The reason why our ToS needs to change

true, 3.3.2 should be covered by other platforms. It's nonsense to protect those kinds of people who are the ones that really negatively affect the server health

 

3.3.2 and 3.3.3 are entirely different subjects.

Zero tolerance policies usually have a harsher punishment: "1st Offense: Minimum 10 Day Ban (based on severity); 2nd Offense Account Ban; 3rd Offense: Permanent Ban"

Zero tolerance is also more distinct than 3.3.3, meaning you can do whatever you want in your private group but on ML this is stricttly forbidden.

Now when it comes to 3.3.3, this might also be true. But the community harrassment issues have more subjects than the zero tolenrace. Meaning a group of people acting against a player vs. an individual openly discriminates.

Mixing up these two topics is irrational.

I also have a more distinct idea on 3.3.3. If I was being targeted by a group and a friend of mine happens to send me a bunch of screenshots of this group actively acts upon negatively impact my reputation or a general gameplay, I should be able to use this as an evidence of my claim. Because it's affecting my ML experience. Someone discriminating against someone in any other platform doesn't affect their gameplay experience, however. I hope this distinction is clear.

From the examples above about invading private communities, I also have an example why this -kinda- falls apart in my eyes.

Let's assume that we're working in the same workplace. A friend invited all of us into their home, and later that night someone decided to actively badmouth someone else from our workplace who is not invited. Now, one can inform the HR about this -since it would affect their work space and their overall security/experience negatively-. I see the issue mentioned above something like this. If such a thing happened on a private gathering, and if someone else wanted to report it to others, one can naturally think that whatever happened can be used as evidence.

Staff isn't dumb, obviously. Noone is going to go around and try to nitpick whatever's happening in private discords. We all gossip, even talk shit about others. I state my opinions rather harshly even on the ML discord, and if someone thinks that I step over the boundaries, I would very much be happy to resolve the issue.
The goal here is to protect individuals against a targeted and grouped harrassments. In example, someone can claim that they are being harrassed by a group of individuals, and if they have an evidence about it, why not take it into account? Whether be an in-game text or a private discord channel. Any evidence regarding 3.3.3 claims would help resolve the issue in a more fair way. Please feel free to prove me wrong, but at this point and as the thread goes on, I feel much safer with the ToS designed that way. It becomes more and more obvious to me.

At this point, we have to think that if we're trying to be helpful or hurtful. 17 pages of circling around obviously gets us nowhere.

 

Correcting you here. Only ONE player have a concerning number of strikes from all the ones who defended against the permanent ban on the matter. Don't invalidate a big part of players opinions based on false statements

 

you can always test it out with a poll

 

btw this is from some 2017 (that's like 6 years ago!!!) article so yeah it could be xd

 

This is the specific I have more problems with, which corresponds to my first post in the thread. You can see the post got a lot of agrees, if that means anything.
While we are against harassment, a lot of us believe that 3.3.3 reach is invasive and the negatives outweigh the benefits.

 

Can staff share an example of a tricky report? I am curious. Of course all identities redacted and such.

 

You can't claim that a specific group is "the vocal minority" without evidence to that. It doesn't make sense. "Vocal minority" is a label best applied retroactively. If only a small group of people are involved in a discussion it doesn't mean that the consensus is representative of a vocal minority, it means there is too small of a sample size for the consensus to represent any group of players.

I want to address directly your proposed examples. Look, let's not beat around the bush here, a lot of people are upset about Skarmory being banned and feel that 3.3.3 is overreaching. Given the reaction here and to other discussions of the topic, I think it's fair to say that this is likely a MAJORITY position of players who have any opinion on the topic. My understanding of harassment is that it involves either repeated unwanted interaction with an individual or repeated unwanted messages intended for a specific individual. Players fearing racism in-game because they see someone saying something racist in private (is that what you meant?) doesn't qualify as harassment. Making a mean comment about a player with no intention of them seeing it does not qualify as harassment. These things certainly become harassment when they target a specific player or occur in a public setting.

I think the basic worry of players is this: someone could say something which offends somebody or which is maybe not very friendly about a certain player in private with no intention of targeting a specific player and no intention of the comment going public or having a broader effect on the community and then get banned for it. Or somebody could say something they don't perceive as harmful in private and with no intention of targeting a specific player and then suddenly the staff is investigating their social media accounts and IRL life and putting their character on trial. I think it's pretty clear why these situations are alarming, and IMO a more narrow and explicit definition of harassment is the best way around this.

I think everyone here has the maturity to understand that if they're being attacked or belittled in, say, a guild Discord group, they should absolutely leave--this doesn't necessarily warrant a harassment ban. There are certain off-platform behaviors I think should warrant ban however. When an off-platform group is created purely to facilitate gossiping, blacklisting, or otherwise shaping people's opinions of players, staff should take action. Anything that involves stalking, inappropriate sexual behavior, or using off-platform channels to DIRECTLY CONTACT A PLAYER in an unwanted manner, that should warrant staff action. But is there any case beyond that which should constitute harassment? I have a hard time of thinking of anything that should.

 

Personally this change makes me not want to interact with the community at all. I want to just stick with a few people I trust. I don't want to talk to or buddy list strangers, I don't even want to talk much on some of the ML Discords I'm on. Cause I never know when it will lead to my personal life being investigated and put on trial.

 

Thread of poll on MapleLegends ToS


https://forum.maplelegends.com/index.php?threads/maplelegends-tos-community-poll.50582/

 

I think the thing that I would want to see changed in 3.3.3 is specifically that "the existence of an offended party" has to be specified as "the direct target of the offending material". If I join a private Discord and see people talking negatively about some other player, the community, staff, or whatever else, I cannot feel offended on their behalf and make a complaint. Furthermore, "the direct target of the offending material" has to be the victim of direct action that impacts them negatively. If I go and leak private guild Discord conversations talking negatively about a player, to that player, they cannot then use that as the subject of a harassment report, unless I was doing so deliberately to harass them (at which point it would be me doing the harassment, not whatever conversation I linked). Can certainly be used as evidence regarding other claims, but in itself it is not harassment if the target isn't actually being acted against in some fashion.

Honestly a lot of these rules that bother to specify on/off the platform can be broadly swept under the rug of "on or in connection with", like the ToSs of many other MMOs these days.

 

Id consider leaking private conversations in order to defame someone as targeted harassment.

 

Yeah, it's all very contextual. If I'm doing it to go "hey, look at how this guy hates you; clearly no one likes you", then I'm the one doing the harassing of the person I'm contacting. If I'm doing it to go "hey, look at this person and all their terrible opinions about people", then I'm doing the harassing of the person whose messages I'm leaking. If I'm doing it to go "hey, looks like you upset so-and-so; not sure what's going on but maybe you should reach out and resolve things", then there's not really harassment going on in either direction there.

Honestly I don't even really think you need 3.3.3 as a standalone rule. Just emphasize that behavior "on or in connection with MapleLegends" are covered by the ToS. That should provide enough leeway to cover other platforms, without the concern of private discussions being held against you from unrelated parties. That and... well, as far as I can tell it's pretty standard across MMOs.

 

I’d go a step further and say none of this is necessary, and you as the leaker are instigating drama needlessly. I would still pin blame on the leaker.

I think there’s a unilateral understanding that private conversations should be kept private.