Code of Conduct Changes - Do better at least for optics

There was a Code of Conduct change!? Anyone got a summary of the changes? I hate it when companies change their policies and don't include a summary.

"

Nicholas_Steel wrote:

There was a Code of Conduct change!? Anyone got a summary of the changes? I hate it when companies change their policies and don't include a summary.

https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1457463

"

Boem wrote:

I think we went down in OT from roughly 490 post's in a week to around 100 in a week, i reckon that's a success for a forum board.

Peace,

-Boem-

Yeah, off-topic is a shell of itself now, so I suppose you are right, it accomplished what it was meant to do.

I guess congrats GGG?

The irony of claiming/stating that people leave the forums and dont post if the topics are inflammatory, only to have a dramatic abandonment of the entire index once you updated the CoC.

80% reduction in postings...kudos, I hope support staff experienced an 80% improvement of their mental health.

"

aggromagnet wrote:

"

Nicholas_Steel wrote:

There was a Code of Conduct change!? Anyone got a summary of the changes? I hate it when companies change their policies and don't include a summary.

https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1457463

Reading the code of conduct I liked this one.

"

Reference explicit or illegal material

I think they mean one cannot reference sexually explicit material. But it is amusing to think it means one must only reference ambiguous material.

"

Turtledove wrote:

I think they mean one cannot reference sexually explicit material. But it is amusing to think it means one must only reference ambiguous material.

Much wider scope than that. It probably mean violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language that are not suitable for minor. Those usual stuff.

"

deathflower wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

I think they mean one cannot reference sexually explicit material. But it is amusing to think it means one must only reference ambiguous material.

Much wider scope than that. It probably mean violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language that are not suitable for minor. Those usual stuff.

Yeah, the kind of stuff featured (including an account of sexual violence) in the game itself. =9[.]9=

"

Raycheetah wrote:

"

deathflower wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

I think they mean one cannot reference sexually explicit material. But it is amusing to think it means one must only reference ambiguous material.

Much wider scope than that. It probably mean violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language that are not suitable for minor. Those usual stuff.

Yeah, the kind of stuff featured (including an account of sexual violence) in the game itself. =9[.]9=

A grim, violent role-playing game promoting loot and exploration, with explicit sexual content that little kids are playing. If you rate the game strictly, it would receive a mature rating but that rating is generally meaningless. The game is openly and easily available.

If the players are underage, they are suppose to get parent consent, but you know kids don't really ask. It is for the sake of appearances, it's for show. Technically there is no age restriction.

"

deathflower wrote:

Technically there is no age restriction.

Why would you write the opposite of the truth?

Technically, there is an age restriction it's just not enforceable in practice.

And people pretending to be older are violating the terms of agreement and therefore forfeit their rights to hold GGG accountable.(as if that would be possible in practice)

Peace,

-Boem-

"

Boem wrote:

"

deathflower wrote:

Technically there is no age restriction.

Why would you write the opposite of the truth?

Technically, there is an age restriction it's just not enforceable in practice.

And people pretending to be older are violating the terms of agreement and therefore forfeit their rights to hold GGG accountable.(as if that would be possible in practice)

Peace,

-Boem-

It is not a restriction if it is not enforced. It wasn't intended to be enforced but safeguard against their own legal liabilities. Since Violating Terms of Service Is usually Not a Crime, Most people do not Read Them... I would go so far as to say it could be beneficial to break them.

What do you call the doctrine of having dubious laws rules on the books in the Code of Conduct, but instead of repealing removing them, just lawlessly refuse to prosecute enforce them? I'd say "neoliberalism" except that moniker is already taken. Clearly such a heavy reliance on prosecutorial moderator discretion would never be used in a partisan biased manner to punish the bad behavior of some while permitting it from others.

Also, discussing the choices GGGovernment makes isn't political because corporations obviously never use the credible threat of punitive action to manipulate behavior of aliens guests on their jurisdiction property. Office politics? Lel, what an oxymoron. Do you even capitalism bro? BTW water cooler gossip is now banned.