Malice is not required for it to be a violation of the rules. Service advertisements must go in the services channel. Otherwise it is a violation of the advertising rules and it can result in account actions. The penalty starts at a silence, then moves on to escalating suspensions, unless you say something that is so heinous it results in a more serious escalation. This is a factor of the account history exclusively.
8 Likes
The instances im discussing there was NO warning before punishment was dealt. After they returned to the game they got those lil warnings in the top right. AFTER they had to sit out for a week…
The official forum post and Support Articles are the warning, however. Which again boils down to the matter of us as consumers doing our due diligence. It’s admirable that you want personalized penalty ladders, but in a game with millions of players that is simply an unfeasible request.
This is an unfortunate misunderstanding of the penalty ladder, is all. All that matters is the history of violations on the account, hence why some only got a silence and others got a suspension. What the violation was is irrelevant in this game. Intent is not factored in.
13 Likes
It really shouldn’t. The rules are there to read. The chat channels are all there to see. If you did not understand them, you could have asked for clarification or done some research.
Keep in mind, penalties go from chat silences for a week to suspensions. Bans are the last thing that will happen.
If your friends were chat silenced, that’s a first infraction and the email tells you what you did.
If your friends were suspended from the game, that means they’ve done something before.
If your friends are banned, that means they can never return to the game at all on that account and means they’ve been getting many infractions over a long period of time to finally hit that mark.
It isn’t. They were sent emails. If they needed more information, they put in appeals.
But the chat channel is active unless you turned it off.
It does. As 24 silences weren’t getting the point across to people and penalties had to be harsher.
8 Likes
Per the forum post Forumcat shared for Classic it doesn’t appear this is true.
3 Likes
While I agree it is certainly not malicious, that does not matter. The chat penalty system has changed many times over the past 20 years. From Suspensions in the early days, to Silences starting at 24 hours then doubling, to what we have now. The reason the chat system penalties are as long as they are, is because people were not learning and changing behaviors with just 24 or 48 hour silences intended as warnings.
Failure to read the rules is not a reason for any enforcement team to cut people a break. It is the responsibility of people using the game to read the rules instead of ignoring them.
Again, the people reporting are ALSO playing players. Blizzard sides with the customers who follow the rules vs those who do not.
Hopefully now that your friends are aware of the rules, they can avoid issues. Be sure they don’t spam the Services channel either. Spam is not just ever X minute. It is when someone annoys the realm with enough ads they get reported a lot. On a quiet server they may want to keep the frequency down and space it out.
12 Likes
You’re still not understanding, probably intentionally at this point.
The warning is the EULA that every person signs when they create their account, and then re-signs when there are any changes. There is also the Social Contract that Blizzard makes everyone acknowledge before playing.
Those are the warnings. If you didn’t read them or didn’t “know”, that’s on you. Ignorance of the rule is not an excuse for breaking them.
9 Likes
On this point, you can actually thank your fellow players for this. They’ve tried short suspensions, short silences, long suspensions, long silences, unlimited doubling of silences…and people still break the rules.
So, yes. 7 day suspension is the first penalty (after a silence). Did it catch your attention? Did it make you think it’s not fair? GOOD! That’s the whole point of punishment: to stop the behavior from happening.
If you find a penalty “acceptable” or “worth the risk”, then it’s not an effective punishment. When you start noticing the punishment like this, then it’s having the desired effect.
Stop breaking the rules.
10 Likes
Your friends are welcome to post here and maybe orlyia can shed some light on. Their penalties keep in mind she will find out the truth and will say what caused not everyone is as innocent as they claim.
3 Likes
Ive told you, what the reasoning was. Lack of knowledge of the full TOS. They posted a service in trade channel.
Hmm. That sounds like the wording may be off. Because when I had the Classic anniversary downloaded and played for the first time, all chat channels were enabled for me. I’d check again, but I had to uninstall it, as there wasn’t enough room on my computer and I wasn’t much playing it after the first day.
Perhaps we need some screenshots to check to see if mine was showing up different than others?
And I’d recommend the OP and friends putting in a suggestion to make sure that all chat channels are turned on upon starting a character for the first time, so that everyone can see all channels that exist.
1 Like
service channel is not auto. You have to join it
They’re also untrue. But good to know where your ulterior narrative was this whole time, I guess.
4 Likes
I don’t know why mine automatically showed up then.
But that’s a change that could help with this issue. I’d suggest tossing that into the in game feedback and tell them why it should be automatically on for every new character. People can go in and turn it off. But they should always know of its existence first.
1 Like
I will make a post in feedback. I agree.
You’re right, it would be lazy. That’s why Blizzard doesn’t do it. Humans answer the tickets with templates, to improve efficiency and ensure everyone gets the same information.
Then go talk to the video creators about why they are lying. Blizzard can’t control what people say on the internet.
They are a for-profit business, and yes, their duty is to their shareholders. Welcome to capitalism!
5 Likes
That’s a them problem. THey probably should have read the EULA and paid attention to the social contract pop-up that they agreed to abide by that explained exactly that.
2 Likes
Any answers on why these players where receiving the notice that they had been reported after returning to the game and not before?
Could’ve not notice before they was action and only seen it after the fact.
1 Like
no definitely popped up after returning. Heard that it was happening several times.