New TOS sucks ass, we need politics allowed in global pls

Just dont start policing party chat, thanks.

The ToS has two issues.

1) religion and politics are not defined in it, which means that the moment you talk about anything partaining "world view" it can be interpreted to be a breach or not.

It bassicaly renders all interesting topics or discussions that like to dig under the superficial taboo.

2) since the definitions aren't defined, it depends on the current mod of the day to subjectively interpret chat and strike as he sees fit.

This bassicaly means there is no standard for the community to consider or uphold and bassically silences everything being "deemed" a violation, also known as self-censorship as to not incur a punishment for no apparent reason other then the mod finding it a violation.

It's not even worth mentioning why this site has an "off-topic" section at this point when the current ToS applies there, clearly re-defening it to
"certain-topics".
Making a vast array of topics taboo like history,philosophy,culture and background etc etc since they all inevitably wind down to the broad definitions of religion or politics if you keep asking "why" enough.

It's utterly pathetic as a guide-line, even more so considering this game, it's content and its age restriction.

Peace,

-Boem-

"

Boem wrote:

It's not even worth mentioning why this site has an "off-topic" section at this point when the current ToS applies there, clearly re-defening it to
"certain-topics".

It's call Off Topic (as in, 'not Path of Exile'), not Any Other Topic You Want With No Restrictions. It has always been "certain topics", because there have always been boundaries on allowed discussion.

"

IllustrativeCapital wrote:

Politics can be an interesting, engaging, and civil topic for discussion.

But unfortunately, there were trolls that were disrespectful to others and would ignore facts

Many politics are themselves like that so ... why would you expect people to be smarter than them ?
It's sad, but that's how the world 'works' at the moment it seems.

"

GusTheCrocodile wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

It's not even worth mentioning why this site has an "off-topic" section at this point when the current ToS applies there, clearly re-defening it to
"certain-topics".

It's call Off Topic (as in, 'not Path of Exile'), not Any Other Topic You Want With No Restrictions. It has always been "certain topics", because there have always been boundaries on allowed discussion.

No there haven't.

The only boundary was "illegal" and the previous ToS guidelines which were
tl;dr [Removed by Support]

So one boundary was the law(duh) and the other was on persons behavior in contact with others, so no, there were no things off-limit that aren't already off-limits or ill adviced in normal social forums/gatherings.

Peace,

-Boem-

Control speech and you control thought, you realize this game is ran by the communist chinese right?

"

Chadwixx wrote:

Control speech and you control thought, you realize this game is ran by the communist chinese right?

While it's true that Tencent is a communist Chinese company and owns GGG, PoE is still run from GGG which is still in New Zealand. Now it very well could be true that GGG would want to avoid any political discussions involving communist China on this forum. I do admit that such a factor could have been part of the thought process in formulating the no political discussion change in the TOS.

"

Boem wrote:

"

GusTheCrocodile wrote:

It's call Off Topic (as in, 'not Path of Exile'), not Any Other Topic You Want With No Restrictions. It has always been "certain topics", because there have always been boundaries on allowed discussion.

No there haven't.

The only boundary was "illegal" and the previous ToS guidelines which were
tl;dr [Removed by Support]

So one boundary was the law(duh) and the other was on persons behavior in contact with others, so no, there were no things off-limit that aren't already off-limits or ill adviced in normal social forums/gatherings.

Peace,

-Boem-

First of all, you've just agreed that there were boundaries on allowed topics. As you say, it's normal for there to be boundaries on acceptable behaviour in social situations. For a start, the polices about obnoxious/negative/antagonistic conduct, in themselves, rule out topics.

Second, that other boundary wasn't "the law". "Referencing explicit or illegal material" is not, as a blanket rule, illegal, so a restriction on that is GGG voluntarily going further than the law requires.

"

Chadwixx wrote:

Control speech and you control thought

Lucky they don't control your speech then, hey. They just have rules about what speech is allowed in their house, as is normal for all sorts of organisations. You're welcome to log off and say whatever you like.

"

Chadwixx wrote:

Control speech and you control thought, you realize this game is ran by the communist chinese right?

There's so many places on the internet for healthy and unhealthy political discourse and tbh, over the years I don't recall the forum rife with current affairs threads soooo.... Is it that people really want to discuss politics or they're just mad the choice has been taken away ?

Cuz if you have a burning point of view to get across well, there's always reddit and the such.

"

GusTheCrocodile wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

"

GusTheCrocodile wrote:

It's call Off Topic (as in, 'not Path of Exile'), not Any Other Topic You Want With No Restrictions. It has always been "certain topics", because there have always been boundaries on allowed discussion.

No there haven't.

The only boundary was "illegal" and the previous ToS guidelines which were
tl;dr [Removed by Support].

So one boundary was the law(duh) and the other was on persons behavior in contact with others, so no, there were no things off-limit that aren't already off-limits or ill adviced in normal social forums/gatherings.

Peace,

-Boem-

First of all, you've just agreed that there were boundaries on allowed topics. As you say, it's normal for there to be boundaries on acceptable behaviour in social situations. For a start, the polices about obnoxious/negative/antagonistic conduct, in themselves, rule out topics.

Second, that other boundary wasn't "the law". "Referencing explicit or illegal material" is not, as a blanket rule, illegal, so a restriction on that is GGG voluntarily going further than the law requires.

Can we not pretend like saying "everything has boundaries" is either insightfull or a meaningfull response to my post.

The point of boundaries is that they are defined so people can adopt them, which religion and politics are not since they overlap in general themes constantly.

Unlike the concept of "nudity" or "explicit violence" which aren't abstractions that overlap on multiple fields of discussions, but are in fact clearly difined both by codes of law and codes of general age restriction content.

If you wish to pretend that [Removed by Support] and "don't break the law or age restriction code of this forum" is the same as making topics taboo that can pop up in multiple other discussions at the discression of the mod in charge at that specific time then do so. It's not my style to overlook rules that can't be applied equally but to each his own.

Peace,

-Boem-