Jump to content


Let's Talk About the Auto Chat Ban System


  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

Poll: Auto Chat-Ban System (70 members have cast votes)

What do you think of it?

  1. I have some problems with it, but it doesn't affect me enough to bother me. (3 votes [4.29%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.29%

  2. I highly dislike the system, and I think it needs serious revision or removal. (15 votes [21.43%])

    Percentage of vote: 21.43%

  3. I hate it, and it never should've been introduced in the first place. (25 votes [35.71%])

    Percentage of vote: 35.71%

  4. I like it, but it could use some revision. (3 votes [4.29%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.29%

  5. I like it, and I think that it's fine where it is. (4 votes [5.71%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.71%

  6. I love it, don't change anything. (3 votes [4.29%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.29%

  7. Indifferent/Don't care. (17 votes [24.29%])

    Percentage of vote: 24.29%

Vote Guests cannot vote Hide poll

ThePigSheFlies #41 Posted Sep 16 2020 - 13:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 82740 battles
  • 19,346
  • [YOUJO] YOUJO
  • Member since:
    10-20-2012

wargaming doesn't want any type of communication, because it creates an influx of support tickets from whiney SJW's that get their feelz hurt when a cancer survivor actually uses the actual definition of the word 'cancer', and someone else that had a friend's sister's cousin's ex girl friend die from it and it causes them to tear up...

 

The fact that some people let words from someone they don't know, never met, and never will meet hold such power over them to the point of debilitating them makes me pity them and anyone they have to encounter in real life at a level that makes me want to either banish them to a remote desert island, or find one of my own so I don't have to deal with such stupidity.

 

Anyway, further evidence of WG not wanting communication.  the god-awful battle comms system that went straight into release after literally half a common test cycle.

 

communicate with the folks you know on discord, team speak or twitch, where even the WoTNA staff are willing/able to drop F-Bombs with impunity...

 

and, I voted "don't care"  I don't think I have played more than 100 battles since Feb., and if I bother logging back in, chat will be off.

 



Mojo_Riesing #42 Posted Sep 16 2020 - 15:01

    Captain

  • Players
  • 21660 battles
  • 1,977
  • [ACATS] ACATS
  • Member since:
    11-26-2011

View PostThePigSheFlies, on Sep 16 2020 - 04:47, said:

wargaming doesn't want any type of communication, because it creates an influx of support tickets from whiney SJW's that get their feelz hurt when a cancer survivor actually uses the actual definition of the word 'cancer', and someone else that had a friend's sister's cousin's ex girl friend die from it and it causes them to tear up...

 

The fact that some people let words from someone they don't know, never met, and never will meet hold such power over them to the point of debilitating them makes me pity them and anyone they have to encounter in real life at a level that makes me want to either banish them to a remote desert island, or find one of my own so I don't have to deal with such stupidity.

 

EULA's are made, TOS created and chat bans enabled specifically because of attitudes like yours.  It's not the word that is the problem, it's that intent behind it, the underlying inappropriate ways folks like you express your displeasure.

 



Markd73 #43 Posted Sep 16 2020 - 15:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 35304 battles
  • 7,923
  • [2M8TA] 2M8TA
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011

View PostBurning_Haggis, on Sep 16 2020 - 04:14, said:

They have also been judged to be contracts of adhesion (specifically illegal in my state) and unconscionable.

 

any contract is only as good as the jurisdiction which seeks to review it, on the day it is reviewed, by the juror reviewing it.   You people that think an EULA is like the tablets of Moses make me laugh.

 

You raise some good points. In some ways it comes down to willpower, desire and deep pockets.

 

Could the user base launch a class action vs WG on the EULA terms may be a lot different between will they do so.



Carde #44 Posted Sep 16 2020 - 19:09

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 67676 battles
  • 569
  • [TGRDY] TGRDY
  • Member since:
    07-12-2013
You should not be allowed to turn off the naughty word filter then get people in trouble for using naughty words you wanted to see.  This is what sociopaths do.
 
 


Mojo_Riesing #45 Posted Sep 16 2020 - 20:17

    Captain

  • Players
  • 21660 battles
  • 1,977
  • [ACATS] ACATS
  • Member since:
    11-26-2011

View PostCarde, on Sep 16 2020 - 10:09, said:

You should not be allowed to turn off the naughty word filter then get people in trouble for using naughty words you wanted to see.  This is what sociopaths do.

 

Enough with the false narrative.  People who use "naughty words", or whatever is decided is inappropriate on a private entity get THEMSELVES into trouble. Period.



ThePigSheFlies #46 Posted Sep 16 2020 - 22:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 82740 battles
  • 19,346
  • [YOUJO] YOUJO
  • Member since:
    10-20-2012

View PostMojo_Riesing, on Sep 16 2020 - 09:01, said:

 

EULA's are made, TOS created and chat bans enabled specifically because of attitudes like yours.  It's not the word that is the problem, it's that intent behind it, the underlying inappropriate ways folks like you express your displeasure.

 

 

literally laughed out loud.

 

go look up the word cancer and then try to lecture me on its appropriate use.  I'm a 30+ year survivor of malignant cancer.  when I refer to the word cancer I am of course referring in proper context to one of the two most commonly referenced definitions of the freaking word.  which is how language and communication works.

 

just because half of the mouth breathing american population only knows of one definition due to their inability to use their brain for more than basic physical metabolic processes doesn't make me the bad guy here, or the reason why we have to have safe spaces for the overly pervasive weak minded souls...



KRZYBooP #47 Posted Sep 17 2020 - 02:27

    Community Coordinator

  • Administrator
  • 4738 battles
  • 1,167
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    08-10-2015

View Postballinbadger, on Sep 15 2020 - 15:47, said:

 

Nah, EULA's are vague legalese nonsense written by a bunch of mouthbreathing lawyers...mate.  Let me just ask you this - if there's a rule in their EULA and they don't enforce it against anyone, what happens?

 

No, they aren't all legalese, they are an agreement that you agree with when entering our game. You agree to follow everything in the EULA when you log in. 

Rules for Chat. EULA source information as of June 2018

Spoiler


 



Dr_Jerkov #48 Posted Sep 17 2020 - 04:38

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 4078 battles
  • 388
  • [TT-6] TT-6
  • Member since:
    10-10-2018

View PostKRZYBooP, on Sep 16 2020 - 19:27, said:

 

No, they aren't all legalese, they are an agreement that you agree with when entering our game. You agree to follow everything in the EULA when you log in. 

Rules for Chat. EULA source information as of June 2018

Spoiler


 

I mean, we also agree to buy pixels for an account we don't own. So we agree to a lot of stuff just to keep some apes from being sent back to the zoo.



XturbohawkX #49 Posted Sep 17 2020 - 14:55

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 30585 battles
  • 406
  • [WARHK] WARHK
  • Member since:
    02-14-2017

View PostCarde, on Sep 16 2020 - 19:09, said:

You should not be allowed to turn off the naughty word filter then get people in trouble for using naughty words you wanted to see.  This is what sociopaths do.
 
 

Hypocrisy at its worst here in WG EULA.

 

 



XturbohawkX #50 Posted Sep 17 2020 - 15:03

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 30585 battles
  • 406
  • [WARHK] WARHK
  • Member since:
    02-14-2017

So let me get this straight, you have tools that allow players to censure a long list of "profane" words all the way up to actually turning chat off YET you feel it's smart to ban players that speak their minds freely? 

 

I don't see Wargaming doing well in NA for much longer when you end up banning 90% of the player base.

 

How about putting a clause in your beloved EULA that puts the onus on the player to turn off chat or else don't complain?  Btw, NO ONE reads EULA's since they are sooo long and full of legalese BS....we just click OK to play the game already. 

 

Ban away. Soon there won't be anyone to ban.



XturbohawkX #51 Posted Sep 17 2020 - 15:23

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 30585 battles
  • 406
  • [WARHK] WARHK
  • Member since:
    02-14-2017
Oh yeah forgot to add the much personally used Blacklist function...I mean there is literally NO reason to ban people with all these tools...But hey, you want to lose players, keep on banning. I know for me I'm playing other games much more and eventually the day will come where I will not have the desire to come back. Clan makes me do so but since hardly any clan events going on and really no clan rewards like in WoWs, it's getting pointless.

Markd73 #52 Posted Sep 17 2020 - 17:31

    Major

  • Players
  • 35304 battles
  • 7,923
  • [2M8TA] 2M8TA
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011

View PostXturbohawkX, on Sep 17 2020 - 14:03, said:

So let me get this straight, you have tools that allow players to censure a long list of "profane" words all the way up to actually turning chat off YET you feel it's smart to ban players that speak their minds freely? 

 

I don't see Wargaming doing well in NA for much longer when you end up banning 90% of the player base.

 

How about putting a clause in your beloved EULA that puts the onus on the player to turn off chat or else don't complain?  Btw, NO ONE reads EULA's since they are sooo long and full of legalese BS....we just click OK to play the game already. 

 

Ban away. Soon there won't be anyone to ban.

 

Yet you agree to it by clicking on it. Maybe read a legal agreement before agreeing to it.

 

Not saying I agree with all aspects of their EULA but Caveat Emptor when you click on "I agree".



XturbohawkX #53 Posted Sep 17 2020 - 20:37

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 30585 battles
  • 406
  • [WARHK] WARHK
  • Member since:
    02-14-2017

View PostMarkd73, on Sep 17 2020 - 17:31, said:

 

Yet you agree to it by clicking on it. Maybe read a legal agreement before agreeing to it.

 

Not saying I agree with all aspects of their EULA but Caveat Emptor when you click on "I agree".

Legal Agreement? lmbo. Just because someone calls a horse a unicorn doesn't make it so.



Markd73 #54 Posted Sep 17 2020 - 20:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 35304 battles
  • 7,923
  • [2M8TA] 2M8TA
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011

View PostXturbohawkX, on Sep 17 2020 - 19:37, said:

Legal Agreement? lmbo. Just because someone calls a horse a unicorn doesn't make it so.

 

So you are claiming that the EULA is not a legal agreement? I really think you need to re-read the document and then lookup what a EULA actually is.

 

https://en.wikipedia...cense_agreement

https://odinlaw.com/...la-tos-and-sla/

https://www.upcounse.../eula-agreement

 

I can understand if you don't like the EULA, but to argue that an EULA is not a legal agreement is more than a little foolish. We are allowed different opinions but not different basics facts.

 


Edited by Markd73, Sep 17 2020 - 20:53.


XturbohawkX #55 Posted Sep 17 2020 - 21:00

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 30585 battles
  • 406
  • [WARHK] WARHK
  • Member since:
    02-14-2017

You can have a legal agreement over ZERO players...what good does that do?  When they piss off everyone (and at an obvious alarming rate since the equipment overhaul) they should be backing off all this hard-core "our way or out" nonsense.

 

I actually like many aspects of this game, my dialog here is hopefully read by an intelligent higher-up in Wargaming Inc.  Wrong direction thus far.



QuicksilverJPR #56 Posted Sep 17 2020 - 21:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 28676 battles
  • 4,805
  • [RPG] RPG
  • Member since:
    01-17-2013

I really think some of you need to stop playing the role of lawyer, STFU, and play the game...

 

But that's just me.  If you get chat banned, you most likely deserved it.  There may be some mistakes, but judging by what I see and record in games, you people are usually foul-mouthed and mostly absent minded anyway...so folks really aren't missing much.



Markd73 #57 Posted Sep 17 2020 - 21:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 35304 battles
  • 7,923
  • [2M8TA] 2M8TA
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011

View PostXturbohawkX, on Sep 17 2020 - 20:00, said:

You can have a legal agreement over ZERO players...what good does that do?  When they piss off everyone (and at an obvious alarming rate since the equipment overhaul) they should be backing off all this hard-core "our way or out" nonsense.

 

I actually like many aspects of this game, my dialog here is hopefully read by an intelligent higher-up in Wargaming Inc.  Wrong direction thus far.

 

So you then retract your claim that the EULA is not a legal agreement?

 

Good to see that are seeing reason on this one.



dont_ping_me #58 Posted Sep 17 2020 - 21:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 92284 battles
  • 3,667
  • [SNEKS] SNEKS
  • Member since:
    02-11-2012
I got my first chat ban last week for saying my team was terrible. No naughty words and no personal insults against any player. Because of this, I have been put off from saying absolutely anything in chat now. I have always enjoyed jovial banter in this game, but that has come to an end unfortunately.

HTTR4Life #59 Posted Sep 17 2020 - 23:36

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 39776 battles
  • 322
  • [FMBB] FMBB
  • Member since:
    09-22-2013

So what is the proper way to let your team know what you think of their ineptness in battle? 

 

I would prefer not to be chat banned again but I am at the point of, after spending as much money as I have to support Wargaming the Company that I should be allowed to let off a little steam at piss poor game play by team mates.

 

PS: Is there a site that you can speak your mind, exercise your 1st amendment rights without the fear of being banned?


Edited by HTTR4Life, Sep 17 2020 - 23:38.


Markd73 #60 Posted Sep 17 2020 - 23:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 35304 battles
  • 7,923
  • [2M8TA] 2M8TA
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011

View PostHTTR4Life, on Sep 17 2020 - 22:36, said:

So what is the proper way to let your team know what you think of their ineptness in battle? 

 

Maybe yell at the clouds?

 

I would prefer not to be chat banned again but I am at the point of, after spending as much money as I have to support Wargaming the Company that I should be allowed to let off a little steam at piss poor game play by team mates.

 

PS: Is there a site that you can speak your mind, exercise your 1st amendment rights without the fear of being banned?

 

I thought the 1st amendment only applied to Government speech? There is no "freedom of speech" in a forum/game that is run by a privately owned company.

 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

 

I suppose you could go to another privately run forum where they let people say more things. Maybe a reddit channel?

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Markd73, Sep 17 2020 - 23:46.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users