and in the company, and voice their anger when facing the same issues over and over again. Some voice their anger in a complete bad way (insults and such), while other state more harsh words to the team and their work. As paying costumers and specially as players and fans to the game and it’s prequel, they have the right to issue negative criticism as well.

A funny fact is that most of these less-righteous players did indeed provide positive criticism in the same feedback over and over, to the point they were called a vocal minority. If the team till now, were doing a extremely bad job at the collaboration process with the players as already recognized, why is it the playerbase’s fault they started voicing in a negative way?

Is it rude to point fingers at the team for their mistakes? Well, maybe it is, but no more than treating the players like kids with comments like “You have been warned”. ANet is behaving like the inquisition calling and burning witches simply because they disagree on ANet’s way of thinking. And we are the rude ones?

Ohh, the hypocrisy!!!

EverythingXen.1835:

Niim.9260:

CC Danicia.1394:

Insulting & non-constructive:
“Anet isn’t competent enough with this game”
“Anet lied to us”
“Fire whoever designed this dungeon/weapon/armor”
“whoever designes this dungeon/weapon/armor clearly has no clue”

You consider these personal attacks?

Yeah… nothing insulting about being called an incompetent, clueless liar who’s useless at his job.

Saying someone lied isn’t a personal attack however, especially when you provide evidence of it. This is a very dangerous slippery slope, though I’m not even remotely surprised given the state of things.

I’m a big fan of this. Combat the destructive negativity while allowing the forum to remain, well, a forum, for ideas and what-not.

EverythingXen.1835:

Niim.9260:

CC Danicia.1394:

Insulting & non-constructive:
“Anet isn’t competent enough with this game”
“Anet lied to us”
“Fire whoever designed this dungeon/weapon/armor”
“whoever designes this dungeon/weapon/armor clearly has no clue”

You consider these personal attacks?

Yeah… nothing insulting about being called an incompetent, clueless liar who’s useless at his job.

I would suggest that a comment about ANET is not a personal attack at all, no matter how insulting it is towards the company. ANET is not a person. Fire ‘so and so’ is more a request than a personal attack and I think perma banning someone for saying ‘someone’ doesn’t have a clue would be an extreme response.

These in my opinion are all pretty much why everyone is concerned about how the enforcement will be carried out.

This kinda seems like a response to the recent incident that I will not mention in fear of being infracted. All I will say is it is sad that it has come to this. Where ArenaNet has to give themselves a boost in power in order to make sure they are not at fault. Anet vs The Players?

^I was trying to give my opinion on this but I’m sure somehow that can be worthy of an infraction.

Mirta.5029:

Lonesamurai.4852:

It’s kinda my job to, I actually TRY and cover GW2 as a games Journalist

I am thinking of giving up though

what magazine do you write for?

Radio, in my sig

Niim.9260:

EverythingXen.1835:

Niim.9260:

CC Danicia.1394:

Insulting & non-constructive:
“Anet isn’t competent enough with this game”
“Anet lied to us”
“Fire whoever designed this dungeon/weapon/armor”
“whoever designes this dungeon/weapon/armor clearly has no clue”

You consider these personal attacks?

Yeah… nothing insulting about being called an incompetent, clueless liar who’s useless at his job.

I would suggest that a comment about ANET is not a personal attack at all, no matter how insulting it is towards the company. ANET is not a person. Fire ‘so and so’ is more a request than a personal attack and I think perma banning someone for saying ‘someone’ doesn’t have a clue would be an extreme response.

These in my opinion are all pretty much why everyone is concerned about how the enforcement will be carried out.

Fact is, thats the rules now. Have an opinion on the rules and provide feedback on them all you want. But follow the rules when you do.

If they define insulting Anet is a personal attack, then it is. There’s no debate.

So is it a personal attack to note that the Developers at Anet have put their foot wrong this week and infuriated a lot of people and their take away seems less “We should do better and tell our customers so” and more “we need to arm our moderators with gag orders and ban hammers!”?

Were it me, I think I would have just quietly stepped up the moderation under the rules that already existed rather than roll out this new announcement and its threatening tone/melodrama.

Define “cleverly disguised”. Broad language like these are quite dangerous.

Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back.

Red Falcon.8257:

CC Danicia.1394:

We absolutely allow constructive criticism.

Skan.5301:

So, basically, negative criticism isn’t allowed anymore?

^ This is what I call disguised trolling.
If this update serves to remove “smart trolling” like this from this board I welcome it.

When you constructively criticize the game, aren’t you really criticizing the people who made it? We all know how words can be taken out of context. What’s stopping someone from doing that even after clarification?

And

Constructive criticism has never been punished on this forum.

I had to read that again to make sure I was reading it correctly. Once I finished, I realized something that I already knew, but, under moderation rules, would surely get me infraction points. However, I got a laugh.