Is it acceptable for zenimax to scour through your messages and take account actions at random?

TybaltKaine · October 6

Yes

Some of y'all are way too dramatic, equating this with a violation of civil liberties and such.

Adhere to the TOS or accept the consequences, it's that simple.

As far as what happened with the erroneous banning's, that was already addressed by Kevin and seems to have been handled internally. Grousing about it after the fact just feels like sour grapes.

Using "AI" to passively monitor chat logs is not unique to ESO. You are being constantly monitored across the web as long as you are on it, even with your VPN's and Ghostery, and uBlock origins and whatever else you install to try to obfuscate the trackers.

Once again, there is no privacy on the web, and not adhering to the TOS one agrees to is a personal problem.

karthrag_inak · October 6

Yes

If khajiit rolled his eyes any harder at these 'MAH FREEDOMZ' post, his whiskers would fall off.

The only freedom you have the right to on someone else's server is the freedom to uninstall the client.

SilverBride · October 6

No

TybaltKaine wrote: »

As far as what happened with the erroneous banning's, that was already addressed by Kevin and seems to have been handled internally. Grousing about it after the fact just feels like sour grapes.

If I had been banned over a harmless personal conversation with a friend you can bet I'd be having some sour grapes.

Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

PrincessOfThieves · October 6

No

quinancia wrote: »

This is a long thread.

The owners of the game should define the terms of service.

The players should adhere to the terms of service.

If the players don't like the terms of service they should ask for change.

there should be no surprises.

But where does it say that one can never, ever, under any circumstances, use swear words?
We have a profanity filter for a reason. If any and all and bad words were outright forbidden, there would be no need for such filter. Just like there's no filter that hides goldseller messages.
The only mention of vulgar language I can find falls under "disruptive behavior", but things like friendly banter or rp would not be disruptive by definition.

Elsonso · October 6

Jaraal wrote: »

"Don't do the crime if you can't do the time."

What do you do if saying the word "crime" is a crime?

How would you know before hand?

Jaraal · October 6

Yes

Sleepsin wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

Sleepsin wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

"Don't do the crime if you can't do the time."

Trash talk to friends is not a crime.

Then why are people getting banned for it?

Make it make sense.

I mean, I couldn't care less what people say.... publicly or in private. But the OP is complaining about ZOS enforcing the terms of service they clicked "agree" to.

The op is complaining about getting banned when no living person reported him. He was talking to a friend in private channel and the AI took a key phrase out of context and flagged it for some intern to red and then ban him.

The "AI" (AKA profanity filter) has been in the game from the beginning. Say a word on the list, a response triggers. It's not rocket science.

Do I think people should be banned for simple words? No. But it's not my game, not my list. ZOS apparently thinks it's bannable, and their opinion is the only one that matters.

Jaraal · October 6

Yes

Elsonso wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

"Don't do the crime if you can't do the time."

What do you do if saying the word "crime" is a crime? How would you know before hand?

Really?

Turn on the profanity filter and say the word "crime." Is it replaced with asterisks? No? Then you're good to go.

Syldras · October 6

Jaraal wrote: »

Really?
Turn on the profanity filter and say the word "crime." Is it replaced with asterisks? No? Then you're good to go.

You have to type a word and send it first to see whether the filter reacts. And then you could already have earned a ban. It's just that you can't know beforehand which words are on the list and which ones not (although from what I've seen it always seem to be the same few words that people got a ban for - which makes me wonder how big that word list is; might be not extensive at all).

SilverBride · October 6

No

I wonder if profanity is triggering moderation at all, because there is already a filter and an option to not filter those words at the player's discretion. I suspect it is more slurs and hate speech that is getting moderated.

Sleepsin · October 6

Jaraal wrote: »

Sleepsin wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

Sleepsin wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

"Don't do the crime if you can't do the time."

Trash talk to friends is not a crime.

Then why are people getting banned for it?

Make it make sense.

I mean, I couldn't care less what people say.... publicly or in private. But the OP is complaining about ZOS enforcing the terms of service they clicked "agree" to.

The op is complaining about getting banned when no living person reported him. He was talking to a friend in private channel and the AI took a key phrase out of context and flagged it for some intern to red and then ban him.

The "AI" (AKA profanity filter) has been in the game from the beginning. Say a word on the list, a response triggers. It's not rocket science.

Do I think people should be banned for simple words? No. But it's not my game, not my list. ZOS apparently thinks it's bannable, and their opinion is the only one that matters.

The profanity filter and the AI monitoring system are two completely things. The filter will just auto snip words while the AI is recording and flagging entire post for review. The AI is much more intrusive.

quinancia · October 6

Yes

PrincessOfThieves wrote: »

quinancia wrote: »

This is a long thread.

The owners of the game should define the terms of service.

The players should adhere to the terms of service.

If the players don't like the terms of service they should ask for change.

there should be no surprises.

But where does it say that one can never, ever, under any circumstances, use swear words?
We have a profanity filter for a reason. If any and all and bad words were outright forbidden, there would be no need for such filter. Just like there's no filter that hides goldseller messages.
The only mention of vulgar language I can find falls under "disruptive behavior", but things like friendly banter or rp would not be disruptive by definition.

I am not sure where in my comment you think I said that one could never use swear words.

Amottica · October 6

Yes

Sleepsin wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

"Don't do the crime if you can't do the time."

Trash talk to friends is not a crime.

And humans review what is flagged. Granted, mistakes can be made, which is why there is an appeal process, but friendly banter is probably easy to see most of the time.

Amottica · October 6

Yes

ADarklore wrote: »

Groterdan wrote: »

Wauw the amount of yes . Rly surprised by that . Sad to see freedom gets given away so easy 😭

This reminds me of Star Wars, "So this is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause".

This is a private arena. Zenimax owns everything in the game which includes our character and anything we say. They own our words.

So yeah, we choose to sign away from our liberty in such matters when we accept the ToS and log into the game. I think the "yes" replies in the poll reflect players' understanding of that reality.

RaikaNA · October 6

Yes

SilverBride wrote: »

TybaltKaine wrote: »

As far as what happened with the erroneous banning's, that was already addressed by Kevin and seems to have been handled internally. Grousing about it after the fact just feels like sour grapes.

If I had been banned over a harmless personal conversation with a friend you can bet I'd be having some sour grapes.

Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

What constitutes "harmless" personal conversation?

mocap · October 6

Bad guys have started using private communication in video games as a way to super-secure data sharing that no intelligence agency can detect.

Obviously, intelligence agencies are not happy with this state, so...

Syldras · October 6

mocap wrote: »

Bad guys have started using private communication in video games as a way to super-secure data sharing that no intelligence agency can detect.

And they do that by using swearwords, slurs and sexual terms?

spartaxoxo · October 6

Amottica wrote: »

Sleepsin wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

"Don't do the crime if you can't do the time."

Trash talk to friends is not a crime.

And humans review what is flagged. Granted, mistakes can be made, which is why there is an appeal process, but friendly banter is probably easy to see most of the time.

They already had to overturn most of their bans on this once. I am not sure that it is easy for whoever is reviewing to see.

spartaxoxo · October 6

Those saying it's legal are ignoring that there is data privacy laws that vary a lot in jurisdictions. ZOS certainly believes it is compliant with all of them, and maybe they are, but it's not something that should be assumed about the use of new technology practices. Companies, including large ones, have been wrong about such things before.

In addition, even if it is legal, that doesn't make it acceptable. We have laws that can be changed as a society for a reason. There's a slew of consumer protection laws that were created because those practices being legal was not acceptable.

Jaraal · October 6

Yes

Syldras wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

Really?
Turn on the profanity filter and say the word "crime." Is it replaced with asterisks? No? Then you're good to go.

You have to type a word and send it first to see whether the filter reacts. And then you could already have earned a ban. It's just that you can't know beforehand which words are on the list and which ones not (although from what I've seen it always seem to be the same few words that people got a ban for - which makes me wonder how big that word list is; might be not extensive at all).

I'm pretty sure most people can tell the difference between "good" and "bad" words. And @ZOS_Kevin stated that there were no autobans, and that the bans were generated by actual customer service agents. And he also said, " ...we are not looking to action anyone engaging in consensual conversations with fellow players."

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/8190298/#Comment_8190298

So I guess it's up to the CS agent to decide if the person you're conversing with is your friend or not, lol

Amottica · October 6

Yes

I have favored Zenimax, removing those who detract from our community by harassing other players. I see it in Cyrodiil when I happen to kill someone and get bent because they died in PvP and start rage-whispering me. Sometimes their minds must have melted from all the rage, as I have seen some comments that went to far because they have a sense of safety via the internet. I have always left PvP to the battlefield and already bested them, which clearly upset them.

They need to check themselves, or Zenimax will do it for them.

It is worth noting that when you are the recipient of such behavior, it is best to avoid replying and especially stooping to their level, as that is just as worthy of Zenimax's attention.

spartaxoxo · October 6

Amottica wrote: »

I have favored Zenimax, removing those who detract from our community by harassing other players. I see it in Cyrodiil when I happen to kill someone and get bent because they died in PvP and start rage-whispering me. Sometimes their minds must have melted from all the rage, as I have seen some comments that went to far because they have a sense of safety via the internet. I have always left PvP to the battlefield and already bested them, which clearly upset them.

They need to check themselves, or Zenimax will do it for them.

It is worth noting that when you are the recipient of such behavior, it is best to avoid replying and especially stooping to their level, as that is just as worthy of Zenimax's attention.

This isn't what's being discussed though. Zenimax is banning people who are NOT reporting each other. They are banning people for consensual conversations with friends. Nobody is talking about hate whispers that are flagged by the victim.

Cazador · October 6

Yes

I think people need to understand that your right to free speech really only covers suppression by the government. ZOS is not the government and you had to agree to a TOS to play the game.

Sleepsin · October 6

Cazador wrote: »

I think people need to understand that your right to free speech really only covers suppression by the government. ZOS is not the government and you had to agree to a TOS to play the game.

Privacy laws apply to companies. TOS does not negate it.

Cazador · October 6

Yes

Sleepsin wrote: »

Cazador wrote: »

I think people need to understand that your right to free speech really only covers suppression by the government. ZOS is not the government and you had to agree to a TOS to play the game.

Privacy laws apply to companies. TOS does not negate it.

That's not very accurate. In most states in the US (not sure about Europe) companies can use, share and sell your data as much as they want without notifying you.

Sleepsin · October 6

Cazador wrote: »

Sleepsin wrote: »

Cazador wrote: »

I think people need to understand that your right to free speech really only covers suppression by the government. ZOS is not the government and you had to agree to a TOS to play the game.

Privacy laws apply to companies. TOS does not negate it.

That's not very accurate. In most states in the US (not sure about Europe) companies can use, share and sell your data as much as they want without notifying you.

You missed the point. This is not a free speech issue, this is a privacy issue. And privacy laws do apply to companies.

Dragonnord · October 6

Yes

Sleepsin wrote: »

Cazador wrote: »

I think people need to understand that your right to free speech really only covers suppression by the government. ZOS is not the government and you had to agree to a TOS to play the game.

Privacy laws apply to companies. TOS does not negate it.

You call Privacy coming to a video game to talk in private?

If I want privacy I don't log in to a game to talk in chat.

You have the wrong idea of what privacy is.

Amottica · October 6

Yes

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

I have favored Zenimax, removing those who detract from our community by harassing other players. I see it in Cyrodiil when I happen to kill someone and get bent because they died in PvP and start rage-whispering me. Sometimes their minds must have melted from all the rage, as I have seen some comments that went to far because they have a sense of safety via the internet. I have always left PvP to the battlefield and already bested them, which clearly upset them.

They need to check themselves, or Zenimax will do it for them.

It is worth noting that when you are the recipient of such behavior, it is best to avoid replying and especially stooping to their level, as that is just as worthy of Zenimax's attention.

This isn't what's being discussed though. Zenimax is banning people who are NOT reporting each other. They are banning people for consensual conversations with friends. Nobody is talking about hate whispers that are flagged by the victim.

Nope, this is about hate whispers as much as everything else the AI will look at. It is also about the person on the receiving end responding in a manner that is worthy of attention. So, my comment fits into the conversation perfectly.

However, I thank you for sharing your thoughts on the matter.

Cazador · October 6

Yes

Sleepsin wrote: »

Cazador wrote: »

Sleepsin wrote: »

Cazador wrote: »

I think people need to understand that your right to free speech really only covers suppression by the government. ZOS is not the government and you had to agree to a TOS to play the game.

Privacy laws apply to companies. TOS does not negate it.

That's not very accurate. In most states in the US (not sure about Europe) companies can use, share and sell your data as much as they want without notifying you.

You missed the point. This is not a free speech issue, this is a privacy issue. And privacy laws do apply to companies.

Yes, and the laws I was referring to are privacy laws. Hence why they are able to do quite a bit with your data without consulting you, and why they are able to monitor conversations at their leisure. You have to understand, these "private conversations " being referred to in this thread are being held on ZOS's servers so they can and will monitor them.

IIBonesII · October 6

No

A member of my console team was banned last week for comms. After our prog night, he was messaged by someone he didn't know calling him things like weeb, and telling him he needed to grow up. That having anime photos in his profile was 'p*do' behaviour. He used words to provoke my team member. Words that I don't think are on the ban list. He goaded my team member into responding over multiple messages. My team member responded with 1 sentence that had the word 'tw.....t' in it. The other player then reported him.

People are using this system against player who ordinarily wouldn't use any comms at all. This team member is usually silent in prog runs and doesn't communicate via xbox methods usually. Player with not great intentions are using this system against player who would not normally react this way or get bans for other reasons themselves.

I don't mind this type of moderation. What I hate with a passion, is no human looking at appeals, or emails in regard to these bans. I don't like the AI interventions here. I don't like that comms between friends isn't given nuance with this AI BS. Im Scottish...how do you think I talk to my Scottish friends? How do you think we talk to each other? If someone isnt reporting it as being harmful to them I don't personally think there should be any punishment. I'd totally be in for a system that checks all these comms, but holds on taking action unless a report is made by someone involved in the interaction. But its not. Its AI making the decision and then no response to emails about the ban or appeal. I reported this person myself and I got no response from zos AT ALL.

Im really tired of having to deal with AI and computers and not having a human being on the other end who can use their brains to engage with me, and not an auto AI response.

SlayerSyrena · October 6

No

Wait, ZOS is policing speech now? Seems absurd to ban someone for roasting a friend.