I was muted for 24 hours for complaining about ganking during my onslaught daily

tfavsb10

So, I log in do some rampages etc and try to do my onslaught daily, I end up being harassed by REDACTED and the REDACTED telling them, I'm doing the daily and to wait until I have my fifty tokens before using their immortal tanks to bleed me to death before I finish, As I enter near deaths I use my travel power to flee and escape them, they follow me I ask several times for them to stop I'm one token away, just let me attack an until guard, they kill me anyways, and laugh at me, I use the in game ticket function, complain because I've wasted enough time and real money on onslaught tokens just to have the dailies taken away from me, by people who have builds so op an onslaught villain cant defeat them. then I log off, log back on after I calm myself down, and try to level an alt, and suddenly I'm silenced... for 24 hours, I don't know if they spam reported me or someone muted me, but I wasn't warned about this at all, now people are furious because i cant respond to them, and I cant even do a rampage because I cant speak. I don't know what happened, REDACTED thinks REDACTED muted me, but I haven't been given any reason why, can someone explain why I've been freaking muted..... This is making me consider quieting... I cant speak I cant emote... I cant do anything but shamble around as people yell at me for not replying to their tells.

jaazaniah1

Pretty sad tale! Unfortunately by naming names in the forum you have violated ToS and this post will certainly be deleted. I always look for the emptiest zone when I'm trying to get my daily 375 villain tokens because of things like this.​​

tfavsb10

jaazaniah1 said:

Pretty sad tale! Unfortunately by naming names in the forum you have violated ToS and this post will certainly be deleted. I always look for the emptiest zone when I'm trying to get my daily 375 villain tokens because of things like this.​​

I didnt name handles... I was told not to list handles.... so Now I cant say what people where attacking me great.....

themightyzenith

tfavsb10 said:

I didnt name handles... I was told not to list handles.... so Now I cant say what people where attacking me great.....

Not on the forums you can't, no. At the moment this is all hearsay.

tfavsb10

themightyzenith said:

tfavsb10 said:

I didnt name handles... I was told not to list handles.... so Now I cant say what people where attacking me great.....

Not on the forums you can't, no. At the moment this is all hearsay.

<.< So I'm not allowed to mention a name at all... fine i'll censor the post, it's clear I wont get any support or expalination for the muting

themightyzenith

This is the forums....it's not support. Try contacting support

ealford1985

Did you rant in zone?

championshewolf

While some people do have courtesy, I am sorry to say, you are the one who participated in a PvP activity. They don't have to afford you that courtesy though many do. Just shrug and move on.​​

tehpaws

Maybe it's because I'm new to the forums, but I see nothing in the Arc forum rules, nor in the official ToS, implicitly stating that you cannot bring up the game handles of players or staff as a general rule. The only applicable case would be in referring to the section on "harassment" in the forum rules, but for me, bringing up what you believe is a legitimate complaint does not qualify as harassment unless the indicted party intends to accuse you of slander, in which case you or they would need to provide evidence. If your claim is as you say, I think your accused party would have a hard sell refuting your complaint.

Again, that's just my impression after reading both the Arc/PWE terms of service and the forum rules.

nepht

Wait the TOS has changed? And OP yeah best bet put in a ticket.

beezeeze

The accused were simply playing the content as intended. Claiming they conspired to have you chat banned is a whole other thing however... I have my doubts that they would do this but I will ask around, for my own peace of mind if nothing else.

biffsmackwell

tehpaws said:

Maybe it's because I'm new to the forums, but I see nothing in the Arc forum rules, nor in the official ToS, implicitly stating that you cannot bring up the game handles of players or staff as a general rule. The only applicable case would be in referring to the section on "harassment" in the forum rules, but for me, bringing up what you believe is a legitimate complaint does not qualify as harassment unless the indicted party intends to accuse you of slander, in which case you or they would need to provide evidence. If your claim is as you say, I think your accused party would have a hard sell refuting your complaint.

Again, that's just my impression after reading both the Arc/PWE terms of service and the forum rules.

Bringing up people's names and calling them out on the forums will rarely solve anything and will most likely end up baiting the other party to post and the whole thing will end up in a very unfriendly manner. While the name-and-shame part of the rules may have poofed, accusing someone of doing something bad is still basically harassment and doesn't belong on the forums, proof or no proof. That's an in-game issue that should be taken up with customer service or a GM.

All that aside, though, the "offending" parties were playing completely within their rights. It is PVP, and in PVP there isn't any rule for mercy.

Yeah, it does suck if all you're trying to do is get tokens, but unless they were doing something against the rules, like abusing exploits to prevent you from doing what you normally could do, they're playing well within the rules.

spinnytop

beezeeze said:

The accused were simply playing the content as intended. Claiming they conspired to have you chat banned is a whole other thing however... I have my doubts that they would do this but I will ask around, for my own peace of mind if nothing else.

I didn't see the name of the SG, but if it's a pvp SG... we all know there are pvpers who are not content with the fact that their ability to attack others is limited to largely consensual means.

holloweaver

Calm down and listen to the advices here.
Noone's telling you that you can't speak your mind and rant but we don't want you to have more problems, and naming them openly may provoke them. It's a risk.
Same as the tokens, listen to the advices and switch to a different instance. Soon or late, you'll always face a selfish a$$ who knows how to turn the game mechanics in a toxic way and there's no rules against that.

chaelk

PWElaughingtrendy's list top of the forums;
Harassing Material
You may not create posts which contain material that is repetitively insulting, defaming and/or otherwise harassing any other user and/or any PWE employee, officer and/or director.

---

this comes under Defaming. That is , anything which may harm another person's reputation. Oddly enough, for law cases of defamation, it doesn't matter if it's true, only that it might harm their reputation.

---

to the OP, to mute you, they only need 20 cumulative ignores, and this can include ones you already have.​​

spinnytop

chaelk said:

to the OP, to mute you, they only need 20 cumulative ignores, and this can include ones you already have.​​

Didn't they remove the "mute via number of ignores" feature? I remember we all had a big celebration about it.

tehpaws

chaelk said:

PWElaughingtrendy's list top of the forums;

Harassing Material

You may not create posts which contain material that is repetitively insulting, defaming and/or otherwise harassing any other user and/or any PWE employee, officer and/or director.

---

this comes under Defaming. That is , anything which may harm another person's reputation. Oddly enough, for law cases of defamation, it doesn't matter if it's true, only that it might harm their reputation.

---

Honestly I read that and personally had disregarded it as irrelevant to the situation. But if it's definition is as you imply, then it's basically saying "you have no right to bring up the bad things someone has done because it might hurt their feelings."

spinnytop

tehpaws said:

Honestly I read that and personally had disregarded it as irrelevant to the situation. But if it's definition is as you imply, then it's basically saying "you have no right to bring up the bad things someone has done because it might hurt their feelings."

Yes. It also means that someone else can't go on the forums and just make up a bunch of stuff that someone did and then slap your name on it. If you want to be protected, then everyone has to be protected. If you want other people to behave in a civilized manner, then you have to behave in a civilized manner. Everyone sits at the tea party.

biffsmackwell

spinnytop said:

tehpaws said:

Honestly I read that and personally had disregarded it as irrelevant to the situation. But if it's definition is as you imply, then it's basically saying "you have no right to bring up the bad things someone has done because it might hurt their feelings."

Yes. It also means that someone else can't go on the forums and just make up a bunch of stuff that someone did and then slap your name on it. If you want to be protected, then everyone has to be protected. If you want other people to behave in a civilized manner, then you have to behave in a civilized manner. Everyone sits at the tea party.

Yup, that's basically it. But I'll add that you absolutely do have the right to bring up the bad things someone has done, but you have to go through the proper channels. Doing it in the forums is not the way to go.

chaelk

Yes, that's the basic problem I've always seen with defamation. The meaning is too strict and doesn't take into account that, they may have behaviour/actions which needs to be known publicly to protect others.
welcome to civil rights.​​

spinnytop

Yes well, I think everyone needs to know that chaelk has been stealing cookies! So make sure to hide the cookies if chaelk is about! o3o/

There, the cookies are now protected by this knowledge being made public uwu

tehpaws

Because sarcasm is a great way of strengthening one's arguments.

pantagruel01

While Onslaught has a number of unfortunate design features, what you're describing is actually the way Onslaught is supposed to work (but mostly doesn't).

squirrelloid

chaelk said:

PWElaughingtrendy's list top of the forums;

Harassing Material

You may not create posts which contain material that is repetitively insulting, defaming and/or otherwise harassing any other user and/or any PWE employee, officer and/or director.

---

this comes under Defaming. That is , anything which may harm another person's reputation. Oddly enough, for law cases of defamation, it doesn't matter if it's true, only that it might harm their reputation.

---

​​

This is wrong, at least in the US. Defamation only includes libel and slander. A claim being true is an absolute defense against libel and slander accusations (see the Zenger case from ~1735). Defamation also carries a mens rea requirement in the U.S., as held in Gertz v. Robert Welch (1985), which means you have to intend to defame.

As the servers are located in the U.S., U.S. law should apply. Hosts are also specifically immunized under U.S. law from liability for any content besides what they themselves produced (47 USC 230), and libel judgements from foreign courts against companies and persons residing in the US cannot be enforced in the US unless the foreign court has protections compliant with US 1st amendment law, as of the SPEECH Act. (ie, Pretty much nowhere, as most countries treat libel as strict liability).

biffsmackwell

I don't know if you're talking about whether that law should apply here, but the "law" that applies to things like this are the rules you agree to when you use the forums. If you're just correcting her for the sake of doing so, then disregard this.

chaelk

it's ok Smackwell, we're arguing common and criminal law. The name and shame bit was missed from trendy's post on behaviour.
I'm in Australia and we've had recent cases, where despite the information actually being true. The person successfully charged someone with defamation of character because it hurt their public reputation.
Slander and libel get treated as different things. In their case, truth is a defense. It depends what the person takes them to court for.
TOS 16.5 has all 3 terms listed.
so as long as the person can say with a straight face " I didn't mean to defame them." They are ok, or can they refuse to testify, on the grounds, that they will get found out to be deliberate but they don't want to say so.

---

we've got some which state you can't use certain speech but cannot stop you from stating your veiw. merely using it to incite violence or vilification against people or groups.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/bill_em/caatvb2005405/memo_0.html

---

and if the Idiot is in another country and has broken their laws as well with the action? Who takes to court first.
some it's they grab and charge, then extradite, it depends on the charges. Can they get him held in another country since it isn't actually a serious(read fatal ) crime?
on TOS - he gets 15.2 H, I,N.

---

​​

dr490nbr347hi

You made the fatal mistake of taking part in PvP.

spinnytop

tehpaws said:

Because sarcasm is a great way of strengthening one's arguments.

What's to argue? The rules are what they are, and it's only a matter of you accepting that fact. Were you under the impression that anyone here had to convince you of something? Humorous.

decorumfriends

chaelk said:

PWElaughingtrendy's list top of the forums;

Harassing Material

You may not create posts which contain material that is repetitively insulting, defaming and/or otherwise harassing any other user and/or any PWE employee, officer and/or director.

---

this comes under Defaming. That is , anything which may harm another person's reputation. Oddly enough, for law cases of defamation, it doesn't matter if it's true, only that it might harm their reputation.​​

Depends on where you are. That's something I've always found weird about the law in the Commonwealth countries. In the US, there's no such thing as defamation by telling the truth. If it's true, and it "defames" them...well, them's the breaks.

EDIT: Ah, well here I am all moot and junk because this has been covered.

jonsills

Yeah, dude, the issue pretty much is that your opponents engaged in PvP as it is defined. You wanted them to engage in cooperative play, but that's not the essence of PvP, nor is it required - remember, the Onslaught system is supposed to be about heroes banding together to take down the menace of a cloned supervillain. It's not supposed to be about the heroes standing around while a cloned supervillain slaughters officers of the law, just because said clone asked politely.

And if you ranted about it in Zone afterward, at least some of those Ignores that bought you the silence would have come from people who felt that way about the situation. Complaining about someone being "unfair" in Zone is usually the short road to being Ignored.

squirrelloid

chaelk said:

it's ok Smackwell, we're arguing common and criminal law. The name and shame bit was missed from trendy's post on behaviour.

I'm in Australia and we've had recent cases, where despite the information actually being true. The person successfully charged someone with defamation of character because it hurt their public reputation.

Slander and libel get treated as different things. In their case, truth is a defense. It depends what the person takes them to court for.

TOS 16.5 has all 3 terms listed.

so as long as the person can say with a straight face " I didn't mean to defame them." They are ok, or can they refuse to testify, on the grounds, that they will get found out to be deliberate but they don't want to say so.

---

we've got some which state you can't use certain speech but cannot stop you from stating your veiw. merely using it to incite violence or vilification against people or groups.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/bill_em/caatvb2005405/memo_0.html

---

and if the Idiot is in another country and has broken their laws as well with the action? Who takes to court first.

some it's they grab and charge, then extradite, it depends on the charges. Can they get him held in another country since it isn't actually a serious(read fatal ) crime?

on TOS - he gets 15.2 H, I,N.

---

​​

Australian law wouldn't apply, because of the SPEECH Act. Basically, the US won't allow the enforcement of any ruling on defamation that occurs on the internet unless the court has procedures compatible with 1st amendment protections. And that includes a whole host of things like 'truth is an absolute defense' and 'there must be intent to defame' (mens rea).

Now, as far as what the TOS means when it says defamation, it was certainly written by US lawyers working for a US enterprise (Cryptic, who is still located in the US no matter where PWE is), and thus should be assumed to mean the US understanding of defamation. (And there is no defamation in the US that isn't libel or slander. If you're telling the truth, the person defamed has done it to themself).

Biff: My comment was mostly on the law, but what the word 'defamation' means in the context of the TOS will be interpreted differently by residents of different countries, because their understanding of defamation law are different. I'd argue it needs to be read from a US perspective. I.e., it's not defamation if the OP was telling the truth, and thus not in violation of the TOS.

nepht

I will say this you must have came across a few bad eggs in D.B as the majority are ok what you should do is contact the guild leader as they are alright ^_^

The mute part is out of order but the ganking part and even the laughing part isnt really its PEEVEEPEE.....MTN DEW QUICKSCOPE 360 DORITOS!

You start PvP your gonna get ganked.

pantagruel01

squirrelloid said:

Now, as far as what the TOS means when it says defamation, it was certainly written by US lawyers working for a US enterprise

Actually, the relevant law is apparently the Netherlands:

31.1Unless applicable mandatory law expressly dictates otherwise:
- this Agreement is governed by and shall be construed and enforced under the laws of the Netherlands;
- the applicability of the Vienna Sales Convention is expressly excluded;
- Any action, dispute or proceeding instituted under this Agreement shall be brought before the competent court in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

spinnytop

Btw, did OP provide any proof that it was said SG members that specifically worked to abuse the system to mute him? If not, then any sort of "it's not slander if it's true" law would be irrelevant, because he neither knows if nor can it be proven that it was true. All it takes is for all involved parties to say "I put him on ignore because he irritated me", and his claims of 'conspiracy to commit chatban fraud' become unfounded accusations.

squirrelloid

pantagruel01 said:

squirrelloid said:

Now, as far as what the TOS means when it says defamation, it was certainly written by US lawyers working for a US enterprise

Actually, the relevant law is apparently the Netherlands:

31.1Unless applicable mandatory law expressly dictates otherwise:
- this Agreement is governed by and shall be construed and enforced under the laws of the Netherlands;
- the applicability of the Vienna Sales Convention is expressly excluded;
- Any action, dispute or proceeding instituted under this Agreement shall be brought before the competent court in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

That's... actually bizarre.

Unless the Netherlands legal system has appropriate first-amendment-like protections, that's not even legal under US law in the case of defamation, at least for any player in the US or for the company itself (which is located in the US).

nepht

squirrelloid said:

That's... actually bizarre.

Unless the Netherlands legal system has appropriate first-amendment-like protections, that's not even legal under US law in the case of defamation, at least for any player in the US or for the company itself (which is located in the US).

Everything from the Netherlands is bizarre ^.^






SJWs THAT SAY THATS RACIST TO DUTCH SHUT THE HELL UP IMA HALF DUTCH AND I AIN'T UP FOR UR BULL&^%$ THANK YOU VERY MUCH! U_U

jonsills

Can't be racist against Dutch. Dutch isn't a race, or even an ethnicity, it's a nationality. It's like being "racist against Americans".

theravenforce

You can be muted for a number of things in my experience.

- Certain people from a certain SG hunting you down and muting you.
- Winning a specific category within a costume contest
- Refusing to sell a part of your character's costume to someone who doesn't understand you cannot rip it off and sell it.
- Owning a character that someone dislikes
- Refusing to RP with someone.

All real reasons why I have been muted in the past.

iamrune

Actually, if he thinks he was unfairly chat-banned by a group he should report it, as devs do have access to all chatlogs, and if people used in-game chat channels of any kind to communicate with each other and get friends to /ignore him on their word rather than on their own, then that will be recorded and they can be caught.

nepht

jonsills said:

Can't be racist against Dutch. Dutch isn't a race, or even an ethnicity, it's a nationality. It's like being "racist against Americans".

Your being racist to furries.

avianos

theravenforce wrote: »

You can be muted for a number of things in my experience.

- Certain people from a certain SG hunting you down and muting you.
- Winning a specific category within a costume contest
- Refusing to sell a part of your character's costume to someone who doesn't understand you cannot rip it off and sell it.
- Owning a character that someone dislikes
- Refusing to RP with someone.

All real reasons why I have been muted in the past.

Thats a Sad little world we live in​​

ealford1985

I've never been muted....what am I doing wrong?

chaelk

I've been reverse muted. PM bug on all channels on all 3 games but despite my best attempts, I have not managed to get a chat ban.
I'm assuming, going on the phrasing in the OP, that they got a Message stating they were chat banned.

---

​​

decorumfriends

nepht said:

SJWs THAT SAY THATS RACIST TO DUTCH SHUT THE HELL UP IMA HALF DUTCH AND I AIN'T UP FOR UR BULL&^%$ THANK YOU VERY MUCH! U_U

The Dutch, Threat or Menace!

spinnytop

ealford1985 said:

I've never been muted....what am I doing wrong?

Again... didn't they do away with the "majority vote chatban" system at some point? I could swear I remember us all having a party about that...

biffsmackwell

From what I remember, they changed it to be less exploitable. I don't think they completely removed it.

ealford1985

spinnytop said:

ealford1985 said:

I've never been muted....what am I doing wrong?

Again... didn't they do away with the "majority vote chatban" system at some point? I could swear I remember us all having a party about that...

Yes, I assume.

But it sounds like people are still being muted...I wouldn't know how, obviously.

jonsills

spinnytop said:

ealford1985 said:

I've never been muted....what am I doing wrong?

Again... didn't they do away with the "majority vote chatban" system at some point? I could swear I remember us all having a party about that...

No, they raised the number of Ignores needed to get an autochatban, from 5 to 20 (and spam accusations from I think 3). Used to be you and a couple of friends could arrange to silence someone; now you need 20 people to agree with you, which isn't as easy (and it's easier for those who would abuse the system to get caught).

squirrelloid

theravenforce said:

You can be muted for a number of things in my experience.

- Certain people from a certain SG hunting you down and muting you.
- Winning a specific category within a costume contest
- Refusing to sell a part of your character's costume to someone who doesn't understand you cannot rip it off and sell it.
- Owning a character that someone dislikes
- Refusing to RP with someone.

All real reasons why I have been muted in the past.

I was muted once for advertising a Costume Contest. That made conducting the costume contest rather challenging.

knightironstar

So if someone gets silenced/muted for 12 Hours, would they be in any danger of getting banned? Even if it's the 1st time it's ever happened before?

chaosdrgnz43

knightironstar said:

So if someone gets silenced/muted for 12 Hours, would they be in any danger of getting banned? Even if it's the 1st time it's ever happened before?

Holy mother of Necromancy!

I doubt it. Haven't seen anyone get banned after getting muted for 12hrs. I think it is just a warning.