PDA

View Full Version : I Was Banned for 72 Hours from Battlelog for using The Word "Badass" in the Forums



UDeadNowSucka
26-11-2011, 05:02 PM
EDIT: Post Updated with information surrounding 3 interactions I attempted to have with 3 EA employee's to get this issue behind us.

Just a quick note before I get into this, I also emailed RPS about this after hearing they were investigating the whole EA Forum bans effecting the games themselves that players had legitimately purchased.

---------------------------------------------------------

My name is Roger, I have a mustache and this is my Battlefield story.

I bought BF3 the day it was released, even stood outside gamestop for 3 hours for the midnight release. Since October 25th I have played BF3 every single day with buddies on teamspeak.

Earlier this morning (November 25th), I had attempted to join a server on Battlelog, but was greeted with an error message telling me I couldn't connect to EA Online. I then tried several different other servers, all giving the same error.

Thinking it was a problem with my browser, I closed Internet Explorer out, and then reopened it again and tried to login to Battlelog, only to be greeted by the message "Buy BF3 to get access to Battlelog".

I figured it was a temporary issue with EA's servers, so I walked away from my PC for a couple hours, ate, watched some tv and then came back to try and play again, only to be greeted with the same message at the login screen, "Buy BF3 to get access to Battlelog".

I immediately contacted EA's support and spoke with an advisor in a chat. This advisor informed me my account was temporarily banned for 72 hours.

I checked my email and lone behold I had an email from EA, informing me my EA Online Account was banned for using the word "Badass" on the battlelog forums. The context that the word was used in, was myself calling Germany a badass country. Note, I posted this in the General/Off-Topic forum as well.

Apparently this really angered a mod for some reason and I was banned for 72 hours. My plea's to various mods on the EA forums were met with obvious defense of EA's ridiculous policies. Yet none of them would admit that a forum ban and a game ban should be seperate.

I am now completely unable to access Battlelog at all, to play the game that I PAID FOR.

Here is an exact copy of the email, for those doubting me. Also my battlelog name is "UDeadNowSucka" without the quotes.

Hello ,
Your Electronic Arts account has been suspended for 72 hours for violating the Terms of Services for Electronic Arts Online.

Violation:Inappropriate language

[almost as badass as germany. Switzerland: they do a lot of stuff I think that just about sums up europe.]

You can read the Terms of Service for Electronic Arts Online by going to the following web address.

http://www.ea.com/global/legal/tos.jsp (http://www.ea.com/global/legal/tos.jsp)

If you feel that this action is unwarranted, or if you wish to dispute the claims of this email, please submit a dispute form by using the following link:

http://support.ea.com/cgi-bin/ea.cfg/php/enduser/terminated_form.php

The Electronic Arts support team is available at http://support.ea.com (http://support.ea.com/) should you have any general questions or concerns about the rule or its enforcement in the game, as we feel it is important to understand the rule completely before returning to the game world.

Sincerely, Customer Support Electronic Arts, Inc.
EA.com Customer Relations

-----------------------------------

The 3 Interactions I attempted to Have With EA Employee's.

First EA Employee Interaction: CrazyCanuck

CrazyCanuck is a high ranking forum mod with EA and one of the battleog mods as well. I spoke to Canuck in a pm on the EAUK forums about this whole thing, in which we sent several pm's back and forth to one another. He searched through my entire battlelog post history, found one thing to latch onto, and then tried using it as a reason to defend EA's 72 hour ban. Yet he couldn't pull his head far enough out of EA's ass to realize that unbanning me from battlelog so I could play the game, but keeping me banned from the forums in battlelog was pretty reasonable. In fact, I even proposed that as a middle-ground and he wouldn't agree too it.

Second EA Employee Interaction: Crash7800

Crash7800 is the Battlefield Community Manager at EA. I tweeted Crash7800 about this on twitter and he never responded back. Not even a direct message or anything. Not even "hey, I heard about your case, nothing I can do, sorry". I heard Crash7800 sent someone his dogtags in the mail for making a video. But he can't look into a forum ban that was unjustified?

Third EA Employee Interaction: Zh1nt0

Zh1nt0 is the Global Community Manager for EA/DICE. Zh1nt0 pm'd me on the EAUK forums the day this happened, after seeing my forum post and asked me for my battlelog name to look into the issue. Then never got back to me.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The official Response from EA's Battlefield Community Manager Crash7800

Sorry that I didn't reply sooner - Holiday here :) I've been checking in where I can, but I'm sorry your issue wasn't on my radar at first.

It will take me some time to look into this issue. I'm sorry that I can't help you at this exact moment, but I can't just go around overturning bans without an examination.

I'm sorry that being banned from the forums resulted in your being banned from the game. This can sometimes be the case - I'm still working to figure out every use-case. I'm looking more into this functionality and what possible improvements could be made.

I can tell you that things like this post -link-, or this post -link-, or this post -link-, or a lot of what you said in this thread -link- (Rape joke - really?), or this entire thread that you started, seemingly only to troll -link- are not helping your case. Especially when you do that all in one day.

In complete honesty, I think that what's gone wrong here is that our report for why you were temporarily banned is wrong. You were probably banned for the reasons I've listed above. I probably would have temporarily banned you too for spamming nonsense and acting like a troll.

EDIT for clarity: To that end, I will be looking into this issue to determine whether this is indeed the case. Our internal reporting for these issues should be more thorough if so, for just such an instance.
I'm sure this will solicit some questions. It's 1 AM here, so I'll have to get back to them in the morning :)

------------------------------
My response to Crash7800

I love the way you say it can "sometimes be the case". Why don't you go read the Rock Paper Shotgun articles, where everytime a user was banned from the EA forums, they were also locked out of the game. So don't use the phrase "This can sometimes be the case", because ITS ALWAYS THE CASE.

Whatever I may have done on the forums should in no way effect my ability to play the game itself. And thats all there is to it. Short of posting links to hack sites, there is absolutlely no reason why I shouldnt be allowed to play, even when banned from the forum.

EA knows this. I know this. You know this. Every gamer alive knows this.

I suggest taking the forums down until EA is able to properly address this issue.

You can link too 500 different offensive posts I made for all I care. Suddenly trolling is worthy of being locked out of the game entirely? In what world does EA exist in? A dillusional world, thats what.

My problem is that I am unable to play the game itself. I could honestly give a shit less about being able to access the forums.

Again, I'll state the obvious.:

I DO NOT CARE ABOUT BEING BANNED FROM THE FORUM. WHAT I CARE ABOUT IS THAT I CANNOT ACCESS THE GAME ITSELF.

EA CLAIMED THIS WAS AN ERROR AND WOULD BE FIXED WHEN THE DRAGON AGE USER WAS BANNED.

8 MONTHS LATER AND IT IS NOT FIXED. FFS.

TillEulenspiegel
26-11-2011, 05:27 PM
I really wonder if this is policy, or an individual moderator going a bit too far. Either way, it's terrible. But if EA is deliberately handing out game bans for anything that could be construed as a mildly naughty word, that's quite remarkable.

psyk
26-11-2011, 05:32 PM
What was that it in response to? I'm thinking it's more for the whole sentance rather than the word badass.

UDeadNowSucka
26-11-2011, 05:39 PM
It was a forum thread I had made where I summarized my thoughts about each european country. I made it in the off topic forum. I can assure you, "badass" was the only slightly offensive word in the entire thread. Nothing else even came close to being an offensive word or curse word. The thread was actually quite funny and comedic in nature. In no way was it created to offend others.

Not to mention, dont you think that if there was something more serious that I had said other than "badass", that the moderator would have banned me for that, instead of banning me for using the word badass?

But none of this has anything to do with the real issue at hand. Why did my forum ban effect whether or not I could access the game?

They should be seperate.

I did not cheat.
I did not aimbot.
I did not wallhack.
I did not abuse other players.

I have a perfectly clean Punkbuster history.

I did nothing in the game itself, that should prevent me from being able to play it.

Taidan
26-11-2011, 05:40 PM
What was that it in response to? I'm thinking it's more for the whole sentence rather than the word badass.

The email clearly states "Violation:Inappropriate language", and a quote giving the "Inappropriate language" in question is also clearly given.

The only other word in that sentence that could count as offensive is "Switzerland", but the number of people who still use that as a curse-word these days is dwindling swiftly.

psyk
26-11-2011, 05:47 PM
Inappropriate language can cover more than one word.


and a quote giving the "Inappropriate language" in question is also clearly given.


Nope that would look like this.


Hello ,
Your Electronic Arts account has been suspended for 72 hours for violating the Terms of Services for Electronic Arts Online.

Violation:Inappropriate language

[badass]

Drake Sigar
26-11-2011, 05:48 PM
I really wonder if this is policy, or an individual moderator going a bit too far. Either way, it's terrible. But if EA is deliberately handing out game bans for anything that could be construed as a mildly naughty word, that's quite remarkable.

I don't think it's deliberate, they just seem to have a bad dual ban system in place which they aren't motivated to fix. When this first happened I thought we were going to get a scandal on a level not seen since Battlenet tried to end online anonymity.

Heliocentric
26-11-2011, 05:48 PM
That's badass.

UDeadNowSucka
26-11-2011, 05:49 PM
Even if I would have cursed the mothers of every EA forum moderator that ever existed on planet earth, it still doesn't change the fact that I did nothing in the game itself that should prevent me from playing it.

It's not like I aimbotted and now I'm here complaining about being banned.

psyk
26-11-2011, 05:50 PM
You agreed to this when you installed the game/made a fourm account no use crying about it now.

OT - helio just clicked through to your wordpress and the latest peice is on "sword of the stars" is it any good? got it for free in a newsletter and haven't got around to it yet.

Also single of multiplayer?

UDeadNowSucka
26-11-2011, 05:52 PM
No I didn't agree to it.

I didn't agree to be restricted from a product I paid for and have done nothing that should prevent me from playing it.

Heliocentric
26-11-2011, 05:54 PM
Log out of the EA forums and stay logged out and it won't happen again.

psyk
26-11-2011, 05:57 PM
Yes you did when you accepted the T&C you should really read it next time.

UDeadNowSucka
26-11-2011, 06:00 PM
Because you read the entire T&C of every game you buy right?

I take it you also print it out and make backup copies for future reference?

Give me a break. Don't sit here and defend lame TOC's and poor business practice. I'm sure your smarter than that.

Memph
26-11-2011, 06:02 PM
I'm pretty sure he ain't.

edit: ok that was pointed. but 'don't cry about it' is about as conducive to the discussion as posting a random lolcat.jpg.

RPS have been plenty vocal about the ridiculousness of this practice, so you're certainly not alone in viewing it as completely unfair, but sadly bar making the stupidity public and waiting 72 hours there's not much else you can do.

metalangel
26-11-2011, 06:04 PM
No I didn't agree to it.

I didn't agree to be restricted from a product I paid for and have done nothing that should prevent me from playing it.


WHEN YOU USE ANY ONLINE GAME, SERVICE or WEBSITE FROM ELECTRONIC ARTS YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE READ, UNDERSTOOD, AND AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THESE TERMS.

Section 10, Rules of Conduct


EA reserves the right to terminate your Account and to prevent your use of any and all EA Services if your Account is used to engage in illegal activity or to violate this Terms of Service.

While I agree they're being ridiculous, it is a case of their house, their rules, and you agreed to be bound be those rules. If you don't like it, your only course of action is to never buy an EA product again.

psyk
26-11-2011, 06:06 PM
Lol

I wish more people did this, imagine xbox live with no angry racist shouty kids because they let fingers run, BLISS, and the added bonus of an increased amount of rage/I'm sorry/suck up posts for the xbox live suspension board.

Taidan
26-11-2011, 06:06 PM
Inappropriate language can cover more than one word.



Nope that would look like this.

No, because then they'd be giving a single word out of context. Some inappropriate language can be entirely appropriate when used on it's own.

Since there's clearly nothing inappropriate in the quoted sentence, we can put this down to another case of an EA forum mod screwing up, and EA's stupid policy of "forum ban equals game ban" exacerbating the problem

I can only assume that your defence of this undefendable situation and your "quit crying" language is an obvious attempt at trolling. So quit crying about this person's quite reasonable outrage at their unfair behaviour.

TillEulenspiegel
26-11-2011, 06:11 PM
If you don't like it, your only course of action is to never buy an EA product again.
Given that nobody could possibly "like" EA's recent behavior, that seems the only sensible decision.

Drake Sigar
26-11-2011, 06:13 PM
The way I see it you have three choices:

1. Create a new account and re-buy all your games every time you get banned.

2. Stop buying EA games.

3. Stop using EA forums.

The third option is the most hassle-free and allows you to play all those EA games few can seem to live without.

metalangel
26-11-2011, 06:14 PM
Given that nobody could possibly "like" EA's recent behavior, that seems the only sensible decision.

Yup. OT: I swore I'd never buy another EA game after Hot Pursuit, but broke that oath for BF3. I really should have known better, it's a crushing disappointment disguised by flashy presentation.

psyk
26-11-2011, 06:17 PM
No, because then they'd be giving a single word out of context.

And? your being banned do they really need to give it in context or do they just need to get the reason you were banned across in a straight forward manner? Would still like to see what it was a reply to to get it in context and all.


Some inappropriate language can be entirely appropriate when used on it's own.

Not on the EA board


I can only assume that your defence of this undefendable situation and your "quit crying" language is an obvious attempt at trolling. So quit crying about this person's quite reasonable outrage at their unfair behaviour, and GTFO.

You accept a T&C you then bend over and take it or you don't accept the T&C and don't bend over and take it

Its not hard to understand.

Subatomic
26-11-2011, 06:22 PM
It seems EA is trying really hard to get people out of their forum. If every post puts you in danger of an account suspension, people will stop posting there sooner or later.


You accept a T&C you then bend over and take it or you don't accept the T&C and don't bend over and take it

Its not hard to understand.

That doesn't make EA's practice any less ridiculous, and every player banned for something stupid like that has every right to complain. Maybe bad publicity will force EA to at least consider changing such stupid rules. If everyone just 'bends over and takes it', how is anything going to change? (excluding not buying EA games in the first place, which might actually be a good idea)

Memph
26-11-2011, 06:24 PM
Not that anyone would want to risk their BF3 access, but it'd be kinda amusing to try and trigger these bans in as innocent a way as possible, say start a thread about your new donkey and share links to myass.jpg and such. Actually I should imagine if all it takes is one accidental use of what one crotchety mod may consider a swear, or offensive, people could be easily trolled into bans left and right.

Taidan
26-11-2011, 06:30 PM
You accept a T&C you then bend over and take it or you don't accept the T&C and don't bend over and take it

Its not hard to understand.

You may be the sort of person who just bends over, but luckily for us, there are still people out there who are willing to fight for what is right. I'll be damned if I'm going to miss out on Mass Effect 3 just because people like you display attitudes like that, and I'll be damned if they drive me to casual piracy.

If the T&C says that they can take their game away from you for no reason whatsoever, with no justification, then you don't just bend over and take it.

You contact RPS, and they run an embarrassing story on it, and "Reach out to EA for comment".

Alex Bakke
26-11-2011, 06:33 PM
As much as I find this ridiculous, the posters above me are correct - Every time one signs the EULA, T&C etc, you agree to be subject to their rules.

psyk
26-11-2011, 06:35 PM
I've been banned from xbox live a few times one of the times was for constructing a sentance with some words replaced with ** someone I know has been banned for having the word nipples in their bio both of those are covered by the T&Cs that MS have in place. We don't get to decide what the rules they have put down cover.


If the T&C says that they can take their game away from you for no reason whatsoever, with no justification, then you don't just bend over and take it. DON'T BUY THE GAME and then complain or just don't accept the T&C and send it back, don't buy the game agree with the T&C then complain about what you have agreed with.

Heiniken22 suck it up, your 72 hour ban will be over soon.

metalangel
26-11-2011, 06:43 PM
You may be the sort of person who just bends over, but luckily for us, there are still people out there who are willing to fight for what is right. I'll be damned if I'm going to miss out on Mass Effect 3 just because people like you display attitudes like that, and I'll be damned if they drive me to casual piracy.

If the T&C says that they can take their game away from you for no reason whatsoever, with no justification, then you don't just bend over and take it.

You contact RPS, and they run an embarrassing story on it, and "Reach out to EA for comment".

I missed out on ME2 and will happily miss out on ME3 because they're EA games. Likewise I'd love to build a ranch in The Sims 3: Pets but it's an EA game. If you object that strongly you accept that no game is worth compromising your morals for, certainly not by wetly trying to embarrass them into being "nice" in the media. They'll still be the same bastards behind their nicely worded press release apologizing.

I did ask earlier if just refusing to be their customer is a similarly bold if ultimately pointless when it came to companies whose practices I disagreed with. The problem alas does lie in the fact that the overwhelming majority will just "take it" as they've decided Manshoot 7: The Shootening is more important than their rights or beliefs.

Nalano
26-11-2011, 07:34 PM
I don't post on Valve nor EA forums for that very reason. Eventually, I've been banned from just about every forum I've ever posted on (knock on wood) but, thankfully, the forums tied to games accounts - as is the case with my many MMO subscriptions - have never banned me from the game due to my actions on the forums.

It is an unconscionable, stupid practice to ban somebody from the game due to forum impropriety, especially when it is painfully clear that your moderators over-rely on word filters (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/forums/showthread.php?2081-Terribly-Moderated-Forums-Your-Worst-Forum-Experiences&p=59553&viewfull=1#post59553) to the ignorance of context.

thegooseking
26-11-2011, 07:52 PM
One thing I've learned from hanging around MMO forums is that people behave differently in a game to how they behave on a forum. Presupposing that if they're disruptive in a forum, they're going to be disruptive in multiplayer is just plain wrong. Banning people from single-player because of disruption on a forum is unambiguously reprehensible, but banning them from multiplayer... Although I can see the thinking behind it, and that makes me a little less outraged at it, that doesn't change the fact that it's still wrong. It's based on false assumptions.

A forum ban should be a forum ban, and nothing more.

That's to say nothing of whether the OP should have had a forum ban. Reminds me of the quote on bash.org (that I'm not going to dig out) where someone on a Christian IRC channel managed to get the Bible bot autobanned by asking it to quote a verse (Numbers 22:23, I think) with the word 'ass' in it.

Nalano
26-11-2011, 08:02 PM
One thing I've learned from hanging around MMO forums is that people behave differently in a game to how they behave on a forum.

Well, the main difference I've noticed is that, in PvE-oriented games where player interaction is substantively limited, players tend to act out their frustrations with their fellow man by being hostile and passive aggressive on the forums. Self-styled "gankers" tend to fight it out with (strong) words, and self-styled "carebears" tend to report anybody with a differing opinion.

It's as if it's offensive to them - after having blocked all distasteful players from their game - to be accosted (http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e342/jonmphy/carebear.jpg) with a differing opinion (http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e342/jonmphy/carebear2.jpg) on the forum!

psyk
26-11-2011, 08:06 PM
The two are connected and who gives a shit about being banned from a forum when you can make a new account and be back on in under a min? at least with the included game ban it actually is a punishment for breaking the T&C that you agreed with.

DigitalSignalX
26-11-2011, 08:07 PM
as conducive to the discussion as posting a random lolcat.jpg

Challenge accepted:

http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/9156/38067682.jpg

TillEulenspiegel
26-11-2011, 08:13 PM
Presupposing that if they're disruptive in a forum
"Disruptive" is one thing, abusive is another. Handing out multiplayer bans for serious abuse on a forum is justifiable, I would argue.

But enforcing *any* kind of ban for mild, inoffensive swearing is mind-bogglingly stupid. This is a forum for an 18+ game, not for children. If you really must insist on scrubbing normal words out of conversation for no apparent reason, at *least* give warnings first.

Nalano
26-11-2011, 08:14 PM
The two are connected and who gives a shit about being banned from a forum when you can make a new account and be back on in under a min?

MMO forum accounts are tied to game accounts. You can't make a new account. And in forums like this, where you can make as many new accounts as you want, that ability is not abused nearly as much as you would imply.

Also, nobody pays for the forums. They pay for the game. To block them from what they paid for because of some unrelated extra is not good policy.

The JG Man
26-11-2011, 08:21 PM
Having a look on your Battlelog profile, your posts seem to be pretty sturdy. My only thinking is that it uses the same language filter as on the EA UK forums, which is functionally quite poor. The ass comes up, you pop up, ban. That, however, would be immensely strict and unnecessary (usually the filter just censors it). As it goes, I can't find the particular post, but that may be because it's been deleted. So yeah. What a bizarre move.

You have my sympathies. Germany is quite bad-ass and I say that as someone who doesn't live there.

psyk
26-11-2011, 08:28 PM
that ability is not abused nearly as much as you would imply.

I've seen it happen enough times and it might not be good policy but that's what the rules are if you don't like them don't agree to them is as easy as clicking the I DON'T AGREE button that is next to the I AGREE button. We also have no idea what led up to this ban the guy could of had warnings before this and this was the last one, we also don't know what the post was a reply to.

HeavyStorm
26-11-2011, 08:37 PM
@Taidan: Thankfully, ME3 is a singleplayer game so I have no need for EA servers (unless, of course, I'd like to receive marketing about a new DLC or something).

I hate EA ever since they corrupted both Westwood and Bullfrog, but now this is ridiculous. No player should be prohibited from using something they paid for unless it was a crime. EA is a service provider and, as such, is under obligation for their customers. I'd like to see someone with money in a similar situation suing EA, asking for their money back. As one mentioned before, their houses, their rules, of course, but heck, if there's any kind of disagreement, then maybe the player should be able to be refunded.

The problem with those newly enforced rules for games is that they are a one way road: they treat software as a service but the provider has little to no obligation to the paying customer. They can terminate your account whenever they please, they can suspend the service whenever they please, but what about you? Can you get refunded for the hours when that same service is offline? Is there any SLA from the part of the provider at all? None.

Some people here are defending that they are right because you agreed to their TOC, EULA, etc. Is that so? Let's propose the absurd: I make a contract where I say someone can kill me. We both sign, so that someone murders me. Is that legal? Is it ok to kill someone just because that someone has agreed to it? Of course not. You can't make contracts that are in breech of the country's law.

Moreover, most people buying software nowadays are minors. Or better yet, even if an adult has bought it, it's a minor that installed it. Now, on most places around the world, minors can not sign abiding contract unless their parents or legal guardians agree to it. So, is the contract valid? No.

So yeah, all of us "crying" instead of taking it have the right to do so. We have to fight for what is right. However, I'd like to say that the first good step into that direction is to do what any conscious customer can: stop buying from them. In this case, all we have to do is not use their forums. And not buy anything from Origin. Any of those steps can show EA we, users, mean business.

The only place they will feel our touch is their wallets.

Nalano
26-11-2011, 08:46 PM
As one mentioned before, their houses, their rules, of course, but heck, if there's any kind of disagreement, then maybe the player should be able to be refunded.

I'm also reminded of the irony of selling games where you murder thousands upon thousands of swarthy foreigners but god forbid you use dirty language (or even parrot the dirty language the NPCs use) because that's wrong.

psyk
26-11-2011, 08:54 PM
Voluntary euthanasia is legal in some countries and U.S. states.

So depending on where you lived yes.

Drake Sigar
26-11-2011, 09:02 PM
One thing I've learned from hanging around MMO forums is that people behave differently in a game to how they behave on a forum. Presupposing that if they're disruptive in a forum, they're going to be disruptive in multiplayer is just plain wrong. Banning people from single-player because of disruption on a forum is unambiguously reprehensible, but banning them from multiplayer... Although I can see the thinking behind it, and that makes me a little less outraged at it, that doesn't change the fact that it's still wrong. It's based on false assumptions.
Not to mention the can of worms such a consequence opens up. Terms like 'objectionable content' could mean anything. EA could find negative opinions about their games objectionable, and then we'll end up with a forum full of fake-smiling gamers.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuAzvb38PyI

Hint: the child is EA.

Kaira-
26-11-2011, 09:40 PM
The problem with those newly enforced rules for games is that they are a one way road: they treat software as a service but the provider has little to no obligation to the paying customer. They can terminate your account whenever they please, they can suspend the service whenever they please, but what about you? Can you get refunded for the hours when that same service is offline? Is there any SLA from the part of the provider at all? None.

This is not helped in the slightest by the fact how popular Steam is. Luckily though Steam has separate forums for games account and forums, though, as it should be IMHO.

Tagert
26-11-2011, 09:43 PM
I wonder if bass sets it off as well.

Hmmmmm!

Taidan
26-11-2011, 09:58 PM
@Taidan: Thankfully, ME3 is a singleplayer game so I have no need for EA servers (unless, of course, I'd like to receive marketing about a new DLC or something).

Tiny nit-pick on that one point... ;)

Nalano
26-11-2011, 10:01 PM
and then we'll end up with a forum full of fake-smiling gamers.

We already have that in a lot of places. It's funny watching an entire class of forum denizen wracking its collective mind to figure out ways to get shit under the radar in their ongoing forum PvP. Indeed, it becomes a game unto itself.

deano2099
26-11-2011, 10:50 PM
You accept a T&C you then bend over and take it or you don't accept the T&C and don't bend over and take it

Its not hard to understand.

That's depressing. Are you like that with everything in life too? If something bad or unfair happens, you just take it? You don't question why, or if it's unfair, or try and do something about it?


As much as I find this ridiculous, the posters above me are correct - Every time one signs the EULA, T&C etc, you agree to be subject to their rules.

So? No-one is denying that the EULA says they can do this or that. But that doesn't automatically make it okay. This is a discussion forum, a forum for discussing things. Not just saying "oh it says so in the EULA so it must be okay".


I've been banned from xbox live a few times one of the times was for constructing a sentance with some words replaced with ** someone I know has been banned for having the word nipples in their bio both of those are covered by the T&Cs that MS have in place. We don't get to decide what the rules they have put down cover.

Thank you for the perfect fucking example:
http://www.neowin.net/news/xbox-live-policy-change-allows-users-to-get-more-sexual

Microsoft has finally changed one of its much argued policies for Xbox LIVE, allowing users to express their sexual orientation in their gamertags and profiles. Users have been previously suspended and banned from the Xbox LIVE (http://consumerist.com/2009/02/identifying-yourself-as-a-lesbian-gets-you-banned-on-xbox-live.html) service, because they would express their sexual orientation in their gamertag and profiles.

See?!

Microsoft were doing something ridiculous, people complained, it got changed. If everyone were like you, that would never have happened. If everyone just listened to you, the stupid policy that led to someone getting banned because his surname was "Gaywood" would still exist. Thankfully, not everyone is like you, some people have backbones and by kicking up a fuss they make change happen.

You know what I want more than anything else on the internet? A new policy that says whenever a company remove or change terms of use or EULAs for the benefit of users, anyone who has ever said "it's in the EULA, suck it up" or anything similar defending the policy in question, doesn't get the benefit of the change. Since they clearly like it so much.


The two are connected and who gives a shit about being banned from a forum when you can make a new account and be back on in under a min?
But that's against the Ts&Cs!

DaftPunk
26-11-2011, 11:03 PM
Why are you even using battlefield forums lol,just stick to this ones and play game,otherwise something like this would happen x)

Tams80
26-11-2011, 11:27 PM
The problem there is that how are people supposed to know what EA moderators think "inappropriate language" is. It varies from person to person (and I expect moderator to moderator) as well as with the context. Sure, there is language most people would consider inappropriate in most situations, but where is the line drawn. The T&C do not define "inappropriate language" and thus are they valid?

There could be a publicly available list of "inappropriate words", but that does not take into account context, which can arise from any angle and you couldn't expect people to actually read a huge list of "inappropriate words".

But as EA control access to the multiplayer you have it play by their rules. Comment like a ridiculously over sensitive moron is going to read your comments or don't comment at all.

EDIT: It's in the EULA? I'm pretty sure EULAs have no legal weight at all. Not that this is worth going to court over.

I haven't discussed the inappropriate use of dual bans here, as it is clearly not well thought out.

metalangel
26-11-2011, 11:49 PM
it is painfully clear that your moderators over-rely on word filters (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/forums/showthread.php?2081-Terribly-Moderated-Forums-Your-Worst-Forum-Experiences&p=59553&viewfull=1#post59553) to the ignorance of context.

The dearly departed Parker's forums (Parker's the automotive site) used a ridiculously heavy handed auto-filter for naughty words. This included naughty words contained within other words, such as "liar" within "familiar".

The most bizarre was on the motorcycle section where the word "scooter" was constantly censored to "s******". I eventually realized that it was trying to stop us seeing the Dukes Of Hazzard-derived slang for girl parts.


Microsoft were doing something ridiculous, people complained, it got changed. If everyone were like you, that would never have happened. If everyone just listened to you, the stupid policy that led to someone getting banned because his surname was "Gaywood" would still exist. Thankfully, not everyone is like you, some people have backbones and by kicking up a fuss they make change happen.

Richard Gaywood is a close friend of mine, and following his complaint they upheld the need for him to change his gamertag on the grounds that you're not allowed to have your real name as your gamertag either.

Vexing Vision
27-11-2011, 12:01 AM
EDIT: It's in the EULA? I'm pretty sure EULAs have no legal weight at all. Not that this is worth going to court over.


That's not quite how it goes.

They cannot sue you for violating their EULA, unless you are violating the EULA in a way that would also violate whatever local law is applicable. However, the right to terminate your account at any point is a perfectly legal if unpleasant point.

So, yeah... I *may* give in to EA's Origin at one point, but I'll sure as hell stay away from their crazy forums or even online match-ups, because I really don't want to lose my single-player access.

archonsod
27-11-2011, 12:42 AM
Also, nobody pays for the forums.

Yes they do. The people hosting them. Y'know, the same people who are also paying for the servers, infrastructure and support staff you use every time you try to play the game. So funnily enough, they're not blocking you from what you paid for, they're blocking you from what they're paying for.


The problem there is that how are people supposed to know what EA moderators think "inappropriate language" is.

By exercising their social skills. In fact, you could argue that their inability to grasp simple etiquette is a good reason to ban them from the multiplayer in the first place.

Nalano
27-11-2011, 01:55 AM
Yes they do.

I did not buy WoW so I could post on Blizzard's forums. I bought WoW so I could play WoW.

That Blizzard decided to host a forum was not my decision, nor did it influence my decision to buy the game.


By exercising their social skills. In fact, you could argue that their inability to grasp simple etiquette is a good reason to ban them from the multiplayer in the first place.

And, yet, it is not though "social skills" that EA nor any other large company moderates its forums. Context is not considered. Only language. And in this case, "badass" seems to be a very mild term on its own, clearly used in a complimentary tone in context, and certainly not - under any stretch of the imagination - worthy of a three day ban from the forums, to say nothing of a three day ban from the product for which the OP is a paying customer.

fearlessgoat
27-11-2011, 02:26 AM
I can tell you for a fact that not one of the moderators speaks English natively. Most are from Europe. You may not have relaised but you probably offended a swiz person there.

How do I know this, well I was offered a job for EA support a while back. When I went threw the building there wasn't one native English speaker. Didnt take the job by the way as it was just a temp job for Battlefield. Though they did say if need for speed is successful they would keep me on.

Sorry but I wasn't leaving a good job for a job that may not be there in a few months time.

UDeadNowSucka
27-11-2011, 05:44 AM
Topic updated with 3 interactions I attempted to have with 3 EA employee's to get this resolved.

Utnac
27-11-2011, 08:53 AM
Why do people use the EA forums in the first place? I havn't touched them since I started hearing about all these bans, it seemed the obvious thing to do at the time.

UDeadNowSucka
27-11-2011, 10:06 AM
I've updated the original thread with the response Crash7800 gave me, the EA Battlefield Community Manager. In the response, you can see that he actually seem's to believe that "trolling" is worthy of a 72 hour ban and that forum bans locking users out of games can "sometimes be the case".

The official Response from EA's Battlefield Community Manager Crash7800

Sorry that I didn't reply sooner - Holiday here :) I've been checking in where I can, but I'm sorry your issue wasn't on my radar at first.

It will take me some time to look into this issue. I'm sorry that I can't help you at this exact moment, but I can't just go around overturning bans without an examination.

I'm sorry that being banned from the forums resulted in your being banned from the game. This can sometimes be the case - I'm still working to figure out every use-case. I'm looking more into this functionality and what possible improvements could be made.

I can tell you that things like this post -link-, or this post -link-, or this post -link-, or a lot of what you said in this thread -link- (Rape joke - really?), or this entire thread that you started, seemingly only to troll -link- are not helping your case. Especially when you do that all in one day.

In complete honesty, I think that what's gone wrong here is that our report for why you were temporarily banned is wrong. You were probably banned for the reasons I've listed above. I probably would have temporarily banned you too for spamming nonsense and acting like a troll.

EDIT for clarity: To that end, I will be looking into this issue to determine whether this is indeed the case. Our internal reporting for these issues should be more thorough if so, for just such an instance.
I'm sure this will solicit some questions. It's 1 AM here, so I'll have to get back to them in the morning :)

------------------------------
My response to Crash7800

I love the way you say it can "sometimes be the case". Why don't you go read the Rock Paper Shotgun articles, where everytime a user was banned from the EA forums, they were also locked out of the game. So don't use the phrase "This can sometimes be the case", because ITS ALWAYS THE CASE.

Whatever I may have done on the forums should in no way effect my ability to play the game itself. And thats all there is to it. Short of posting links to hack sites, there is absolutlely no reason why I shouldnt be allowed to play, even when banned from the forum.

EA knows this. I know this. You know this. Every gamer alive knows this.

I suggest taking the forums down until EA is able to properly address this issue.

You can link too 500 different offensive posts I made for all I care. Suddenly trolling is worthy of being locked out of the game entirely? In what world does EA exist in? A dillusional world, thats what.

My problem is that I am unable to play the game itself. I could honestly give a shit less about being able to access the forums.

Again, I'll state the obvious.:

I DO NOT CARE ABOUT BEING BANNED FROM THE FORUM. WHAT I CARE ABOUT IS THAT I CANNOT ACCESS THE GAME ITSELF.

EA CLAIMED THIS WAS AN ERROR AND WOULD BE FIXED WHEN THE DRAGON AGE USER WAS BANNED.

8 MONTHS LATER AND IT IS NOT FIXED. FFS.

psyk
27-11-2011, 11:21 AM
That's depressing. Are you like that with everything in life too? If something bad or unfair happens, you just take it? You don't question why, or if it's unfair, or try and do something about it?Read what I wrote man, I AM NOT GOING TO BUY A GAME AGREE WITH THE T&C THEN CRY LIKE A CHILD WHEN IT GETS ENFORCED I WILL JUST NOT BUY IT. not quite sure why that is so hard to understand.


The problem there is that how are people supposed to know what EA moderators think "inappropriate language" is.How is that different than anywhere else?

The guy also still hasen't posted what the reply was to so we have no context (which you guys seem to love) has anyone even checked to see if it was "badass"

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=almost+as+badass+as+germany.+Switzerland% 3A+they+do+a+lot+of+stuff+I+think+that+just+about+ sums+up+europe.&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a

Shit is this what people do now? get banned moan and spread it round the web in a lame attempt at guilting the banners in to unbanning


Richard Gaywood is a close friend of mine, and following his complaint they upheld the need for him to change his gamertag on the grounds that you're not allowed to have your real name as your gamertag either. AHHHHH POOR DEANO



I can tell you that things like this post -link-, or this post -link-, or this post -link-, or a lot of what you said in this thread -link- (Rape joke - really?), or this entire thread that you started, seemingly only to troll -link- are not helping your case. Especially when you do that all in one day.LMAO at least I now know why he wouldn't post what the post was a reply to, make it to easy to track down and the rest or the SHIT he had posted would of come out. UDeadNowSucka/Heiniken22 you going to send that info to the other places you have sent this story? or are you going to let them run something that you have painted yourself as a victim in?

Gnoupi
27-11-2011, 11:42 AM
You can link too 500 different offensive posts I made for all I care. Suddenly trolling is worthy of being locked out of the game entirely? In what world does EA exist in? A dillusional world, thats what.


While I agree that linking behaviour in the forums to access to the game is quite silly, and easily on the "unacceptable" side...

A part of me who just got trash talked in LoL this morning by my own teammate has difficulties feeling sorry for you. No one likes a troll. No one likes rape jokes. And if you behave like this in a forum, I doubt you're a gentleman during the actual game.

I kind of wish there would be higher consequences for people who ruin other ones' fun by trolling and trash-talking. Because you paid for the game, but so did I. And people like you are ruining my game and preventing me from enjoying it. I want to simply have fun, winning or losing, without unsavory jokes about my family's sexual preferences or my own, and without hearing "noob" from either side of the conflict.

In my delusional world, gamers would be mature and able to just have fun without behaving like insulting jerks. And it wouldn't be a shame to call yourself a gamer in a mature environment, and you wouldn't be associated to that kind of childish behaviour.

Drake Sigar
27-11-2011, 11:58 AM
A part of me who just got trash talked in LoL this morning by my own teammate has difficulties feeling sorry for you. No one likes a troll. No one likes rape jokes. And if you behave like this in a forum, I doubt you're a gentleman during the actual game.

I couldn't be more of a gentleman in-game if I wore a top hat and monocle. How I'm perceived on forums I'll leave to the judgement of others, but I have been known to appreciate the occasional absurd rape joke. Are forum users who regularly engage in unwanted behaviour going to take that attitude to online games? Probably. Are you prepared to go around convicting people on the word 'probably'?

Taidan
27-11-2011, 12:03 PM
And now for a winning example of exactly why it's worth kicking up a fuss whenever a publisher makes a dick move:

http://uk.gamespot.com/news/bf3-players-to-get-battlefield-1943-after-all-6346676?tag=updates;editor;all;title;2

(Also involving EA and Battlefield 3, conveniently enough.)

psyk
27-11-2011, 12:03 PM
I can tell you that things like this post -link-, or this post -link-, or this post -link-, or a lot of what you said in this thread -link- (Rape joke - really?), or this entire thread that you started, seemingly only to troll -link- are not helping your case. Especially when you do that all in one day. That says it all, Op you want to put those links up? AIM defending something they know NOTHING about got to love it.

glenn37216
27-11-2011, 01:17 PM
I just recieved the ban hammer for 72 hours for an incident that happened to my son on Battlelog. Seems a EA server admin banned him for using the m98 sniper rifle and going 30-0 on a tdm..

Here's the kicker; he wasn't banned from just the server but from Battlelog/Origin itself.



After along heated discussion with EA SUPPORT,they told me he was banned for bad mouthing a EA ADMIN in a game server , not in Battlelog itself. I was like WTF? You mean to tell me you can be banned for talking smack in game? Yes , you can according to Ea support.

 

This isnt the outragous part. For some reason , a seperate Origin account (mine) that was on the same pc and tied into a different email was banned also. So 2 accounts was banned over 1 incident that happened in a game server? Yup , turns out Origin scans your pc and looks for Ea games , and other Origin accounts. So screw up on one... and even your offline accounts that are on the same pc will not work .. .Now thats one bad a$$ ban hammer.

 

As of right now, we have 8 EA titles we bought and paid for that we cannot play until this ban is lifted. -ONLY 1 of them is actually using the same Email that is associated with Battlelog /Origin. Now if this doesn't scare the average gamer away from Origin titles... I don't know what will .

Taidan
27-11-2011, 01:29 PM
This isnt the outragous part. For some reason , a seperate Origin account (mine) that was on the same pc and tied into a different email was banned also. So 2 accounts was banned over 1 incident that happened in a game server? Yup , turns out Origin scans your pc and looks for Ea games , and other Origin accounts.

That's a pretty alarming accusation. Now I really am convinced that Origin isn't the service for me.

Wolfenswan
27-11-2011, 01:53 PM
I just recieved the ban hammer for 72 hours for an incident that happened to my son on Battlelog. Seems a EA server admin banned him for using the m98 sniper rifle and going 30-0 on a tdm..

Here's the kicker; he wasn't banned from just the server but from Battlelog/Origin itself.



After along heated discussion with EA SUPPORT,they told me he was banned for bad mouthing a EA ADMIN in a game server , not in Battlelog itself. I was like WTF? You mean to tell me you can be banned for talking smack in game? Yes , you can according to Ea support.

 

This isnt the outragous part. For some reason , a seperate Origin account (mine) that was on the same pc and tied into a different email was banned also. So 2 accounts was banned over 1 incident that happened in a game server? Yup , turns out Origin scans your pc and looks for Ea games , and other Origin accounts. So screw up on one... and even your offline accounts that are on the same pc will not work .. .Now thats one bad a$$ ban hammer.

 

As of right now, we have 8 EA titles we bought and paid for that we cannot play until this ban is lifted. -ONLY 1 of them is actually using the same Email that is associated with Battlelog /Origin. Now if this doesn't scare the average gamer away from Origin titles... I don't know what will .

proof? screenshots?

Taidan
27-11-2011, 02:02 PM
proof? screenshots?

I'd say that given the circumstances, EA should be the ones providing proof to the contrary. After all, they've already stated that it's not their policy that forum bans equal bans, yet here we are still, with numerous people having already provided proof that their statements are not accurate...

deano2099
27-11-2011, 02:48 PM
That says it all, Op you want to put those links up? AIM defending something they know NOTHING about got to love it.

No-one is defending him, they're defending the general point - I'd still think it was wrong to ban him from the games if his forum ban was for posting child pornography. It's the principle of the thing. You might say that 'you accept the terms and conditions' but unless you live under a rock, I can 100% guarantee that you have agreed to some stuff that, were those rights exercised, you'd be pretty upset about and would likely complain. Are you posting from a PC with Windows installed for a start? Do you have a gas and electric supply?

Thing is, companies give themselves as many rights as they can legally get away with in their EULAs, but it's meant to be self-regulated - that is, if a company abuses those rights more than people deem fair, then they stop using them. You don't judge them on what's in the EULA, but in what they actually do on a regular basis. For that to work, people need to complain and tell people when an abuse happens. You're under the impression that posting on a forum is going outside the system, it's not, it's part of the system.

Nalano
27-11-2011, 04:48 PM
No one likes a troll. No one likes rape jokes.

No one? No one at all?

I hesitate to use the word "butthurt," as it's just as crude as what you're currently offended over, but you're clearly in a fragile emotional state that is very susceptible to teasing and such is not the state of mind in which you should be going out in mixed company, as sooner or later you will see or hear something that will offend you.

I see two choices here: Either, at great expense, we enact draconian rules and tirelessly police society to a standard dictated by pensioner schoolmarms, or accept that the level of decorum in multiplayer games and online forums is that of a pub atmosphere, complete with trash-talking, ribaldry, and blue and black humor. Games are not a formal, black-tie event. In fact, they're substantively its very opposite.

psyk
27-11-2011, 05:03 PM
YES you ACCEPTED do we need a definition of that word? If you don't like the T&C DON'T agree it's that simple. This has nothing to do with the T&Cs I agree with for all you know I pirate everything and don't live in a house, this is about the op acting like a dick on BATTLELOG and getting what he knew would happen then trying to gain support and a pat on the back while leaving out evidence that shows him in a bad light.


I'd still think it was wrong to ban him from the games if his forum ban was for posting child pornography
Palm meet forehead

A thread the op made on battlelog

Got to love these fa@@ot mods locking every thread

Taidan
27-11-2011, 05:06 PM
A thread the op made on battlelog

Would you do us the honour of providing a direct link to this thread, so that we can form our own opinions?

psyk
27-11-2011, 05:14 PM
Nope on other PC and can't really be arsed to write out the URL what you can do though is sign in to battlelog and search for "UDeadNowSucka" click on his name and it's down the bottom in the "Battlefeed" (4 down from the top at the time of this post)

Nalano
27-11-2011, 05:41 PM
By replying to this thread you agree to tongue-bathe my pet rottweiler after tongue-washing my car at a time of my choosing. All rights are reserved by me.

Go ahead, click reply.

ReverendMoosey
27-11-2011, 05:50 PM
...What sort of car?

Taidan
27-11-2011, 06:00 PM
Is the Rottweiler a boy or a girl? I'm not willing to go gay for a dog...

Drat! Too late!

archonsod
27-11-2011, 07:53 PM
I did not buy WoW so I could post on Blizzard's forums. I bought WoW so I could play WoW.

So don't post on the forum. Problem solved. All EA are effectively doing is refusing to provide you with any services if you abuse the provision of one of their services, which is perfectly normal as far as I can see. Your argument is tantamount to saying a store should not eject you for taking a piss in the electrical goods section if you were only there to buy clothing. They're not interested in why you were there, it's your behaviour that's the problem.


And, yet, it is not though "social skills" that EA nor any other large company moderates its forums.

Unless they're using automated scripts I don't see how they could avoid it.


Context is not considered. Only language. And in this case, "badass" seems to be a very mild term on its own

The rules say no foul language, not "mild swearing accepted". It's not an ambiguous rule. As for what is deemed inappropriate, I'm pretty sure that's a skill you're expected to have mastered by the time you're a teenager. If not, you're going to be in a whole world of hurt once you enter the workplace.

Nalano
27-11-2011, 08:21 PM
So don't post on the forum. Problem solved.

Thanks for opening an account with BankAmericaCorp. Here's a complimentary pen as our thanks.

Are... are you doodling with that pen? That's it! We're freezing your assets!

Also, here's hoping you don't get dry mouth.

TillEulenspiegel
27-11-2011, 08:24 PM
The rules say no foul language, not "mild swearing accepted". It's not an ambiguous rule. As for what is deemed inappropriate, I'm pretty sure that's a skill you're expected to have mastered by the time you're a teenager. If not, you're going to be in a whole world of hurt once you enter the workplace.
I love shit like this. Makes me glad I've never had a "real" job, and likely never will.

Better wear a suit and tie next time you play your videogames too.

psyk
27-11-2011, 08:29 PM
re... are you doodling with that pen? That's it! We're freezing your assets!
Yep that's what its like.

Theblazeuk
27-11-2011, 08:49 PM
The apologists in these conversations are a useful reminder of why senseless, harmful and arbitary situations persist around the world. It's only when you read these brave apologists for the pointless and irrational flaws of the corporate world that you can truly understand the righteous apathy any attempt at rectifying the status quo faces.

After all, this isn't just a "I don't care about your complaint" this is a "WHY ARE YOU EVEN COMPLAINING" to the point of being the second most frequent poster in the thread. This is the attitude obviously shared by the mods and the admins on EA Forums and why bureaucracy is generally impenetrable.

All that said just don't use the EA forums or the Steam forums and if you have to, don't post anything but the blandest tech support request. I'd say don't play the game but frankly I can't begrudge you playing BF3, it does look good. Just don't do anything extra with them - if no one used their forums other than to make one post saying "I have purchased BF3 but won't be participating in any of EA's community sites due to their terrible T+C and utter disdain for circumstance or context" then they couldn't pretend people didn't have a problem. Hell if no one used them the point would be made to some extent.

psyk
27-11-2011, 09:10 PM
No DON'T BUY THE GAME. Your buying the game and agreeing with the T&C, by doing this your saying it's OK to continue what they are doing.

If you don't like battery chickens DON'T BUY BATTERY CHICKENS, don't buy the chicken then complain that you don't like the way it's raised, same in the case of games or anything else you don't agree with.

What is the problem with being banned on BATTLELOG and from the game anyway? as in the ops case. Anything you post on there is shown in your bf3 profile the two are connected it's not like he was on the main EA fourm and got banned although he is on there under the name "Heiniken22" trying the same sob story (yep that's what this is, he left out info that was related to his ban and won't post links that go against his "oh im innocent" story his weaving)



Got to love these fa@@ot mods locking every threadYep is what game fourms are for insulting the staff.

Nalano
27-11-2011, 09:12 PM
I love shit like this. Makes me glad I've never had a "real" job, and likely never will.

Better wear a suit and tie next time you play your videogames too.

And for fuck's sake, has anybody played BF3?

THEY USE FOUL LANGUAGE! (also, you kill a lot of people)

Memph
27-11-2011, 10:22 PM
'I'm getting ducked up the asp over here!'
'Duck! I'm getting my ship pushed in here'
- battlefield 3 multiplayer. (roughly every 30 seconds).

*some edits may have been made, for the good of the children

deano2099
27-11-2011, 10:23 PM
YES you ACCEPTED do we need a definition of that word? If you don't like the T&C DON'T agree it's that simple. This has nothing to do with the T&Cs I agree with for all you know I pirate everything and don't live in a house, this is about the op acting like a dick on BATTLELOG and getting what he knew would happen then trying to gain support and a pat on the back while leaving out evidence that shows him in a bad light.


It doesn't matter if he deserved it. Or even if he was doing it on purpose. You're being really annoying, so as far as I'm concerned you deserve to have a school kid spit in your face tomorrow, but if that happens it still doesn't mean the school kid was in the right.

Out of interest, where would you change your mind? If EA took 1000 from his bank account as 'punishment' but that was in the T&C, would you be okay with it? If they send someone around to kick his face in, but it was in the T&C, would that be okay with you too? Exactly how far can a company go in inflicting its own statutory punishments for users' actions?

Or a step further, imagine I own a large conglomerate, part of which includes a videogame company and an electricity provider. You're rude on the videogame forum, so I ban for you for 48 hours. And cut off your electric for 48 hours too.

Yes, an online forum and the game that forum is about are a lot more tightly linked, but EA have already banned people from unrelated single-player games too. It's getting more and more divorced. I really don't think the sort of horror story in the previous paragraph, where you piss off one company and they take it out on you through another, is a million miles away.

psyk
27-11-2011, 10:29 PM
It doesn't matter if he deserved it. Or even if he was doing it on purpose.That's what the thread is about even if it has been hijacked in to an anti EA policy thread


You're being really annoying, so as far as I'm concerned you deserve to have a school kid spit in your face tomorrow, but if that happens it still doesn't mean the school kid was in the right.LMAO why would a school child spit in my face? just because your in school and get spat on dosen't mean we all are ;p that's a great attitude by the way "WHAAAAA his annoying me, I hope something befalls him WHAAAA"


Out of interest, where would you change your mind? If EA took 1000 from his bank account as 'punishment' but that was in the T&C, would you be okay with it? If they send someone around to kick his face in, but it was in the T&C, would that be okay with you too? Exactly how far can a company go in inflicting its own statutory punishments for users' actions?If he agreed to that then YES


Or a step further, imagine I own a large conglomerate, part of which includes a videogame company and an electricity provider. You're rude on the videogame forum, so I ban for you for 48 hours. And cut off your electric for 48 hours too.HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ok lets push this as far as we can

Your home country runs a game fourm you get banned they kick you out the country.

deano2099
27-11-2011, 10:45 PM
That's what the thread is about even if it has been hijacked in to an anti EA policy thread
Threads change and adapt. As do companies. And people. You have a problem with the entire notion.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ok lets push this as far as we can

Your home country runs a game fourm you get banned they kick you out the country.
And you'd be okay with that right, if it said it in the T&Cs. "Bad language may result in deportation" - you'd be fine with it right?

There's also the small matter of EA saying publicly some months ago that it wasn't their policy to issue game bans for forum behaviour, so even someone agreeing to those T&Cs may be doing so with the knowledge of that statement. Why are you not as excited about that as the EULA or whatever? Why not hold the company to account for their statement.

I'm also interested in where you stand from a moral point of view, to bring you on to the same page as everyone else in the discussion. If we accept that it's legally okay for EA to do this, do you think it's morally right? What do you think? Come out from behind the T&Cs and tell us what your hand is in this game. Because at the moment it's unclear as to if you think EA is in the right and people should just get used to this sort of thing, or if you think people should stop buying EA games in order to campaign directly against these practices.

psyk
27-11-2011, 11:52 PM
I would rather focus on the sob story that has loads of info left out like the pure troll thread by the op insulting the mods and the links to posts the mod sent him in his message.


And you'd be okay with that right, if it said it in the T&Cs. "Bad language may result in deportation" - you'd be fine with it right?I wouldn't click the agree button/tick the I agree box in the first place and if I did I wouldn't cry when it was enforced. Oh and deportation can be for breaking laws in the country you reside in.

And once again people don't give a shit if they get banned on a fourm they can make a new account if they get banned from the game as well maybe they will sort themselves out.

deano2099
28-11-2011, 12:21 AM
I would rather focus on the sob story that has loads of info left out like the pure troll thread by the op insulting the mods and the links to posts the mod sent him in his message.

Fair enough. No-one else here actually cares about that though. This isn't that sort of forum.

psyk
28-11-2011, 12:29 AM
What sort of fourm is this, a place to circle jerk about the evils of the gaming industry? got to love "long term" members THIS IS OUR HOUSE GTFO (May be exaggerated)

TillEulenspiegel
28-11-2011, 12:41 AM
No, you're just boring. The particulars of this specific case aren't very interesting. Who cares? It doesn't affect you.

EA's broader policies do, though. So does the direction of the gaming industry at large.

psyk
28-11-2011, 12:45 AM
LMAO I think your boring, Oh look it goes both ways. This is way offtopic though the thread is about "UDeadNowSucka" getting banned for breaking T&Cs that he agreed with, not if you think i'm boring.


EA's broader policies do, though. So does the direction of the gaming industry at large.

There is already a thread on that why do you feel the need for this one to discuss the same thing?

Nalano
28-11-2011, 12:51 AM
LMAO I think your boring, Oh look it goes both ways.

Oh, I'm sorry, weren't you just complaining about trolls, like, two posts ago?

psyk
28-11-2011, 12:59 AM
What this


I would rather focus on the sob story that has loads of info left out like the pure troll thread by the op insulting the mods and the links to posts the mod sent him in his message.
Talking about the pure troll thread the op made on battlelog (Got to love these fa@@ot mods locking every thread) that's the only part like two posts ago I can find talking about trolls.

If people are going to call me boring im going to return the favour, guys you need to try harder.

Battlelog (where the guy got banned from) is not ea(dot)com, all you guys who wanted battlelog integrated in BF3 how would you see bans working then?



[–]UDeadNowSucka[S] Oh look, another retard defending EA;s ridiculous policies. Maybe you should go work for EA. I’m sure you would fit right in.
And another thing Mr. Retard, if this happened to you. I’m sure you would be shitting all over EA as well. So don’t be such an ass kissing faggot.
Forum behavior =/= Game behavior. The two can be very different, but I don’t expect you to understand this, seeing as your brain seems to be covered in EA’s shit from having your head stuck so far up there asses.
And even if I am a dick in the game, what business is it of anybody elses? I didnt realize we all turned into the internet police all of a sudden. Gotta keep the servers friendly and language clean, meanwhile your multiplayer character is getting fucked in the ass as they say and having his shit pushed in.
And be careful, I might rape you in the game, seeing as I made a rape joke on the battlelog forums.
permalinkparent

[–]UDeadNowSucka[S] Being a dick isn’t against the law faggot. Deal with it. Dont play internet police. Crash isn’t going to give you a medal for it.
You wanna sit here and justify this stupid banning system, than go ahead. But I promise you, when and if it happens to you, you’ll be playing an entirely different tune.
Seems we’ve reached a point in gaming when dev’s and publishers can actually lock players out of games they paid for, based on there out of game actions.
Whats next? EA’s going to send rep’s to the houses of everybody that buys there game to monitor there behavior? This way if somebody says the word “fuck” or “shit” outside the game, EA can ban them in the game as well.
You Dumbass bitch

[–]UDeadNowSucka[S] I made a thread in the off topic forum in which I summarized all of the european countries with comedic remarks. Nobody got offended, most of the replies found it funny. I did not directly insult a country in an abusive or serious manner in any way shape or form, nor did I insult any battlelog users from any of the countries I mentioned in my thread.
Badass was the only word in my entire thread that could possibly be considered offensive. No other word was even remotely close to "badass" in terms of offensiveness.
The part you see in the email, the part the moderator apparently took offense too was worded as follows:
"Denmark: Almost as badass as germany."
Following it was my remark about the country of Switzerland. Then I went on to say "That just about sums up all the european countries".
Either way, nothing was remotely offensive enough to get me banned for 72 hours. Unless the moderator that did it is an overly emotional 12 year old girl that lives in Denmark.

[–]UDeadNowSucka[S] The mod that banned me was probably french. rimshot

[–]UDeadNowSucka[S] What I'm wondering is, why do forum mods have any power beyond forum bans in the first place? There job is to ban from the forums, not ban people from there games. How is it some EA forum mod in a bad mood, can have the power to actually take a paid-for product away from a player based on a whim that "badass" is offensive to him/her.

[–]UDeadNowSucka[S] I spoke too CrazyCanuck in pm on the EAUK forums about this whole thing, and he searched through my entire battlelog post history, found one thing to latch onto, and then tried using it as a reason to defend EA's 72 hour ban. Yet he couldn't pull his head far enough out of EA's ass to realize that unbanning me from battlelog, but keeping me banned from the forums was pretty reasonable. In fact, I even proposed that as a middle-ground and he wouldn't agree too it.
from reddit. Got to love the rage and the blind chasing of being banned for saying "badass"

I'm bored so thought I would group together the reasons for this guy getting a 72 hour ban

Got to love these fa@@ot mods locking every thread
almost as badass as germany. Switzerland: they do a lot of stuff I think that just about sums up europe.
I can tell you that things like this post -link-, or this post -link-, or this post -link-, or a lot of what you said in this thread -link- (Rape joke – really?), or this entire thread that you started, seemingly only to troll -link- are not helping your case. Especially when you do that all in one day.Surprised it was only 72 hours

deano2099
28-11-2011, 02:22 AM
That's the thing. We don't care about personalities here. The OP admitted to making rape jokes and a bunch of other stuff, I don't know the guy but if I had to make a judgment he doesn't sound like a particularly pleasant person. Likewise, we don't know you psyk but from your attitude on here you seem much the same. Yes, the wall of text you posted from Reddit sounds like the rantings of a mad man, but if I posted up everything you've said in this thread it'll look pretty similar to me. No-one cares about you, no-one cares about the OP, no-one cares about me, the only thing that matters here is your opinion and the strength of your argument. We're not out to win points in internet flaming here.

To make a famous RPS-stretched-analogy: I'm against the death penalty too. That doesn't mean I was defending Ted Bundy.

Psyk, the only point you seem to be making, over and over again, is that it says in the T&Cs EA can do this and so they can. Well done, we're all in agreement on that one. The OP is guilty, right, fine. If that's all you have to say then you can leave because no-one here disagrees that with that, you won the thread, here have a RPS-point, collect 1000 for a free pencil sharpener.

But yes, there's a larger point as to if EA should be doing this, which we're talking about. It's interesting because they've said before that that's not their policy.

psyk
28-11-2011, 02:32 AM
They sound like the rantings of a racist homophobe


But yes, there's a larger point as to if EA should be doing this, which we're talking about. It's interesting because they've said before that that's not their policy. Woah what?


“With every game and service EA offers, we take the satisfaction of our customers very seriously. We discourage cheating and strive to maintain a high level of integrity in both our games and our forums. Therefore when someone violates our Terms of Service, we are forced to take actions that can include suspensions and other measures. We do not take those decisions lightly – however the integrity of our services and the satisfaction of our customers requires a clear set of rules.

“We have listened to our customers and are planning a policy update which will include more equitable rules on suspensions – we want to make sure the time fits the crime. As with all technology updates, these changes take some time to implement. Meanwhile, we urge any user with a question about suspensions or our policies to please contact us at (866) 543-5435 so we can address their specific situation.”that's the response RPS got and if we dive in to that we get to "we want to make sure the time fits the crime." so the op is lucky he didn't get even more screwed then he already thinks he is.

Also
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/forums/showthread.php?2083-Gamer-s-Willingness-to-Sign-Away-Their-Statutory-Rights&highlight=EULa

And going to ask this again
If battlelog was integrated in BF3 how would you see this going down then? excatly the same as it is now.

stop telling me to leave as well that aint going to work

This is where he got the ban http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/gate/ not http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/categories/list.page

If people use an all in one stat tracker/fourm/game browser why the fuck are they getting surprised when a ban on one carries over to the rest of the package?

Nalano
28-11-2011, 03:14 AM
If that's all you have to say then you can leave because no-one here disagrees that with that, you won the thread, here have a RPS-point, collect 1000 for a free pencil sharpener.

Hey! Hey.

I don't remember reading about the pencil sharpener clause in the RPS EULA.


They sound like the rantings of a racist homophobe

What in the fucking fuck are you talking about?

psyk
28-11-2011, 03:20 AM
I would like to know the same thing but you kinda never responded to my reply to

Oh, I'm sorry, weren't you just complaining about trolls, like, two posts ago? So you can work that one out.

fuck it as im kind here this might help you http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/10/27/blizzcons-peculiar-homophobic-moment/

Does that not work both ways? only counts if it's a big company?

Nalano
28-11-2011, 03:40 AM
I would like to know the same thing but you kinda never responded to my reply to
So you can work that one out.

Pro-tip: It was a rhetorical question.

You're trolling. Or counter-trolling. It's all the same thing.

soldant
28-11-2011, 03:49 AM
counter-trolling.
Isn't this an upcoming Valve game?

psyk
28-11-2011, 03:51 AM
Nice avoiding Nalano your good at that.

I can't be arsed to look through your posts but do you think battlelog should be included in BF3 instead of being in a browser? If it was would people still be moaning?

http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=I+Was+Banned+for+72+Hours+from+Battlelog+for+usi ng+The+Word+%22Badass%22+in+the+Forums&pbx=1&oq=I+Was+Banned+for+72+Hours+from+Battlelog+for+us ing+The+Word+%22Badass%22+in+the+Forums&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=s&gs_upl=12932l12932l0l13959l1l1l0l0l0l0l204l204l2-1l1l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=4490b66f1f36cf5d&biw=1240&bih=894

Yeah screw that got to love internet reporting.

"I was banned for 72 hours from battlelog for being a dick" fixed

http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/battlefield-3/1457262-so-zh1nt0-why-am-i-still-banned-battlelog.html just because the guys rage amuses me

deano2099
28-11-2011, 12:52 PM
They sound like the rantings of a racist homophobe
Let's gloss over the irony of that coming from the guy that introduced the phrase "bend over and take it" to the topic eh?


Also
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/forums/showthread.php?2083-Gamer-s-Willingness-to-Sign-Away-Their-Statutory-Rights&highlight=EULa

Fair point, but the they also said the opposite here:
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/03/11/ea-retracts-game-ban-for-forum-violation/
and still haven't retracted that statement.


stop telling me to leave as well that aint going to work
I don't want you to leave, I just want to know if you have anything to add beyond attacking the OP and telling him he deserved it. Let's have a conversation, not a slanging match.

R-F
28-11-2011, 01:03 PM
Can we all agree that psyk should be banned for trolling?

Berzee
28-11-2011, 02:13 PM
No, but I would be alright with banning him for swearing.

metalangel
28-11-2011, 02:46 PM
Can we all agree that psyk should be banned for trolling?

No. I don't always agree with the way he's expressing his views but I think his views are valid.

Cooper
28-11-2011, 03:58 PM
Does everyone remember that week when everyone agreed that EA were no longer the evil-iest of the evil? And everyone decided Activision were the evil-iest publishers, followed later by Ubisoft.

I think Mirror's Edge came out in that week. That was a good week.

Smashbox
28-11-2011, 04:01 PM
Admittedly I'm a bit late to the party on this one, but is this the new thing here or something? Registering a forum account to bitch about poor customer service on an unrelated platform/service?

Berzee
28-11-2011, 04:21 PM
Admittedly I'm a bit late to the party on this one, but is this the new thing here or something? Registering a forum account to bitch about poor customer service on an unrelated platform/service?

Oh man, this is nothing. I was about to make a post about this other website I read a lot that many of you have never heard of, but anyway on the forums there, everyone who posts just posts about how bad things have happened to them on other forums. It's terrible. Let me find a link for you...

Nalano
28-11-2011, 06:43 PM
Isn't this an upcoming Valve game?

That'd be interesting. Lobbing Orlybombs and masking your identity through clever use of sockpuppets to pepper your opponents with flames.

Like CS for horrible people.

Wait. No.

Like CS for more horrible people.

psyk
28-11-2011, 10:05 PM
The Rules
1. Be excellent to each other.

2. That means not insulting each other.

3. No, really, it's possible to disagree without insults. Just don't do it.

4. Please use English. I know, but our Foreign is pretty shockingly bad.

5. Please report spam or innappropriate behaviour using the tools provided. We can swear if we feel the need to we just can't insult each other mmmmmmmm.

Try and understand that he was banned from BATTLELOG the thing a lot of you want in BF3 and not in a browser if that was the case at launch then would you all still be up in arms about something that you seem to be getting confused with something else? I agree the op has tried his hardest to make it look like the other bans but when it comes down to it he was banned from a all in one STAT TRACKER/GAME BROWSER/FOURM a connected through BATTLELOG group of services not from a seperately run game fourm.

If you looked at the other cases and compare to the op you might be able to see what he is trying to do and why people should be calling him on it instead of giving his BS more coverage.

Deano
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/03/11/ea-retracts-game-ban-for-forum-violation/ - March
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/11/17/eas-unwieldy-banhammer-ea-responds/ - Nov

Nalano
28-11-2011, 10:17 PM
We can swear if we feel the need to we just can't insult each other mmmmmmmm.

You're not being excellent to me. You're not even being particularly good to me.


Deano
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/03/11/ea-retracts-game-ban-for-forum-violation/ - March
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/11/17/eas-unwieldy-banhammer-ea-responds/ - Nov

http://www.pacepress.org/features/jaywalking-in-new-york-city-is-actually-illegal-1.1489690#.TtQH0HqGmSo

psyk
28-11-2011, 10:26 PM
All I've said is your good at avoiding questions and what does jaywalking have to do with this?

neema_t
28-11-2011, 10:48 PM
Does everyone remember that week when everyone agreed that EA were no longer the evil-iest of the evil? And everyone decided Activision were the evil-iest publishers, followed later by Ubisoft.

I think Mirror's Edge came out in that week. That was a good week.

Frankly I personally feel that order still stands. Yeah, EA banning people from games along with forums is pretty damn evil, but the way Activision and Ubisoft are acting is bad for everyone. That's not to say EA's behaviour isn't bad for everyone, but we can just not use their forums. Most gamers who follow the relevant news will hopefully be aware of what can happen if they're even slightly impolite on the internet (apparently that does happen, shocking), and as such won't put themselves in a position where EA can ban them.

Having said all that, I find it disgusting, frustrating and plain wrong that EA can use something you've said to effectively take your money and their product back. It sucks that digital distribution is so convenient, I know I couldn't keep the cases and discs for 144 games on my shelf, because we are pretty much putting ourselves in a very bad position, and cloud gaming is going to make that worse. Imagine, one day we'll all have all our games in one place, and that place isn't in our homes. Now imagine that you log in to that service with Facebook (could happen), and you get banned from Facebook for posting a rude word in a status update... I could honestly see things going that way, given that there are already plenty of sites that request you log in with FB. I'm eternally grateful that RPS isn't one of them.

deano2099
29-11-2011, 01:19 AM
We can swear if we feel the need to we just can't insult each other mmmmmmmm.
And you kind of admitted that your whole presence here is to insult the OP is the issue I think people are having...


Try and understand that he was banned from BATTLELOG the thing a lot of you want in BF3 and not in a browser if that was the case at launch then would you all still be up in arms about something that you seem to be getting confused with something else? I agree the op has tried his hardest to make it look like the other bans but when it comes down to it he was banned from a all in one STAT TRACKER/GAME BROWSER/FOURM a connected through BATTLELOG group of services not from a seperately run game fourm.

A valid an interesting point - in social games, where do we draw the line? If the forums were only accessible from the game client, would the ban be reasonable then? And do we really want to encourage that sort of walled-garden mentality, when it'd be counter-productive for most of us?

Did this ban affect the entire Origin account I wonder? Or does BF3 not use it?

psyk
29-11-2011, 08:22 AM
And you kind of admitted that your whole presence here is to insult the OP is the issue I think people are having...I fixed his title in one post and have said his story is BS ok I called him a dick a few times to other people but then his proven that to me.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/forums/showthread.php?2186-I-Was-Banned-for-72-Hours-from-Battlelog-for-using-The-Word-quot-Badass-quot-in-the-Forums&p=62541&viewfull=1#post62541

It dosen't help when all his done is copy pasted his story everywhere to try and gain support while insulting people in comments when they don't agree with him and his only reason to make his account on here has been to spread his story (he could prove me wrong but I doubt it)


Did this ban affect the entire Origin account I wonder? Or does BF3 not use it?His giving limited details so the whole story dosen't come out, they use the same email, but he has only mentioned battlelog in his posts so might be the case.


I am now completely unable to access Battlelog at all, to play the game that I PAID FOR.

Vexing Vision
29-11-2011, 10:07 AM
I am enjoying this discussion a lot, for the most part.

As someone who coordinates a team of forum moderators (among other things), let me just say this:

a) People who are 'troublemakers' (rude, insulting, racist, homophobic) in the forums are ALWAYS also 'troublemakers' in other social online environments, like in online games. If there is a sufficent reason to ban a person from a forum, there is also sufficent reason to ban him from interacting with the online community. Subsequently, if you are banned from the game for ToS-violating behaviour (for example by being homophobic or racist), you will also be banned from the forums.
The reason we - and other online-game publishers who care about healthy communities - are doing this is because a pleasant environment is the best reason for new players to become invested long-term. Players ("customers") who are invested long-term because they are enjoying themselves are the best investment for increased revenue - if a player is happy (with the game and the community), he is willing to spend more money. Also, they're a lot more fun to work with.


b) Banning players from offline, single-player games should never, ever happen. Not for hacks, cheats, or even rude behaviour. NPCs have no feelings. You can yell at them whatever you feel is required to yell. A ban from a single-player experience benefits no-one - you did not disrupt the experience of any other gamer, and your loyality towards the company takes a big hit, which means that we've probably lost you as a customer. While in a), we would benefit from losing you (because it makes a more pleasant environment for our other customers), here, there is no gain, no benefit and bad PR.

All these things could also be labelled as "common business sense". Which is something that is sadly lacking in some of the bigger companies.

hamster
29-11-2011, 10:59 AM
Well, there's a bit of a dissonance isn't there? You're allowed to swear and rant and make sexist/racist/supremacist statements in-game. The worse that can happen is that the server admin imposes rules against such-and-such, and since you are in violation, they kick or ban you from their server. Alternatively, if the system is in place, you might get vote-kicked. But this isn't even guaranteed to happen because different servers have different rules and different systems.

But here you get temp-banned from playing the game online. Seems like a whole new level of magnitude. Additionally, I think it bans your account too so you can't play other Origin games. And previously, EA did represent that it wasn't in their policy to link your forum account with your game account, and that the entire thing was a mistake.

I don't think there's much room for debate on this.

I also think there's way too much of a reaction to asshats. So an asshat is annoying. So what? He's a racist nazi pig. You know he's not serious anyway, he's just throwing insults willy-nilly. I just tell 'em to fuck off when they annoy me or roll 'em over by teabagging their corpses after i cap 'em. Then I tell 'em to "SUCKIT". *shrug* C'mon, guys.

metalangel
29-11-2011, 11:58 AM
I just tell 'em to fuck off when they annoy me or roll 'em over by teabagging their corpses after i cap 'em. Then I tell 'em to "SUCKIT". *shrug* C'mon, guys.

I doubt they're smart enough to realize you're ironically giving them a taste of their own medicine.

psyk
29-11-2011, 12:27 PM
Hamster he got banned on the BATTLELOG fourm I don't think you can not have it linked to your origin account.

battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/gate/ (http://www.battlelog.battlefield.com)
forum.ea.com (http://www.forum.ea.com)

All the reports about the fourm bans (including here on RPS) seem to be talking about the EA FORUM not BATTLELOG as is the case here.

Heiniken22 is his EA FORUM account - no ban
UDeadNowSucka is his BATTLELOG account - 72 hour ban

Also it wasn't just for saying badass as he would like people to believe, it was for all of this


I can tell you that things like this post -link-, or this post -link-, or this post -link-, or a lot of what you said in this thread -link- (Rape joke – really?), or this entire thread that you started, seemingly only to troll -link- are not helping your case. Especially when you do that all in one day.and


Got to love these fa@@ot mods locking every thread which I guess goes with "or this entire thread that you started, seemingly only to troll -link-"

Which he was told after he contacted them, should the mod who banned him included all of those links? maybe.

hamster
29-11-2011, 01:15 PM
Well then they should probably make forum privileges a subset of the account. It only makes sense that if you troll a forum, you get temp banned from posting in the forum. I mean that's proportional, right? This is a heck of a lot more than an eye for an eye. And imagine if his infraction was serious enough to warrant a permanent ban on the forum. Are you saying you have no objection if he gets permanently locked out of his account?

psyk
29-11-2011, 01:38 PM
If they banned his account permanenlty on the first warning that would of been going to far but they didn't. It's funny MS have been doing this for ages now but people only start complaining when it starts to have an impact on them, is sad.

I'm seeing it like an online asbo

deano2099
29-11-2011, 02:44 PM
While I take on board the point that trouble makers in one venue are likely to be trouble makers in another, the stuff he was doing on the EA forums, if done in game, would not have got him banned. So banning him from the game seems odd.

Taidan
29-11-2011, 03:43 PM
What Psyk is saying:


Hamster he got banned on the BATTLELOG fourm I don't think you can not have it linked to your origin account.

[/I]All the reports about the fourm bans (including here on RPS) seem to be talking about the EA FORUM not BATTLELOG as is the case here.

What EA are saying:


Hello ,
Your Electronic Arts account has been suspended for 72 hours for violating the Terms of Services for Electronic Arts Online.

Violation:Inappropriate language

[almost as badass as germany. Switzerland: they do a lot of stuff I think that just about sums up europe.]

You can read the Terms of Service for Electronic Arts Online by going to the following web address.

http://www.ea.com/global/legal/tos.jsp (http://www.ea.com/global/legal/tos.jsp)

If you feel that this action is unwarranted, or if you wish to dispute the claims of this email, please submit a dispute form by using the following link:

http://support.ea.com/cgi-bin/ea.cfg/php/enduser/terminated_form.php

The Electronic Arts support team is available at http://support.ea.com (http://support.ea.com/) should you have any general questions or concerns about the rule or its enforcement in the game, as we feel it is important to understand the rule completely before returning to the game world.

Sincerely, Customer Support Electronic Arts, Inc.
EA.com Customer Relations


DON'T BUY THE GAME and then complain or just don't accept the T&C and send it back, don't buy the game agree with the T&C then complain about what you have agreed with.

Heiniken22 suck it up, your 72 hour ban will be over soon.

What with the endless trolling and worrysome cyberstalking, plus the fact that Psyk has referred to "UDeadNowSucka" as "Heiniken22" a few times, I can only assume this is a personal issue that has been dragged onto these forums from elsewhere.

Not only that, but Psyk's entire argument has changed from being "If you agreed the T&C then that's your own fault" into a direct defence of EA's banning of "UDeadNowSucka", which leads me to believe that all of his posts are merely put up into direct opposition to "UDeadNowSucka's" quite legitimate complaint, instead of actually representing any real views or opinions s/he may have.

Obvious troll is obvious, and also doesn't have a leg to stand on in any of the arguments that s/he has presented.

Now GTFO, troll.

Nalano
29-11-2011, 06:33 PM
a) People who are 'troublemakers' (rude, insulting, racist, homophobic) in the forums are ALWAYS also 'troublemakers' in other social online environments, like in online games. If there is a sufficent reason to ban a person from a forum, there is also sufficent reason to ban him from interacting with the online community. Subsequently, if you are banned from the game for ToS-violating behaviour (for example by being homophobic or racist), you will also be banned from the forums.

The reason we - and other online-game publishers who care about healthy communities - are doing this is because a pleasant environment is the best reason for new players to become invested long-term. Players ("customers") who are invested long-term because they are enjoying themselves are the best investment for increased revenue - if a player is happy (with the game and the community), he is willing to spend more money. Also, they're a lot more fun to work with.

Yes, of course. Potential customers > actual customers. How silly of us.

TillEulenspiegel
29-11-2011, 06:37 PM
Yes, of course. Potential customers > actual customers. How silly of us.
Alternatively, paying money doesn't mean you get to be a total dick with no consequences. Nice customers are more valuable than not-nice customers.

Is there any good argument for *not* banning people who are repeatedly abusive in online games?

Taidan
29-11-2011, 06:49 PM
Is there any good argument for *not* banning people who are repeatedly abusive in online games?

I can give you two:

Firstly, who defines what is "abusive" vs. what is harmless trash-talk? We let EA define abusive, and look where that got us...

Secondly, these people paid for the game in question. It's not right to take back their game once a person crosses a certain, very poorly defined line, just because they people are communicating in ways we don't approve of.

Now, a constructive counter-proposal:

Have a network of moderated, approved servers. Let new servers apply to join the ranks of these "safe-havens", and let people who want good, clean online murderizing to choose to see only these browsers in their serverlist. Then, instead of stealing people's fairly paid-for games away from them for being asshats, just exile them to unmoderated, unsupported, wild-west servers for however long they need.

Mistabashi
29-11-2011, 06:57 PM
I've got to say I'm in two minds about this. While I think it's a bit much to temporarily ban people from playing an online game for being offensive on the forums, I've also witnessed enough depressing behavior from idiots in both environments to realise that the lack of consequences for their actions is a large part of why these people feel free to act like such assholes on the internet. What would people think about a slightly less harsh punishment, say for example instead of removing access to the game you remove all their unlocks/perks/whatever for a few days/weeks? That way you aren't really denying them access to something they paid for (at least not in full), but you're giving them something serious to think about before trolling the forums for kicks. I think I can get behind that idea.

Rii
29-11-2011, 06:59 PM
Like I needed more reasons not to give EA money.

Taidan
29-11-2011, 07:08 PM
What would people think about a slightly less harsh punishment, say for example instead of removing access to the game you remove all their unlocks/perks/whatever for a few days/weeks? That way you aren't really denying them access to something they paid for (at least not in full), but you're giving them something serious to think about before trolling the forums for kicks.

That's also a fantastic suggestion. It's still certainly going to cause very minor problems if EA's moderation continues to be as uneven has it has repeatedly been proven to be, but it's the best way I've seen of dealing with this yet.

It's hitting them right where it hurts, (right in the e-peen...) without doing any permanent damage. I like it!

Nalano
29-11-2011, 07:24 PM
Alternatively, paying money doesn't mean you get to be a total dick with no consequences. Nice customers are more valuable than not-nice customers.

Is there any good argument for *not* banning people who are repeatedly abusive in online games?

Having been banned from almost every forum I've been a member of, I can tell you how many ways your system can fuck up. Eventually, somebody will disagree with me and take it upon themselves to rid the forum of my (prolific) meddling. Tell me, as director of moderators, have you ever seen any of these specimens:

1) I disagree with you, and seek to win my argument by shutting you up, therefore I report you.
2) You killed me in-game, and in doing so have made an enemy for life, therefore I report you.
3) Yes, I asked for your opinion, but you're not complimenting me on my craft, therefore I report you.

There are very many alleys in the internet where "troll" is synonymous with "someone I disagree with" or "someone I don't like" and "disruption" is synonymous with "I no longer control the floor." Reporting becomes a tool in one's arsenal, just as practical and unprincipled as flaming. You don't make friendlier or nicer gamers, any more than Political Correctness eradicates bigotry. Instead, you reward passive aggressive gamers.

In my years of playing MMORPGs and MPFPSs, I've noticed that the "carebears" are just as aggressive as the "gankers" they purport to hate. The only difference is that the "carebears" are more accomplished forum-PvPers than game-PvPers. They, just as actual trolls, feed on a perceived power that comes by gaming a system that is impersonal and disinterested. The game becomes "who can get the other party angry faster so they can be reported," which is a very trollish thing to do.

psyk
29-11-2011, 07:50 PM
Taidan They are the same person why wouldn't I use both his usernames? all I did was put the title of the thread (or the first email he got can't remember) in to google and it came up with the thread he made on the EA forum not sure where you got personal spat from don't even know the guy.

Cyber stalking LMAO its called research you know what you do before you start typing.


Not only that, but Psyk's entire argument has changed from being "If you agreed the T&C then that's your own fault" into a direct defense of EA's banning of "UDeadNowSucka", which leads me to believe that all of his posts are merely put up into direct opposition to "UDeadNowSucka's" quite legitimate complaint, instead of actually representing any real views or opinions s/he may have.That makes no sense I was saying follow the T&C now i'm defending EA how does that work? they are one in the same. I guess this post from page one just slipped you by


I wish more people did this, imagine xbox live with no angry racist shouty kids because they let fingers run, BLISS, and the added bonus of an increased amount of rage/I'm sorry/suck up posts for the xbox live suspension board.The joys of reading hey.


that the lack of consequences for their actions is a large part of why these people feel free to act like such assholes on the internet. Yep why do people think they can act how they like.

You buy a car your driving with no insurance the police pull you over and impound your car you can't pay to get it back you can't use your car. Oh no something you payed for has been taken away and you can't use it :(



Firstly, who defines what is "abusive" vs. what is harmless trash-talk? We let EA define abusive, and look where that got us...Why don't you push it on here and find out what the staff define as abusive?

Taidan
29-11-2011, 08:13 PM
Oh, you didn't drag this in from another forum?

I'd just assumed that from the amount of butthurt and whining you've been doing from the offset, the deeper story to all of this was that it was either a continuation of an earlier spat, or that you were getting a hard time from the other kids at school and that all of this was just a case of misdirected rage.

And yes, when you go to that much trouble to try (and fail) at disproving the post of a random stranger on the internet to defend a corporation that's already been proven multiple times to be doing exactly what they're accused of here, you're deep in creepy, stalking weirdo territory.

Of course that doesn't leave out Option 3: That you're a crazed EA fanboy/planted shill.

Kadayi
29-11-2011, 08:15 PM
Like I needed more reasons not to give EA money.

I didn't think you bought games anyway Rii.

Also these 'cry wolf' threads are hilarious.

psyk
29-11-2011, 08:28 PM
Oh, you didn't drag this in from another forum?Taidan the first thing I did was search for the thread title in google and the guys origin username, why? because these stories are barely ever what they seem and that wall of quotes is copy pasted from another comment section with a bit of editing while looking at the reddit comments.



I'd just assumed that from the amount of butthurt and whining you've been doing from the offset, the deeper story to all of this was that it was either a continuation of an earlier spat, or that you were getting a hard time from the other kids at school and that all of this was just a case of misdirected rage.
LMAO is that your attempt at finding out what the staff here find abusive? sorry to say but it's really poor, Who uses are you getting bullied unless they're still in school themselves.


And yes, when you go to that much trouble to try (and fail) at disproving the post of a random stranger on the internet to defend a corporation that's already been proven multiple times to be doing exactly what they're accused of here, you're deep in creepy, stalking weirdo territory.What am I trying to disprove? I think your getting mixed up


Of course that doesn't leave out Option 3: That you're a crazed EA fanboy/planted shill. Lets do a little count............ok that's 6 EA games in my collection out of 97 I buy the games I like whoever they are made by, take your fanboy calling somewhere else and planted shill YESSSSS I just thought I would come out for this one thread.

What's the opposite of a fanboy?

Grizzly
29-11-2011, 08:38 PM
I've got to say I'm in two minds about this. While I think it's a bit much to temporarily ban people from playing an online game for being offensive on the forums, I've also witnessed enough depressing behavior from idiots in both environments to realise that the lack of consequences for their actions is a large part of why these people feel free to act like such assholes on the internet. What would people think about a slightly less harsh punishment, say for example instead of removing access to the game you remove all their unlocks/perks/whatever for a few days/weeks? That way you aren't really denying them access to something they paid for (at least not in full), but you're giving them something serious to think about before trolling the forums for kicks. I think I can get behind that idea.

You can also deny their ability to communicate with anyone. Including in game chat and voice chat.
Comm rose
Q button.

db1331
29-11-2011, 08:56 PM
This seems odd. I have been a much bigger asshole on the BL forums, and used much worse language, and I haven't even received a warning. It seems like there is at least one "shit" or "fuck" in every thread, too.

psyk
29-11-2011, 09:01 PM
As Nalano said it's normally people hitting report, the guy with nipples in his 360 bio had it for around half a year before getting banned for it.

Taidan
29-11-2011, 09:07 PM
Awww, what's the matter, Psyk? You can deal it out, but you can't take it? Worried you're in danger of being out-trolled in this thread?

Waaaaaahhh.

So, if you're not here as a crazed fanboy, what's with the sudden burst of crusading and desperate "research" trying to prove this guy wrong, despite all of the proof that this kind of thing is happening anyway (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/11/17/eas-unwieldy-banhammer-ea-responds/)?

(And yes, what with all the stalking you've done, you do appear sadly desperate.)

Megagun
29-11-2011, 09:11 PM
Here (http://www.reddit.com/r/battlefield3/comments/mptco/i_was_banned_from_battlelog_for_72_hours_for/c3332zk) is crash7800's (Battlefield 3 community manager for the Battlefield 3 subreddit) response to the Reddit thread made by the OP. I know it was referenced before in this thread (by text), but I didn't see links to the posts referenced by crash7800 anywhere in this thread.

Nalano
29-11-2011, 09:13 PM
As Nalano said it's normally people hitting report

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/02/08/nyregion/police-balk-at-crackdown-on-jaywalkers-by-giuliani.html

TillEulenspiegel
29-11-2011, 09:29 PM
Firstly, who defines what is "abusive" vs. what is harmless trash-talk? We let EA define abusive, and look where that got us...
It's pretty easy if you just let the "gray area" cases slide with a warning and post deletion at worst, and only ban the obvious, *repeat* offenders. You shouldn't draw the line in a place where there could possibly be any ambiguity.

I certainly advocate leniency whenever possible. I'm talking about the worst of the worst, the people who continue to spout racist/homophobic/sexist/whatever abuse despite repeated warnings.


Secondly, these people paid for the game in question. It's not right to take back their game once a person crosses a certain, very poorly defined line, just because they people are communicating in ways we don't approve of.
What do you do when they're shitting up the experience of many other people in the game, though? At that point, I have very little sympathy. Paying $50 for a game certainly doesn't mean you have the right to cheat online, and it shouldn't mean that you get to be a raging asshole either.


Have a network of moderated, approved servers. Let new servers apply to join the ranks of these "safe-havens", and let people who want good, clean online murderizing to choose to see only these browsers in their serverlist. Then, instead of stealing people's fairly paid-for games away from them for being asshats, just exile them to unmoderated, unsupported, wild-west servers for however long they need.
Completely agree, when it's possible. Not possible with MMOs, though.

psyk
29-11-2011, 09:32 PM
Awww, what's the matter, Psyk? You can deal it out, but you can't take it? Worried you're in danger of being out-trolled in this thread?Im confused.


http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/11/17/eas-unwieldy-banhammer-ea-responds/Where were the people related to that link banned from and where was this guy banned from? out of those which is directly tied in to part of the game?


(And yes, what with all the stalking you've done, you do appear sadly desperate.)I chose to find out the other side instead of just blindly posting, call it what you will.



Cheers Megagun didn't see that.

Nalano
29-11-2011, 09:46 PM
Completely agree, when it's possible. Not possible with MMOs, though.

They're called PvP servers.

Actually, no. The real wild-west servers are RPPvP servers.

RIP Cimmeria.

metalangel
29-11-2011, 10:01 PM
Yes, of course. Potential customers > actual customers. How silly of us.

That unfortunately is 'it' at the moment, especially for EA.

Everyone is loving Mass Effect! But we need to appeal to more people and our potential customers won't want vehicle bits or inventory management. Result: Mass Effect 2

Everyone is loving Dragon Age! Yes, but we need to appeal to more people, and our potential customers want a button-bashier combat system, and more sex. Result: Dragon Age 2

Everyone is loving Burnout Paradise! Yes, but our potential customers might have been put off by having to navigate on their own, and having to do tricky jumps. So let's put huge glowing arrows in to keep them on the course, and get rid of the jumps. Result: NFS Hot Pursuit

Everyone is loving Battlefield 2! I don't know, a lot of our potential customers might find a lot of vehicles and a big map confusing, that Call of Duty thing they all like has tiny little maps, and lets them customize their guns. Make everything smaller. Result: Bad Company 2

Nalano
29-11-2011, 10:06 PM
Well, ME was kinda funny in that people complained bitterly about the Mako and the one-square-mile-of-ridiculous-terrain, then complained bitterly when the Mako was taken out in 2, then complained bitterly when the Hammerhead was added in DLC.

deano2099
30-11-2011, 12:33 AM
You buy a car your driving with no insurance the police pull you over and impound your car you can't pay to get it back you can't use your car. Oh no something you payed for has been taken away and you can't use it :(
And you have a right to appeal that through sanctioned channels. Because it's the state and, theoretically, the state can be held to account. Private companies can't, and private companies don't have to offer any appeals process. It's more like if the MD of Ford pulled you over and impounded your car for driving without a license. And then said it's in the T&Cs you signed when buying the car.


Why don't you push it on here and find out what the staff define as abusive?
Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass.

That word is also in the thread title. Which of course, raises the issue of how different boards will have different standards, even though the T&Cs for EA and RPS are likely the same: 'we reserve the right to ban you over anything'.

If a clearly defined rule is broken then that's fair enough, but when it's applied unevenly, and when people are given the wrong reasons for being banned, it gets muddy. And it should concern us because while I'm sure some people 'deserve' it, I'm also 100% sure that there are some people getting banned that don't deserve it by any measure. There always will be.

metalangel
30-11-2011, 07:11 AM
Well, ME was kinda funny in that people complained bitterly about the Mako and the one-square-mile-of-ridiculous-terrain, then complained bitterly when the Mako was taken out in 2, then complained bitterly when the Hammerhead was added in DLC.

I loved the Mako. The driving physics were hilarious, and flinging myself off cliffs and using the jets to soften my landing was how child-me pictures driving the moonbus from 2001: A Space Odyssey.


And you have a right to appeal that through sanctioned channels. Because it's the state and, theoretically, the state can be held to account. Private companies can't, and private companies don't have to offer any appeals process. It's more like if the MD of Ford pulled you over and impounded your car for driving without a license. And then said it's in the T&Cs you signed when buying the car.

I thought of it more like this:
"Goddammit, it's clear, there's no-one else on the road, my tires and brakes are in good condition, I'm not hurting anyone, fuck it!"
"That doesn't matter, sir. The limit is still 70, you were doing 110. Put your hands on the roof."

Nalano
30-11-2011, 07:28 AM
I thought of it more like this:
"Goddammit, it's clear, there's no-one else on the road, my tires and brakes are in good condition, I'm not hurting anyone, fuck it!"
"That doesn't matter, sir. The limit is still 70, you were doing 110. Put your hands on the roof."

Giuliani in his second term as mayor of New York decided that, after his crusade on squeegee men and night club dancing (http://www.tenant.net/Tengroup/Metcounc/Jan02/giuliani.html), he'd go after jaywalking.

Jaywalking. In New York.

It's about as close as one can come to declaring war on New Yorkers. Oh, sure, he cited all the usual reasons - over a hundred folks die each year, it's for the public good, blah blah - and raised the tickets from $2 to $50. And then, when he ordered the police to crack down on jaywalkers, a reporter followed him around all day.

He jaywalked three times that day. The crackdown was quickly shelved.

This "letter of the law" bullshit exists outside of accepted cultural values. We all have a rapport and trying to enforce something outside of that simply won't work.

metalangel
30-11-2011, 07:56 AM
Oh, I agree that the spirit rather than the letter of the law should be enforced wherever possible. Likewise, you might get away with more than you realize because the authorities have bigger fish to fry at the time.

What I'm saying is you break the rules and get caught, there's little point stomping your feet, carrying on and making excuses. At least, not after cursing yourself for making the decision in the first place. That's what I think our badass friend is doing. Like the speeder, he knows he tried to get away with pushing it, and didn't, and is embarassed. The hollering is trying to deflect attention away from their shame.

Nalano
30-11-2011, 08:22 AM
Oh, I agree that the spirit rather than the letter of the law should be enforced wherever possible. Likewise, you might get away with more than you realize because the authorities have bigger fish to fry at the time.

What I'm saying is you break the rules and get caught, there's little point stomping your feet, carrying on and making excuses. At least, not after cursing yourself for making the decision in the first place. That's what I think our badass friend is doing. Like the speeder, he knows he tried to get away with pushing it, and didn't, and is embarassed. The hollering is trying to deflect attention away from their shame.

I was arguing that if the law doesn't feel right, people won't follow it. There is nothing that will stop New Yorkers from jaywalking. There is no power under the sun that will compel them to.

metalangel
30-11-2011, 08:41 AM
That's why I said the spirit! If you put yourself or others in stupid danger by jaywalking then they'd use that to throw the book at you. Likewise, going 40mph over the limit as per my example. But only a stupid, mean cop gives a citation to a guy crossing the road in a normal context.

The problem comes with the type of enforcement. In the UK, they have speed cameras (aka photo radar). Many are fixed and automatic. The camera doesn't care if the sun is shining, the road is dry and the traffic is light. If you exceed its threshold speed (usually considered to be speed limit + 10% + 2) then FLASH FLASH, ticket. Likewise, on the EA forums you have drones with moderator access who see any naughty word and, regardless of context, BAN BAN.*

*thing is, the defendant is saying he just said "badass". The plaintiff's emails suggest several more, serious offenses.

Vexing Vision
30-11-2011, 09:31 AM
Yes, of course. Potential customers > actual customers. How silly of us.

Here's a fun fact - in the free-to-play market, less than 1 of 50 people who get banned for abusive, homophobic or racist behaviour is an actual customer in any game that is not classified as 18+. 12+ games (the majority of the current online titles) monetize a lot better if the game is being kept clean of people you wouldn't want to socialize with in "real life".

It's as much a business decision as it is a personal satisfaction to kick person who society could do without.

psyk
30-11-2011, 09:51 AM
And you have a right to appealSorry officer I know you can't drive without insurance but It was only for a short distance. yeah not going to happen and you can appeal to EA so Im not quite sure what your point is.



Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass, Badass.why when the rules have already been posted in this thread have you posted badass over and over again?


If a clearly defined rule is broken then that's fair enough, but when it's applied unevenly,Once again the rules have been posted for here in this thread how are they clearly defined? love the different rules that are put on to different sites by people.


1. Be excellent to each other.

2. That means not insulting each other.What does that mean?


Firstly, who defines what is "abusive" vs. what is harmless trash-talk?LMAO


he knows he tried to get away with pushing it, and didn't, and is embarassed. The hollering is trying to deflect attention away from their shame. Yes and it's so blatant

Taidan
30-11-2011, 12:20 PM
Sorry officer I know you can't drive without insurance but It was only for a short distance. yeah not going to happen and you can appeal to EA so Im not quite sure what your point is.

why when the rules have already been posted in this thread have you posted badass over and over again?

Once again the rules have been posted for here in this thread how are they clearly defined? love the different rules that are put on to different sites by people.

What does that mean?

LMAO

Yes and it's so blatant

LMAO

/10char

Cooper
30-11-2011, 03:29 PM
..........

Something barely comprehensible

o.0

Drake Sigar
30-11-2011, 03:52 PM
That unfortunately is 'it' at the moment, especially for EA.

Everyone is loving Mass Effect! But we need to appeal to more people and our potential customers won't want vehicle bits or inventory management. Result: Mass Effect 2

Everyone is loving Dragon Age! Yes, but we need to appeal to more people, and our potential customers want a button-bashier combat system, and more sex. Result: Dragon Age 2

Everyone is loving Burnout Paradise! Yes, but our potential customers might have been put off by having to navigate on their own, and having to do tricky jumps. So let's put huge glowing arrows in to keep them on the course, and get rid of the jumps. Result: NFS Hot Pursuit

Everyone is loving Battlefield 2! I don't know, a lot of our potential customers might find a lot of vehicles and a big map confusing, that Call of Duty thing they all like has tiny little maps, and lets them customize their guns. Make everything smaller. Result: Bad Company 2
This may be the dominant attitude throughout the entire service industry. No company gives a toss about the customers they have, they're all too worried about the customers they don't have.

metalangel
30-11-2011, 04:18 PM
This may be the dominant attitude throughout the entire service industry. No company gives a toss about the customers they have, they're all too worried about the customers they don't have.

Which is the wrong way, of course. Bought much insurance lately? I have two vehicles, and in the last decade precisely ONCE has a insurer reduced their ridiculous renewal quote to beat a competitor and retain my business for another year.

I realize that capitalism is all based on growth but surely it's harder to attract new customers by bending over backwards than it is to carry on giving existing ones what they want?

TillEulenspiegel
30-11-2011, 04:54 PM
Everyone is loving Dragon Age! Yes, but we need to appeal to more people, and our potential customers want a button-bashier combat system, and more sex. Result: Dragon Age 2
That was a particularly lovely example of having no clue what made the first successful. You found a niche - a big niche. Why are you abandoning it?

I'm not a pointy-haired CEO or anything, but it seems to me that it would be a smart strategy to maintain successful franchises and expand via new franchises, rather than risking existing ones. Have a portfolio of games that each satisfy a different market segment, rather than trying to make everything appeal to everyone.

Vexing Vision
30-11-2011, 05:09 PM
Sadly, investors need a growth prediction. Growth can only be achieved by targetting a broader audience. A broader audience can only be targetted by including more features.

The decision-making process is usually pretty dumb.

Nalano
30-11-2011, 05:35 PM
12+ games (the majority of the current online titles) monetize a lot better if the game is being kept clean of people you wouldn't want to socialize with in "real life".

Battlefield 3 is not a 12+ game.


I realize that capitalism is all based on growth but surely it's harder to attract new customers by bending over backwards than it is to carry on giving existing ones what they want?

It occurred to me that the only industry I can think of that absolutely, positively wants to keep customers are cell phone carriers, and they do it in the most boneheaded way possible.


Sadly, investors need a growth prediction. Growth can only be achieved by targetting a broader audience. A broader audience can only be targetted by including more features.

The decision-making process is usually pretty dumb.

Yet another everything-for-the-short-term failing of public corporations.

Rii
30-11-2011, 06:22 PM
I was arguing that if the law doesn't feel right, people won't follow it.

Yes. Law as a coercive instrument is totally overrated. What laws actually do is signpost accepted norms which the vast majority of people follow the vast majority of the time because they are perceived to make sense. To the extent that they aren't perceived to make sense *cough* piracy *cough* they get ignored.

I am beholden to no law, yet I am a law-abiding citizen.

Those with an instinctive fear of anarchism must live a terror-filled existence, forever imagining themselves surrounded by would-be murderers and homicidal drivers restrained by almighty law. Of course the truth is that nobody actually wants to murder them or endanger the lives of others on the road and that if they did the law wouldn't (and doesn't) stop them from doing so.

Nalano
30-11-2011, 06:27 PM
What laws actually do is signpost accepted norms which the vast majority of people follow the vast majority of the time because they are perceived to make sense. To the extent that they aren't perceived to make sense *cough* piracy *cough* they get ignored.

Right. They signpost societal norms except when they don't.


Those with an instinctive fear of anarchism must live a terror-filled existence, forever imagining themselves surrounded by would-be murderers and homicidal drivers restrained by almighty law. Of course the truth is that nobody actually wants to murder them or endanger the lives of others on the road and that if they did the law wouldn't (and doesn't) stop them from doing so.

That said, I'm thoroughly of the opinion that a fair number of people are alive today solely because they're not worth going to jail over.

hamster
30-11-2011, 06:47 PM
It's not overrated since Hart's Concept of Law...which was written a damn long time ago.

But you've still got to admit: law without enforcement is more or less useless. Although only something like 1% of the world population are murderers, consider the number of people that participate in riots (like the one in UK earlier). Looting, burning, and all sorts of stuff that they've always wanted to, but were ordinarily oppressed to suppress. But once a crowd starts gathering and that kind of behavior seems to be taken for granted all around you, it becomes apparent that laws are merely a form of deterrence - there is no immediate, physical force physically stopping you from doing the immediate thing you want to do.

So don't under rate enforcement, I say.

Ah but this is off-topic.

Nalano
30-11-2011, 07:04 PM
It's not overrated since Hart's Concept of Law...which was written a damn long time ago.

But you've still got to admit: law without enforcement is more or less useless. Although only something like 1% of the world population are murderers, consider the number of people that participate in riots (like the one in UK earlier). Looting, burning, and all sorts of stuff that they've always wanted to, but were ordinarily oppressed to suppress. But once a crowd starts gathering and that kind of behavior seems to be taken for granted all around you, it becomes apparent that laws are merely a form of deterrence - there is no immediate, physical force physically stopping you from doing the immediate thing you want to do.

So don't under rate enforcement, I say.

Ah but this is off-topic.

As somebody who's been put in front of the classroom for the last four years, I know that enforcement is a thin veneer - a con game - over the unenforceable.

But riots are the venting of a deep-seated grievance that enforcement was only keeping the lid on. Enforcement, then, isn't the solution, but rather merely the holding pattern 'til one finds the problem and solves it.

But yeah, this is kinda off-topic.

deano2099
30-11-2011, 07:08 PM
Sorry officer I know you can't drive without insurance but It was only for a short distance. yeah not going to happen and you can appeal to EA so Im not quite sure what your point is.
"Sorry officer but my wife was dying and this was the only way to get her to the hospital quickly enough" might work though. In UK law the only time a case isn't judged in context is if it's over a law where someone is held strictly liable. The interesting thing about strict liability is it only applies to laws with very firm, clear definitions. Not just "don't be rude".


Once again the rules have been posted for here in this thread how are they clearly defined? love the different rules that are put on to different sites by people.
Well I haven't paid for RPS (well I have, but I could easily have not had).

Keep
30-11-2011, 07:17 PM
only something like 1% of the world population are murderers

Jesus! That means there are...70 million murderers in the world! That means in my small city right now, there are...150,000 murderers! Yikes. That means when I go to a concert of 2,000 people, I'm surrounded by, yikes, twenty real actual murderers!

I'm never leaving the house again...

Nalano
30-11-2011, 07:21 PM
That means when I go to a concert of 2,000 people, I'm surrounded by, yikes, twenty real actual murderers!

Yell "fire!" in that concert and, believe me, there will be.

metalangel
30-11-2011, 08:22 PM
It occurred to me that the only industry I can think of that absolutely, positively wants to keep customers are cell phone carriers, and they do it in the most boneheaded way possible.


Oh man, the story I could tell you of how one lost my five plus years of loyal custom. Perhaps I oversell it with an intro like that, but it would make good reading for a businessy person.


I'm not a pointy-haired CEO or anything, but it seems to me that it would be a smart strategy to maintain successful franchises and expand via new franchises, rather than risking existing ones. Have a portfolio of games that each satisfy a different market segment, rather than trying to make everything appeal to everyone.

I think their thought process goes that anyone who is already a fan is now committed for life, and they can now tweak the formula to bring in even more people by removing what their focus group has told them were unwelcoming elements.

Somehow, Valve does this and retains most of their artistic vision while EA produces a nice looking thing that you only interact with some of the time, but it sure looks nice on 'leaked' videos and Digital Foundry 'comparisons'.

Keep
30-11-2011, 08:29 PM
I think their thought process goes that anyone who is already a fan is now committed for life, and they can now tweak the formula to bring in even more people by removing what their focus group has told them were unwelcoming elements.

I put the blame on society's emphasis on consequentalist ethics above virtue ethics.


:-|.

pabloottawa
05-12-2011, 08:18 AM
EA will eventually be sued for this. It's just a matter of time.

KeefRoll
09-12-2011, 11:22 PM
Just responding to say that I got a 72 hour ban for talking about sex with my girlfriend in the forums. I cannot access any of my EA games. Customer service told me that there was nothing they could do but escalate it, which would probably take 72 hours anyway; I asked for a refund and was told I could probably get one if there was a legitimate problem with my game :DERP:

Could someone please get to the bottom of this?

metalangel
10-12-2011, 12:53 AM
Just responding to say that I got a 72 hour ban for talking about sex with my girlfriend in the forums.

Why on earth would you want to talk about that on a Battlefield 3 forum?!

Drake Sigar
10-12-2011, 01:11 AM
Because he's getting laid. Everybody NEEDS to know!

glenn37216
12-12-2011, 12:18 AM
I recently reported someone for Inappropriate language on the battlog and it backfired on me. EA banned me for 72 hours instead. Here's the actual email :

Hello ,

Your Electronic Arts account has been suspended for 72 hours for violating the Terms of Services for Electronic Arts Online.

Violation:

Inappropriate language:
Post:What a cock. I can tell if were ever unlucky enough to visit your house i`d imagine it being pristine clean with your cooking appliances in alphabetical order based upon what country it was manufactured, let alone the tins of food in chronological order and your DVD` stacked up from what you`d `approve` as best to worst.... You have spent 10 fold the amount of time as i have writing this message to your trolling first post on what seems to be the most ridiculous points to rage at because the game doesnt maintain to the standards of your pathetic lifestyle. Get a life you cocksucker. Its a fucking game that has minor errors; which of course is completely contrary to the life you lead..... .... you cum guzzling, spunk sniffing, lady boy fingering, anal dwelling, fat slutty fuck face penis, whore bag, crack pushing, sleezy shit pie. Thats all.

I quoted his post and then posted the following :
Reported for offensive language.

..and I was the one banned ... for reporting offensive language. wow. lost for words here. Ea's servers tagged me as the offender because I quoted the poster?

Nalano
12-12-2011, 12:20 AM
Clearly you were not clever enough in your insults.

trjp
12-12-2011, 12:34 AM
What we need are people who've bought games through Origin (and not in any other way) to besiege UK Trading Standards (closest office to EA UK HQ if there is such a place) because...

UK Consumer Law relates to the retailer/customer relationship - and by making themselves the 'retailer' they become directly responsible for the items they sell (games) working properly (and banning your account clearly violates that!)

People who buy games from other sources (shops, online, other DD services) don't have quite the same relationship - they'd have to taken action against their retailer and not EA directly - that said, if enough people take action against GAME (for example) they'd probably have to do something also.

End of the day, if you're banned and can no longer access your games - UK Consumer Law has been broken (your item is not "fit for the purpose") and you'd be entitled to a full refund of the purchase cost (you can then buy the game without another account if you choose to).

It's not complicated - you bought something and it doesn't work - TS need to help you remedy that, get onto them.

If they don't help - contact the UK Press - they like a good 'big company stealing from parents and kids' story too :)

Szakal
13-12-2011, 01:48 PM
Hello, I decided to register here just to share smiliar expirience with EA.

At beginning - I want to apologise for my not excelent english - it's not my main language.

So my ban is even more stupid. See it for yourself.
Mail:


Hello ,

Your Electronic Arts account has been suspended for 72 hours for violating
the Terms of Services for Electronic Arts Online.

Violation:

[Suspended {72 hrs} For posting other forum sLink
Link:http://www.xfire.com/profile/0szakal0/]

You can read the Terms of Service for Electronic Arts Online by going to
the following web address.

http://www.ea.com/global/legal/tos.jsp

If you feel that this action is unwarranted, or if you wish to dispute the
claims of this email, please submit a dispute form by using the following
link:

http://help.ea.com/

The Electronic Arts support team is available at http://help.ea.com/
should you have any general questions or concerns about the rule or its
enforcement in the game, as we feel it is important to understand the rule
completely before returning to the game world.

Sincerely,
Customer Support
Electronic Arts, Inc.

EA.com Customer Relations

This link is placed in my battlelog profile in "describe yourself" you can check it for yourself - my battlelog name is "Szakal0x"

I read thoughtfully whole ToS in my own language to find the reason of my ban. I found NOTHING.
So simple facts:
1. Xfire website itself and my profile which is the issue is not a forum.
2. There are no rules about linking to the third party websites in profiles.
3. I got banned for something - does not even matter what it was - and this thing is not removed??? What kind of twisted logic is that?

So I tried contact ea support regarding this issue. And the funniest part starts here.

First time I contacted them yesterday. I forgot to save the chatlog. Whole discussion was something like this:
-She keeps repeating herself that I need to wait 72 hours
-I am asking how to appeal
-She tells me that she gave my issue to senior team and i should just wait.
She didn't cared about my explenations or reason itself. Like chating with a bot.
Whatever,
I tried contact them today. And this is the results.

Second time:
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0BxcPtOLFhK4jZjUyNzgxMzAtNjNiZC00OGRlLWJmNGY tYTEyNDJlZWUxMzYw&hl=en_US

Third time: (Long but godly. best part is when they add their own ban reason)
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0BxcPtOLFhK4jODdjZTk2OTUtNDUyZS00ZjYxLThjNmM tOTE4NDIwZmM2MGRm&hl=en_US

So in the end I need to wait "NOIDEAHOWLONG" till someone will contact me.

Vexing Vision
13-12-2011, 01:55 PM
Cheers for sharing, Szakal.

Being banned for having an xfire-link (which officially supporst some EA games) is kind of bad.

Circlestrafe
20-12-2011, 06:18 AM
Hello, I decided to register here just to share smiliar expirience with EA.

At beginning - I want to apologise for my not excelent english - it's not my main language.

So my ban is even more stupid. See it for yourself.
Mail:



This link is placed in my battlelog profile in "describe yourself" you can check it for yourself - my battlelog name is "Szakal0x"

I read thoughtfully whole ToS in my own language to find the reason of my ban. I found NOTHING.
So simple facts:
1. Xfire website itself and my profile which is the issue is not a forum.
2. There are no rules about linking to the third party websites in profiles.
3. I got banned for something - does not even matter what it was - and this thing is not removed??? What kind of twisted logic is that?

So I tried contact ea support regarding this issue. And the funniest part starts here.

First time I contacted them yesterday. I forgot to save the chatlog. Whole discussion was something like this:
-She keeps repeating herself that I need to wait 72 hours
-I am asking how to appeal
-She tells me that she gave my issue to senior team and i should just wait.
She didn't cared about my explenations or reason itself. Like chating with a bot.
Whatever,
I tried contact them today. And this is the results.

Second time:
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0BxcPtOLFhK4jZjUyNzgxMzAtNjNiZC00OGRlLWJmNGY tYTEyNDJlZWUxMzYw&hl=en_US

Third time: (Long but godly. best part is when they add their own ban reason)
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0BxcPtOLFhK4jODdjZTk2OTUtNDUyZS00ZjYxLThjNmM tOTE4NDIwZmM2MGRm&hl=en_US

So in the end I need to wait "NOIDEAHOWLONG" till someone will contact me.

Under Section 11 of the ToS:
Post messages for any purpose other than personal communication, including advertising or promotional messaging, chain letters, pyramid schemes, or other commercial activities.

The link to xfire could possibly be interpreted as 'advertising' by EA. So, yeah, technically you violated the ToS. Not that I think you should've been banned for it, I agree that's pretty lame, but it's their ToS and you agreed to it, so I guess we have to deal with it and/or try to get it changed.

Szakal
22-12-2011, 08:30 PM
Under Section 11 of the ToS:
Post messages for any purpose other than personal communication, including advertising or promotional messaging, chain letters, pyramid schemes, or other commercial activities.

The link to xfire could possibly be interpreted as 'advertising' by EA. So, yeah, technically you violated the ToS. Not that I think you should've been banned for it, I agree that's pretty lame, but it's their ToS and you agreed to it, so I guess we have to deal with it and/or try to get it changed.

Isn't that rule related to chat or forums? Not personal description?

halmosi
22-12-2011, 08:50 PM
I'm not condoning EA's seemingly blanket approach to banning but coming to this late and reading the posts that the OP made on the BF3 forums I am not surprised that he was banned.

I would uphold that ban in any online environment that EA had, but it shouldn't affect solo gaming.