The law does not prevent us from identifying your ESO account when you have caused harm.

The law does not prevent us from sharing the information about the harm you have caused with other guild leaders.

The law does not prevent us from protecting our members from you when you have caused harm.

So far as "how to deal with people": I would suggest enrolling yourself in courses both in the law and in ethics. As guild officers, we have an ethical obligation to protect others from the harm you cause. You can whine about how you've "realised you've messed up" and how much you "want a second chance" all you like. You can claim that you have the right to "start over with better circumstances" as you put it. You don't. Yes, when you abuse our members, steal from our bank, make use of derogatory language, make inappropriate sexual advances to other players, or a host of other poor behaviours, we have the right to ensure that you are not allowed to do that to our members again, even when you decide that you're a far better person now and are entitled to a clean slate when you change your account name. You don't have that right. You don't get a free pass just because you've decided you're a nicer person than you were before or because you've decided to change your account name. Yes, we will judge you for those behaviours. It is entirely appropriate to do so.

SilverBride wrote: »

Something needs to be done because this issue isn't going to just go away.

Not everything some people don't like needs to go away. Pretty much everything is disliked by someone. It is literally impossible for society to adapt to the sensitivities of every individual. So we need to put things into perspective and learn to deal with the things we don't like to the greatest degree possible.

This is especially important when living in a free society. Something too many people have forgotten.

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hi all. We wanted to address the recent conversations around teabagging and proper etiquette around the action in-game. In the past, we have noted that context matters when teabagging in-game and when responding to that action. Teabagging in-game is generally not a direct violation of ToS. However, when an impacted player asks you to stop and you refuse, that is when we have crossed into targeted harassment territory. If this happens and the impacted player reports the incident with video proof, then an investigation will open for ToS violations for targeted harassment. This can lead to possible suspension or permanent ban. So please take requests to stop seriously.

For those reporting a potential violation, please make sure you provide a video that makes it clear that you asked the user who teabagged you in-game to please stop the action and continued action after the ask.

We hope this clears things up for everyone, especially as we are going into Whitestrake's Mayhem. Again, we understand why some players choose to engage in teabagging. As someone in this thread put it, we survived the 2000's Halo lobbies also. But we want to respect anyone's wishes who do not want to be subject to the in-game action of teabagging.

Additional update based on a question asking about users who are in offline mode or placed an impacted player on an ignore list: If a user is in offline mode or placed you on an ignore list, you should make an effort to post the request in a general channel. As long as the attempt of contact is made and seen in your video account, that will be factored in during the investigation.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/662880/teabagging-update-would-be-good-before-mym/p3#Comment_8157509

Here's the most recent statement IIRC

In praise of the Upriver Striped Sash-Kilt costume.

This costume is perfect for a heavily tattooed berserker wielding a very grievous scythe. I wish I could create a similar outfit with styles.

Backstory (A tale of two brothers Part I)




With his leopards.

loosej wrote: »

DragonRacer wrote: »

antihero_kazuma wrote: »

In regards to the zeal of zenithar event, why not push the event back one week and hopefully that will be enough time to fix the trader glitch... Of course I'm probably being overly optimistic

While I don't disagree, this is also apparently NOT a glitch but an intentional change... not spoken of in advance or even listed in the patch notes, from what I can tell, just some unhappy surprise you found out about when you logged in after the update. That apparently adding a thing you wanted (sorting know/unknown) came at the price of REMOVING functionality you used every single day.

Had I known this was an either/or issue, I'd have preferred we keep what we had rather than remove existing functionality.

So zos delivered something commonly asked for in a way nobody asked for? I'm shocked

Joking aside, I used to trade a lot myself so I do hope this gets fixed real fast for you all.

You wanted giant hands, so we are giving you giant hands! To offset this wanted change, we removed your feet. Enjoy!

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hi All! We are looking to understand how Update 46 and the launch of Subclassing, and more recently making Scribing a part of the base game, may have changed the play experience and character build for you and the content you engage in.

• Did your ability to play and/or complete certain types of game content improve after the launch of Update 46?
• If so, prior to the launch of Update 46, what was your character build?
• What did you change to your character build when Update 46 launched that allowed you to play or complete content that you had trouble with before?
• What game content was it?

Any and all feedback is helpful for us to relay back to the Combat Team. That way, they have anecdotal experience to add to their existing data. Thanks in advance to all constructive feedback!

(This is strictly to get feedback on your play experience between Update 45 and Update 46. We are not factoring Update 47 PTS feedback in this since it is not available to everyone at the moment).

Did your ability to play and/or complete certain types of game content improve after the launch of Update 46?
No.

feedback is helpful
Zos policy/paradigm of catering to casual, ephemeral and/or occasional players rather than a more eclectic approach inclusive to existing long term players has pretty much hit many longer term players who have simply quit. You know: apparent lack of interest in them, their needs etc is pretty much reflected when they move on from eso. The ones like me who are left have been entrained by this policy/paradigm towards a much more transient and casual approach, expecting less and spending less time in game and less money.

Regarding scribing and subclassing I have barely looked at either. I just don't feel motivated to do so, especially since this casualisation policy/paradigm, among others, has driven away a lot of players I'd normally do group content with. In fairness, I do have time-constraints which also impacts my game time. My main concern with subclassing is the destruction of the core game classes which will make it much harder for these ephemeral/transient casual players (me now) zos have created and/or encouraged to resume eso with extant characters on relogging after an absence. With scribing and the associated Golden Pursuit currently active, which is presumably to encourage an exploration of scribing, zos have disincentivised me to engage because I actually bought Gold Road so cannot grab even the simplest of those by 'claiming scribing from the crown store'. Again, this apparent absence of real interest in me as a paying player is reflected as no interest from me in engaging with eso and any 'new' system introduced. In fairness, once more, Golden Pursuits are generally as interesting to me as watching paint dry but, still, I'd expect more effort and directed intent towards inclusivity in such game activities from zos, nonetheless.

I fully expect a new 'update 35' incoming which will hammer damage and sustain - and likely any interest in resumption of playing eso given the implied pressure at that point to embrace, in particular, subclassing for any of my characters to have any kind of group role viability. It's already clear that the core classes and their viability are the first casuality to subclassing and, despite statements that it's not zos' intent to do this, I don't really see this improving.

Thanks for asking, though.

SilverBride wrote: »

Whether a player finds teabagging offensive or not, it does create a LOT of conflict that could be eliminated if the crouching animation was just changed. They could make the player semi transparent, for example. Anything other than what it is now.

The way is it now is just creating a lot of work for customer service, and this conflict isn't going to go away unless this animation is changed to something different.

Why change the animation? It's meant to show your character preparing to stealthily sneak around. That animation is important for other aspects of the game.

Your @name is not considered personal information.

Furthermore, you have agreed to reveal it in a public sphere (in order to access the game).

Putting someone on an in-game Ignore list is not a breach of their privacy.

Look. I see you're struggling to grasp this. So let's lay it out clearly:

You behave badly, you get banned, we are able to ensure you remain banned.

Falsifying what happens doesn't make your argument correct. Your account name isn't being "mass circulated". Those that have access to it are those who have banned you.

Neither is anyone "breathing down my neck because I make a point that bothers them, either here or in game. "

Neither does anyone have access to your "identity". We have the ability to prevent you from causing harm to our members. That is as it should be.

Neither is anyone "harassing" you. On the contrary. We prevent you from rejoining our guild after you have been banned.

In what conceivable way can this be construed as "deny[ing] you opportunities".

If you steal from our guild bank, then, yes, it is entirely appropriate that we warn other guild leaders of your behaviour and that you are prevented from harming others.

And, no, nothing of any of this would allow you or anyone else to sue me for "defamation". In case you are unclear about this, if a player's account is circulated among GMs, the GM is required to provide evidence that you've done the thing you are accused of having done: racist or phobic language, stealing from the bank, abusing other players, whatever. In which case, you are not being "defamed" you are being held to account for your actions.

You can attempt to misconstrue this as being "bad behavior", or as coming from "malicious intent" or acting in a "hateful manner" as much as you like. You are wrong. You are being held to account for your actions. We are protecting others from the harm you have caused.

This is not "fake authority". This is the authority we have as guild leaders to protect our members from you.

And, to disabuse you of at least one of your illusions: no, we don't need you.

What we do need is the ability to ensure that, having caused harm, you are prevented, as far as possible, from committing further harm.