Blizzard’s standard is based on specifics, common sense, and context. Blizzard employees have clear internal guidelines and policies, along with there being an appeals process to address “grey” area objectivity.
Blizzard can change their standard at any time for any reason, including new “urban dictionary” definitions to older words.
Trying to spin “no profanity, not even when masked” into “if you stand on your head while tilting it side ways and rotating your eyes all the way to the left, anything and everything could be considered as masking profanity, as long as you leave reason behind” is more than a bit redonkulous.
I tend to think of it as the profanity filter is there for everyone’s sake. If someone can’t control themselves it provides a filter of sorts. I mean, everyone can kinda infer what you meant to say but it’s not displayed.
Turning off the profanity filter and cussing is more for the company you choose to keep. Your guild, your party, etc.
and i am agreeing about people who know they’re breaking a rule and get punished then act surprised, and talking about a plethora of other issues with the actual system as it exists, which you refuse to address and instead keep repeating your one liner over and over.
and you’re NOT being principled, if you want people to accept the consequences of breaking the rules intentionally gracefully, then people who flick a switch that allows them to see profanity should accept the consequences of that action gracefully as well. both knew what they were getting themselves into. all people are responsible for their own actions.
nice, you quoted a vague, subjective, and in my opinion: poorly written policy.
that verbiage is precisely what I’m saying is the issue with it.
and calling the ability to turn it off and see profanity an “extra layer of protection” is fallacious. an extra layer of protection would be to go the club penguin route and disallow it altogether if it is against the rules
See, the whole problem with your train of thought here is, it doesn’t matter if the filter is on or off, using profanity (openly or masked) is against the rules, thus it is illogical to assign any fault to anyone other than the one who violated the rule, regardless of the status of other players’ mature language filter.
It is written the way it is for several reasons, not the least of which is flexibility to deal with changing meanings, and preventing “rules lawyering” arguments by edgelords that just have to see how far over the cliff edge they can stick their toes before they fall.
no it is not. if i leave open bags full of money in my car in the back of a walmart in a sketchy neighborhood known for stealing at night, it is not illogical to blame me partially for when it gets stolen. legally, sure, the only person getting prosecuted is the thief (if they get caught), but a lot of the blame falls on me for knowingly helping create such a situation.
if i walk around downtown late at night and go around insulting people, if i get beat up, they truly are at fault, but i caused it.
i started a fight once a long time ago in school. i wasn’t the first one to get physical, but it was absolutely my fault and i will readily admit i was the instigator. had i not been a punk, the whole situation could have been avoided.
calling the ability to participate in something against the rules an “extra layer of protection” is absolutely fallacious. that is not protection whatsoever.
if we had a “allow cheating filter” that people could click to allow cheating programs to function, that is not “protection”, it’s the opposite. protection would be to not have the choice because it is already banned, and to disallow it across the board.
OOC. i said even people who don’t violate the rules are often partially to blame for what happens to them, just like the person who leaves stacks of cash in their car or the person who turns off their profanity filter.
