I have found it frustrating when people respond to comments when they are clearly directed to ZOS, however, notice that none of us commented until you went public. Even though at least I, so I’m sure others, knew that this was still about Wizards. I understand you feel that ZOS owes us specifics, but all things considered, the opinion of two different ZOS employees is more than most of us ever get. My bug post begging for devs to comment on major bugs (I need to add the queue bugs again…) hasn’t had any traction, for instance.

You have a deeply flawed understanding of the purposes of a TOS.

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

@wolfie1.0. not trying to be rude or anything but do you only post n treads you disagree with ? as tho you claim in a dying post to like another you say nothing to support something you feel is good , just asking since you are the one that brought up that i just went ahead and made my post before getting what i wanted to back up a few things in its claim

I post in threads in which I feel commentary, a sense of realism, and to challenge an idea, or sometimes a bit of humor is needed.

In this case its realism and to challenge you.

Do I like that ZOS is arbitrary and subjective in how they handle things? Nope not at all.

Do i understand that vague arbitrary and subjective terms in the TOS and other documents are designed mostly to allow companies the flexibility they want in order to protect those subjective and arbitrary decisions and options? Yes, I do.

Zos is legally protected from having to explain their internal reasoning to you.

You are asking them to show you the line in the sand, what exactly it is thar crosses it... however, the issue that you are running into is that they dont have to give you and answer. They can literally say "because they said so" and its fine. They can even say the addon exists so its fine.

Not explaining the reasons foe why x is allowed and Y isnt gives them the ability to be flexible with where the line actually is.

Is it frustrating? Yes. Take getting an account gifting qualified... its a pain and no one know the criteria because its not disclosed and it changes.

So the reality check here is that the most likely action zos would take is to suspend or ban someone that keeps pressing them on where the line is, when they dont want to disclose it.

If they do end up finally doing so, great awesome. But they arnt required to, and that is my point.

Regarding the rest, honestly? I dont care about the addon. The goal is to challenge, to try to bring out critical thinking. Because the best ideas and methods are ones that survive scrutiny and criticism and still look like good ideas.

In this thread and others you have posted like it, the vast majority of my comments have revolved around what you should expect as a response to your requests/demands... and that your likely not going to get what you want from it.

Is that ok? No, not really... but they can do it. The real decision is deciding if its going to be enough to end your willingness to support the game. Which is all you can really do to impact ZOS.

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

wolfie1.0. wrote: »

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

@wolfie1.0. not trying to be rude or anything but do you only post n treads you disagree with ? as tho you claim in a dying post to like another you say nothing to support something you feel is good , just asking since you are the one that brought up that i just went ahead and made my post before getting what i wanted to back up a few things in its claim

I post in threads in which I feel commentary, a sense of realism, and to challenge an idea, or sometimes a bit of humor is needed.

In this case its realism and to challenge you.

Do I like that ZOS is arbitrary and subjective in how they handle things? Nope not at all.

Do i understand that vague arbitrary and subjective terms in the TOS and other documents are designed mostly to allow companies the flexibility they want in order to protect those subjective and arbitrary decisions and options? Yes, I do.

Zos is legally protected from having to explain their internal reasoning to you.

You are asking them to show you the line in the sand, what exactly it is thar crosses it... however, the issue that you are running into is that they dont have to give you and answer. They can literally say "because they said so" and its fine. They can even say the addon exists so its fine.

Not explaining the reasons foe why x is allowed and Y isnt gives them the ability to be flexible with where the line actually is.

Is it frustrating? Yes. Take getting an account gifting qualified... its a pain and no one know the criteria because its not disclosed and it changes.

So the reality check here is that the most likely action zos would take is to suspend or ban someone that keeps pressing them on where the line is, when they dont want to disclose it.

If they do end up finally doing so, great awesome. But they arnt required to, and that is my point.

Regarding the rest, honestly? I dont care about the addon. The goal is to challenge, to try to bring out critical thinking. Because the best ideas and methods are ones that survive scrutiny and criticism and still look like good ideas.

In this thread and others you have posted like it, the vast majority of my comments have revolved around what you should expect as a response to your requests/demands... and that your likely not going to get what you want from it.

Is that ok? No, not really... but they can do it. The real decision is deciding if its going to be enough to end your willingness to support the game. Which is all you can really do to impact ZOS.

if more players band together not divided zos wouldn't see a player as a outcast they'd see a group of players wanting answers to questions but you got to fight the community more over wanting it more than you get answered

I dunno, looks like most of the players here are very much in agreement.

The community isn't "divided" on this issue at all; there is a massive, overwhelming consensus in the room. You aren't being seen as an outcast because of some split in the playerbase; you are being seen that way because you are the only one refusing to accept a definitive, developer-vetted answer that everyone else has already moved on from.

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

HatchetHaro wrote: »

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

wolfie1.0. wrote: »

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

@wolfie1.0. not trying to be rude or anything but do you only post n treads you disagree with ? as tho you claim in a dying post to like another you say nothing to support something you feel is good , just asking since you are the one that brought up that i just went ahead and made my post before getting what i wanted to back up a few things in its claim

I post in threads in which I feel commentary, a sense of realism, and to challenge an idea, or sometimes a bit of humor is needed.

In this case its realism and to challenge you.

Do I like that ZOS is arbitrary and subjective in how they handle things? Nope not at all.

Do i understand that vague arbitrary and subjective terms in the TOS and other documents are designed mostly to allow companies the flexibility they want in order to protect those subjective and arbitrary decisions and options? Yes, I do.

Zos is legally protected from having to explain their internal reasoning to you.

You are asking them to show you the line in the sand, what exactly it is thar crosses it... however, the issue that you are running into is that they dont have to give you and answer. They can literally say "because they said so" and its fine. They can even say the addon exists so its fine.

Not explaining the reasons foe why x is allowed and Y isnt gives them the ability to be flexible with where the line actually is.

Is it frustrating? Yes. Take getting an account gifting qualified... its a pain and no one know the criteria because its not disclosed and it changes.

So the reality check here is that the most likely action zos would take is to suspend or ban someone that keeps pressing them on where the line is, when they dont want to disclose it.

If they do end up finally doing so, great awesome. But they arnt required to, and that is my point.

Regarding the rest, honestly? I dont care about the addon. The goal is to challenge, to try to bring out critical thinking. Because the best ideas and methods are ones that survive scrutiny and criticism and still look like good ideas.

In this thread and others you have posted like it, the vast majority of my comments have revolved around what you should expect as a response to your requests/demands... and that your likely not going to get what you want from it.

Is that ok? No, not really... but they can do it. The real decision is deciding if its going to be enough to end your willingness to support the game. Which is all you can really do to impact ZOS.

if more players band together not divided zos wouldn't see a player as a outcast they'd see a group of players wanting answers to questions but you got to fight the community more over wanting it more than you get answered

I dunno, looks like most of the players here are very much in agreement.

The community isn't "divided" on this issue at all; there is a massive, overwhelming consensus in the room. You aren't being seen as an outcast because of some split in the playerbase; you are being seen that way because you are the only one refusing to accept a definitive, developer-vetted answer that everyone else has already moved on from.

again if your willing to take what was gave as an answer its only because you wasnt for the change
but this aint an answer

"Hi All, just wanted to follow up here. We want to reiterate that currently, we do not see an issue with ( in sert any topic ) and do not consider it breaking ToS. Our stance has not changed here. We have shared this before, but wanted to make sure we followed up here given the thread commentary. Thank you for sharing your opinions about this add-on."

to something that had multiple claims and backed by ToS am just sorry to say it but its not ive seen better and more detailed derailment post

A definitive "no violation" from the developers of the game is an answer, whether you choose to accept it or not.

Demanding that developers write a custom essay addressing your personal claims before you'll accept their authority isn't how live-service games operate. They gave a clear statement, and the community has moved on; it's time you moved on too.

At this point, the best way to handle this topic is ignore it. He was banned previously, he will probably be banned again if continue pushing this, just don't waste your time answering and trying to convince or explain anything, it is almost trolling type of messages, repeating all the same nonsense making you want to answer something. Fight the desire to answer and just ignore this topic, it is helpless.