The Gold Road Chapter – which includes the Scribing system – and Update 42 is now available to test on the PTS! You can read the latest patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/656454/
Maintenance for the week of April 22:
• [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 22, 4:00AM EDT (08:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 22, 4:00AM EDT (08:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
Was it ever confirmed if "tea-bagging" is against TOS now?
-
Casul✭✭✭✭✭
✭Alright guys so after a long search I found point down. It's in emotes > Give Directions point down.
Perfect replacement for you souls fans out there.PvP needs more love.3 -
Recremen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
Why are you going to such lengths to defend simulated sexual assault? It's a game, and most multiplayer games have rules about acceptable conduct. If they're not to your liking then you can stop playing at any time. You don't have a right to force others to associate with you when you fail to abide by the group's social contract. There is no separation between "real life" consequences (getting banned from the game) and in-game action. The actions you perform in game are already performed under the assumed purview of the aforementioned contract. In fact, in this case it's a literal contract that you acknowledged before being able to play. That's what that whole Terms of Service thing is from the launcher.Men'Do PC NA AD Khajiit
Grand High Illustrious Mid-Tier PvP/PvE Bussmunster8 -
Raideen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
No, this is an opinion, since we disagree and can debate it. Don't hide it behind anything else.
Then, your second argument is invalid. There are already real life consequences (ban) for in game behaviors. (cheating). Do you imply cheating should be ok as well?
It's basically the same thing.
In the end, we are both opinionated.
Your opinion is that teabagging is ok. Mine is that teabagging is not, and should be punished.
Both opinions are valid and debatable.
1. Incorrect. Just because you argue out of a lack of understanding does not make it an opinion. Freedom and 100% safety from the world around you are IN FACT mutually exclusive. Does this mean we don't need laws or need to restrict people from certain things, absolutely not. But as with all things balance is the key. The issue I have is you are not advocating balance, you intend to push it to the opposite extreme, and that is where you lose all forms of freedom. So again, this is NOT an opinion, but a very easily observable fact.
2. How does someone "cheat" in game and get banned for it? There is no way to "cheat" in game, there are only ways to exploit. Exploits go against the intended game design and allow players to "skip" content for reward. This is not even REMOTELY the same or similar to t-bagging.
I love that you actually want to see players who are t-bagged punished. I really do, because you do not even see how that mindset, how your mindset is directly connected to the path that leads to 1984, which at the end of the day will affect you negatively in ways that FAR eclipse getting T-bagged in a game. WOW.
Too much out there.
I quit.
You win.
I am not here debating to "win", I hope to educate.
2 -
preevious✭✭✭✭✭
✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
No, this is an opinion, since we disagree and can debate it. Don't hide it behind anything else.
Then, your second argument is invalid. There are already real life consequences (ban) for in game behaviors. (cheating). Do you imply cheating should be ok as well?
It's basically the same thing.
In the end, we are both opinionated.
Your opinion is that teabagging is ok. Mine is that teabagging is not, and should be punished.
Both opinions are valid and debatable.
1. Incorrect. Just because you argue out of a lack of understanding does not make it an opinion. Freedom and 100% safety from the world around you are IN FACT mutually exclusive. Does this mean we don't need laws or need to restrict people from certain things, absolutely not. But as with all things balance is the key. The issue I have is you are not advocating balance, you intend to push it to the opposite extreme, and that is where you lose all forms of freedom. So again, this is NOT an opinion, but a very easily observable fact.
2. How does someone "cheat" in game and get banned for it? There is no way to "cheat" in game, there are only ways to exploit. Exploits go against the intended game design and allow players to "skip" content for reward. This is not even REMOTELY the same or similar to t-bagging.
I love that you actually want to see players who are t-bagged punished. I really do, because you do not even see how that mindset, how your mindset is directly connected to the path that leads to 1984, which at the end of the day will affect you negatively in ways that FAR eclipse getting T-bagged in a game. WOW.
Too much out there.
I quit.
You win.
I am not here debating to "win", I hope to educate.
Yeah, I agree to stop arguing, but please don't push it. That is simply ridiculous.2 -
Raideen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
Why are you going to such lengths to defend simulated sexual assault? It's a game, and most multiplayer games have rules about acceptable conduct. If they're not to your liking then you can stop playing at any time. You don't have a right to force others to associate with you when you fail to abide by the group's social contract. There is no separation between "real life" consequences (getting banned from the game) and in-game action. The actions you perform in game are already performed under the assumed purview of the aforementioned contract. In fact, in this case it's a literal contract that you acknowledged before being able to play. That's what that whole Terms of Service thing is from the launcher.
1. I am not "defending" simulated sexual assault. But nice try in trying to label me this way to the reader. T-bagging is not by its definition "simulated sexual assault". It could be determined that way by some, it is also determined in other ways by others. The action in and of itself does not mean " simulated sexual assault"
2. The problem with the "rules" is that they are vague and open to interpretation. Vague means, not specific. There is no specific clause about Tbagging, and "harassment" is vague enough to mean anything, literally anything.
4 -
Raideen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
No, this is an opinion, since we disagree and can debate it. Don't hide it behind anything else.
Then, your second argument is invalid. There are already real life consequences (ban) for in game behaviors. (cheating). Do you imply cheating should be ok as well?
It's basically the same thing.
In the end, we are both opinionated.
Your opinion is that teabagging is ok. Mine is that teabagging is not, and should be punished.
Both opinions are valid and debatable.
1. Incorrect. Just because you argue out of a lack of understanding does not make it an opinion. Freedom and 100% safety from the world around you are IN FACT mutually exclusive. Does this mean we don't need laws or need to restrict people from certain things, absolutely not. But as with all things balance is the key. The issue I have is you are not advocating balance, you intend to push it to the opposite extreme, and that is where you lose all forms of freedom. So again, this is NOT an opinion, but a very easily observable fact.
2. How does someone "cheat" in game and get banned for it? There is no way to "cheat" in game, there are only ways to exploit. Exploits go against the intended game design and allow players to "skip" content for reward. This is not even REMOTELY the same or similar to t-bagging.
I love that you actually want to see players who are t-bagged punished. I really do, because you do not even see how that mindset, how your mindset is directly connected to the path that leads to 1984, which at the end of the day will affect you negatively in ways that FAR eclipse getting T-bagged in a game. WOW.
Too much out there.
I quit.
You win.
I am not here debating to "win", I hope to educate.
Yeah, I agree to stop arguing, but please don't push it. That is simply ridiculous.
Another distinction. I am not arguing, I am debating. You are arguing, not debating. They are different.2 -
Gaggin✭✭✭✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect. The whole concept of "implicit consent" apply
I love how people like to call it 'sexual assault' while totally ignoring the fact that you get MURDERED before it happens, as if sexual assault is somehow worse than murder.
I also love how some people disingenuously talk about 'victoms' in RL as if teabagging is what harms people in RL. It isn't, its the *** and.... other stuff.
And even if it is, that's not our problem. It's like asking fps games to not have loud gunshots cus of someone's ptsd. Meanwhile in this game you can suck someone's body dry, body-check them in various ways, put your hands all over their body via various skills, not to mention all the npc interactions that could be construed as 'sexual assault'. These actions are never brought up in this conversation, and the reason to me is really simple. Some people are sore losers and when they get killed in pvp they wanna create a stink over it.10 -
Recremen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
Why are you going to such lengths to defend simulated sexual assault? It's a game, and most multiplayer games have rules about acceptable conduct. If they're not to your liking then you can stop playing at any time. You don't have a right to force others to associate with you when you fail to abide by the group's social contract. There is no separation between "real life" consequences (getting banned from the game) and in-game action. The actions you perform in game are already performed under the assumed purview of the aforementioned contract. In fact, in this case it's a literal contract that you acknowledged before being able to play. That's what that whole Terms of Service thing is from the launcher.
1. I am not "defending" simulated sexual assault. But nice try in trying to label me this way to the reader. T-bagging is not by its definition "simulated sexual assault". It could be determined that way by some, it is also determined in other ways by others. The action in and of itself does not mean " simulated sexual assault"
2. The problem with the "rules" is that they are vague and open to interpretation. Vague means, not specific. There is no specific clause about Tbagging, and "harassment" is vague enough to mean anything, literally anything.
Teabagging is definitionally simulated sexual assault. There is no alternative interpretation. It is an action that simulates touching another person with your *** without their consent. Zero people are going to take you seriously if you can't acknowledge this simple fact. So yes, you are definitely pulling a lot of weight trying to defend simulated sexual assault.
If you struggle to see how that is a harassing behavior, then we plainly do not need you in this community. I think that's not the case, of course. I think you see that it is harassing, and want to defend it because you specifically want to keep harassing people without consequences. Also, if you can't trust that the enforcement of anti-harassment clauses will be carried out fairly, then once again, you're free to leave at any time. The rest of us don't have low-key paranoid hangups about extremely standard behavior policies. What's the alternative you want, for them to list every possible bad behavior that someone could do? It's an impossible task, so the "vague" language is fine as is.Men'Do PC NA AD Khajiit
Grand High Illustrious Mid-Tier PvP/PvE Bussmunster12 -
Kingslayer513✭✭✭✭✭
✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
Why are you going to such lengths to defend simulated sexual assault? It's a game, and most multiplayer games have rules about acceptable conduct. If they're not to your liking then you can stop playing at any time. You don't have a right to force others to associate with you when you fail to abide by the group's social contract. There is no separation between "real life" consequences (getting banned from the game) and in-game action. The actions you perform in game are already performed under the assumed purview of the aforementioned contract. In fact, in this case it's a literal contract that you acknowledged before being able to play. That's what that whole Terms of Service thing is from the launcher.
1. I am not "defending" simulated sexual assault. But nice try in trying to label me this way to the reader. T-bagging is not by its definition "simulated sexual assault". It could be determined that way by some, it is also determined in other ways by others. The action in and of itself does not mean " simulated sexual assault"
2. The problem with the "rules" is that they are vague and open to interpretation. Vague means, not specific. There is no specific clause about Tbagging, and "harassment" is vague enough to mean anything, literally anything.
Teabagging is definitionally simulated sexual assault. There is no alternative interpretation. It is an action that simulates touching another person with your *** without their consent. Zero people are going to take you seriously if you can't acknowledge this simple fact. So yes, you are definitely pulling a lot of weight trying to defend simulated sexual assault.
If you struggle to see how that is a harassing behavior, then we plainly do not need you in this community. I think that's not the case, of course. I think you see that it is harassing, and want to defend it because you specifically want to keep harassing people without consequences. Also, if you can't trust that the enforcement of anti-harassment clauses will be carried out fairly, then once again, you're free to leave at any time. The rest of us don't have low-key paranoid hangups about extremely standard behavior policies. What's the alternative you want, for them to list every possible bad behavior that someone could do? It's an impossible task, so the "vague" language is fine as is.
lmao9 -
Raideen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
Why are you going to such lengths to defend simulated sexual assault? It's a game, and most multiplayer games have rules about acceptable conduct. If they're not to your liking then you can stop playing at any time. You don't have a right to force others to associate with you when you fail to abide by the group's social contract. There is no separation between "real life" consequences (getting banned from the game) and in-game action. The actions you perform in game are already performed under the assumed purview of the aforementioned contract. In fact, in this case it's a literal contract that you acknowledged before being able to play. That's what that whole Terms of Service thing is from the launcher.
1. I am not "defending" simulated sexual assault. But nice try in trying to label me this way to the reader. T-bagging is not by its definition "simulated sexual assault". It could be determined that way by some, it is also determined in other ways by others. The action in and of itself does not mean " simulated sexual assault"
2. The problem with the "rules" is that they are vague and open to interpretation. Vague means, not specific. There is no specific clause about Tbagging, and "harassment" is vague enough to mean anything, literally anything.
Teabagging is definitionally simulated sexual assault. There is no alternative interpretation. It is an action that simulates touching another person with your *** without their consent. Zero people are going to take you seriously if you can't acknowledge this simple fact. So yes, you are definitely pulling a lot of weight trying to defend simulated sexual assault.
If you struggle to see how that is a harassing behavior, then we plainly do not need you in this community. I think that's not the case, of course. I think you see that it is harassing, and want to defend it because you specifically want to keep harassing people without consequences. Also, if you can't trust that the enforcement of anti-harassment clauses will be carried out fairly, then once again, you're free to leave at any time. The rest of us don't have low-key paranoid hangups about extremely standard behavior policies. What's the alternative you want, for them to list every possible bad behavior that someone could do? It's an impossible task, so the "vague" language is fine as is.
1. Technically the person is crouching and standing and crouching and standing. "T-bagging" is the term given to it, but the actual act of placing your private area on someone elses corpse does not exist. It was never coded or designed, the private parts never existed. It was a picked up by players as a way to instigate the enemy player they just killed. Its foundation was never rooted in the idea of sexually assaulting someone in a game. Sorry you fail to see this.
2. I do not struggle with anything, I clearly see the opposite perspective, I just think its laughable that you take it so seriously, so seriously in fact that you want real life consequences against players who t-bag, and that itself is laughable, ludicrous, and ridiculous to the nth degree.
I think its hilarious you assert that myself or t-baggers are paranoid...lol you are the ones who think someone is sexually assaulting you in game.
6 -
Kingslayer513✭✭✭✭✭
✭Kingslayer513 wrote: »We cannot regress to "potentially unwanted sexual attention is ok until they say no." You cannot consent for your players like that. "First ball-dip free" is not a competent sexual harassment policy.
Why some people see anything sexual in "teabagging"?..
And even sexual harrasment, seriously?
Teabagging is done only to show disrespect to the enemy - not to show any affection, not to simulate any sexual action.
I would never tbag somebody whom I respect.I just make it my mission to down them, and then use the Falkreath Frolic until they rez.
Ok, I've finially decided to buy this emote
Very stylish, and much better than emotes from Vvardenfell bundle.
It's just a matter of course for pvp and doesn't necessarily mean disrespect. I've been bagged after 1vXing a large group of noobs and killing most of them before dying, who then followed up asking me for build advice. I've also been bagged after a long fight with skilled players, who then immediately follow up with a whisper that it was a good fight. Just take it with a grain of salt, teabagging doesn't mean anything.
You're giving it meaning by doing it. Else, why even do it? No one does anything for no reason. Intent is there. So what is that intent? Usually derogatory.
That's why I italicized the word. Sure there's technically a meaning behind anything. People ITT are going way overboard with Freudian pseudoscience interpretations of a simple action that really doesn't have that much depth to it. It's pretty funny to watch the mental gymnastics play out though.4 -
Recremen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
Why are you going to such lengths to defend simulated sexual assault? It's a game, and most multiplayer games have rules about acceptable conduct. If they're not to your liking then you can stop playing at any time. You don't have a right to force others to associate with you when you fail to abide by the group's social contract. There is no separation between "real life" consequences (getting banned from the game) and in-game action. The actions you perform in game are already performed under the assumed purview of the aforementioned contract. In fact, in this case it's a literal contract that you acknowledged before being able to play. That's what that whole Terms of Service thing is from the launcher.
1. I am not "defending" simulated sexual assault. But nice try in trying to label me this way to the reader. T-bagging is not by its definition "simulated sexual assault". It could be determined that way by some, it is also determined in other ways by others. The action in and of itself does not mean " simulated sexual assault"
2. The problem with the "rules" is that they are vague and open to interpretation. Vague means, not specific. There is no specific clause about Tbagging, and "harassment" is vague enough to mean anything, literally anything.
Teabagging is definitionally simulated sexual assault. There is no alternative interpretation. It is an action that simulates touching another person with your *** without their consent. Zero people are going to take you seriously if you can't acknowledge this simple fact. So yes, you are definitely pulling a lot of weight trying to defend simulated sexual assault.
If you struggle to see how that is a harassing behavior, then we plainly do not need you in this community. I think that's not the case, of course. I think you see that it is harassing, and want to defend it because you specifically want to keep harassing people without consequences. Also, if you can't trust that the enforcement of anti-harassment clauses will be carried out fairly, then once again, you're free to leave at any time. The rest of us don't have low-key paranoid hangups about extremely standard behavior policies. What's the alternative you want, for them to list every possible bad behavior that someone could do? It's an impossible task, so the "vague" language is fine as is.
1. Technically the person is crouching and standing and crouching and standing. "T-bagging" is the term given to it, but the actual act of placing your private area on someone elses corpse does not exist. It was never coded or designed, the private parts never existed. It was a picked up by players as a way to instigate the enemy player they just killed. Its foundation was never rooted in the idea of sexually assaulting someone in a game. Sorry you fail to see this.
2. I do not struggle with anything, I clearly see the opposite perspective, I just think its laughable that you take it so seriously, so seriously in fact that you want real life consequences against players who t-bag, and that itself is laughable, ludicrous, and ridiculous to the nth degree.
I think its hilarious you assert that myself or t-baggers are paranoid...lol you are the ones who think someone is sexually assaulting you in game.
For one thing, it was absolutely rooted in the idea of sexually assaulting people. This was never in contention. You're trying to cover up decades of real cultural use and it's just not going to work. It's completely transparent to all observers in the same way that you know, without prompting, that it's meant to simulate sexual assault. All this work you're trying to do to disassociate the action with simulated sexual assault on a purely theoretical level is just arguing in bad faith. There are no real instances of it being anything other than a digital stand-in for sexual assault. Nobody uses it in any other way. Your hypothesis is worse than worthless, it actively seeks to misinform in spite of a preponderance of real data.
Okay, so you admit to the second premise, which is that you definitely see how it's harassing and want to continue to do it anyway. We don't need you in this community until you mature a little and realize why that's bad. Harassers lost today, get over it and get better.Men'Do PC NA AD Khajiit
Grand High Illustrious Mid-Tier PvP/PvE Bussmunster9 -
LadyAstrum✭✭✭✭✭
✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
Why are you going to such lengths to defend simulated sexual assault? It's a game, and most multiplayer games have rules about acceptable conduct. If they're not to your liking then you can stop playing at any time. You don't have a right to force others to associate with you when you fail to abide by the group's social contract. There is no separation between "real life" consequences (getting banned from the game) and in-game action. The actions you perform in game are already performed under the assumed purview of the aforementioned contract. In fact, in this case it's a literal contract that you acknowledged before being able to play. That's what that whole Terms of Service thing is from the launcher.
1. I am not "defending" simulated sexual assault. But nice try in trying to label me this way to the reader. T-bagging is not by its definition "simulated sexual assault". It could be determined that way by some, it is also determined in other ways by others. The action in and of itself does not mean " simulated sexual assault"
2. The problem with the "rules" is that they are vague and open to interpretation. Vague means, not specific. There is no specific clause about Tbagging, and "harassment" is vague enough to mean anything, literally anything.
Teabagging is definitionally simulated sexual assault. There is no alternative interpretation. It is an action that simulates touching another person with your *** without their consent. Zero people are going to take you seriously if you can't acknowledge this simple fact. So yes, you are definitely pulling a lot of weight trying to defend simulated sexual assault.
If you struggle to see how that is a harassing behavior, then we plainly do not need you in this community. I think that's not the case, of course. I think you see that it is harassing, and want to defend it because you specifically want to keep harassing people without consequences. Also, if you can't trust that the enforcement of anti-harassment clauses will be carried out fairly, then once again, you're free to leave at any time. The rest of us don't have low-key paranoid hangups about extremely standard behavior policies. What's the alternative you want, for them to list every possible bad behavior that someone could do? It's an impossible task, so the "vague" language is fine as is.
I don't particularly like tea-bagging, because I think it's generally immature behaviour, but I wouldn't take it seriously enough... or crucially.... personally enough to define it as sexual harassment or assault. I honestly feel if someone responds this way to such a juvenile act as tea-bagging, perhaps that someone is too fragile to play online games. There are far too many people these days who seem to be unable to separate real, physical truth, from pixellated games.
As appears to be the case of the world these days, instead of reflecting personally on one's suitability to partake in an activity, there is instead a desire to control other people's behaviour. I find this creeping need to control other people in games or in life generally, quite frankly, insidious.~ "You think me brutish? How do you imagine I view you?" - Molag Bal #misunderstood ~8 -
Smitch_59✭✭✭✭✭I would post a link to the Wikipedia definition of "teabagging" but it's sexually explicit and would likely get me banned. Clearly the term has sexual connotations.By Azura, by Azura, by Azura!7 -
Minyassa✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Wow, congrats on actually managing to get an official answer to this. I tried in an earlier thread and instead of even *trying* to answer, they closed the thread because of all the people who decided to turn it into an arguing/baiting thread instead and *completely* ignored my repeated requests for an administrative answer.2 -
SilverBride✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Just start reporting them. Every one, every time.Edited by SilverBride on September 24, 2020 6:20PMPCNA10 -
Minyassa✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Pretty sure people tea-bag because forum threads like this exist lol.
In a way, that's true. People teabag because it upsets other people, which goes back to the definition of teabagging as an action whose sole purpose is to cause grief. If only there was some kind of word to describe such an action in a video game.
It's good that we now know that there is nothing that can be done, because trying to ask someone to stop doing that is just not feasible in a fast-paced environment where people are not sitting still to be whispered to and that amounts to giving the teabaggers free reign. That means that I can stop trying to coax the people who won't play PvP because of the teabagging into giving it a try, because I literally cannot promise them that there are any times they won't be harassed. There are several people that I know personally, including myself, who would love to PvP if it wasn't for that sort of gross behavior in the player base. I have been a little more apt to ignore it as I can just judge the player to be a worthless person and move on without it affecting my mood but I have friends who are sexual assault survivors that just nope right out of opting in to a situation where they are likely to be reminded of that during play time.9 -
Gaggin✭✭✭✭I am confused on the "if they ask you to stop you should stop" part. What if you have them on ignore? I'd imagine ppl who complain about this are on alot of ignore lists, both ingame and irl.
However I have yet to get one request to stop, usually i get hate whispers cslling me names and telling me to kill myself, all of which are worse than using an ingame mechanic.4 -
Psiion✭✭✭✭Greetings,
We have removed quite a few posts and would like to remind everyone that Baiting is against the Forum's Community Rules, as stated below:
Remember to keep the Community Rules in mind when posting or replying on the Forums.Trolling or Baiting: The act of trolling is defined as something that is created for the intent to provoke conflict, shock others, or to elicit a strong negative or emotional reaction. It’s okay and very normal to disagree with others, and even to debate, but provoking conflict, baiting, inciting, mocking, etc. is never acceptable in the official The Elder Scrolls Online community. If you do not have something constructive or meaningful to add to a discussion, we strongly recommend you refrain from posting in that thread, and find another discussion to participate in instead. It is also not constructive or helpful to publicly call out others and accuse them of trolling, or call them a troll—please refrain from doing so. If you genuinely believe someone is trolling, please report the post or thread to the ESO Team, and leave it at that.0 -
Fuzzybrick✭✭✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
Why are you going to such lengths to defend simulated sexual assault? It's a game, and most multiplayer games have rules about acceptable conduct. If they're not to your liking then you can stop playing at any time. You don't have a right to force others to associate with you when you fail to abide by the group's social contract. There is no separation between "real life" consequences (getting banned from the game) and in-game action. The actions you perform in game are already performed under the assumed purview of the aforementioned contract. In fact, in this case it's a literal contract that you acknowledged before being able to play. That's what that whole Terms of Service thing is from the launcher.
1. I am not "defending" simulated sexual assault. But nice try in trying to label me this way to the reader. T-bagging is not by its definition "simulated sexual assault". It could be determined that way by some, it is also determined in other ways by others. The action in and of itself does not mean " simulated sexual assault"
2. The problem with the "rules" is that they are vague and open to interpretation. Vague means, not specific. There is no specific clause about Tbagging, and "harassment" is vague enough to mean anything, literally anything.
Teabagging is definitionally simulated sexual assault. There is no alternative interpretation. It is an action that simulates touching another person with your *** without their consent. Zero people are going to take you seriously if you can't acknowledge this simple fact. So yes, you are definitely pulling a lot of weight trying to defend simulated sexual assault.
If you struggle to see how that is a harassing behavior, then we plainly do not need you in this community. I think that's not the case, of course. I think you see that it is harassing, and want to defend it because you specifically want to keep harassing people without consequences. Also, if you can't trust that the enforcement of anti-harassment clauses will be carried out fairly, then once again, you're free to leave at any time. The rest of us don't have low-key paranoid hangups about extremely standard behavior policies. What's the alternative you want, for them to list every possible bad behavior that someone could do? It's an impossible task, so the "vague" language is fine as is.
Touching without consent?
Ok...
With that logic, I'm headed into IC to do my quests... NO BODY TOUCH ME! I'm not there to pvp, I just want to do my quests and be done... I'll get back to you with how it goes.
Relax, don't have an aneurysm.
And enjoy some awkward elder scrolls lore
The Thirty-Six Lessons of Vivec, Sermon Fourteen
by Vivec
Vivec lay with Molag Bal for eighty days and eight, though headless. In that time, the Prince placed the warrior-poet's feet back and filled them with the blood of Daedra. In this way Vivec's giant-form remained forever harmless to good earth. The Pomegranate Banquet brought many spirits back from the dead so that the sons and daughters of the union had much to eat besides fruit."A TROLL, HUH? WELL, THERE'S ONLY ONE SOLUTION FOR THAT, DESTROY ALL THE BRIDGES IN THE WORLD!"-- Uncle Grandpa
VR 16 Stamina Templar
VR 16 Magicka Templar
VR 16 Magicka NB
VR 16 Stamina DK
VR 16 Magicka DK
VR 16 Stamina Sorc
VR 16 Magicka Sorc5 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭SilverBride wrote: »Just start reporting them. Every one, every time.
Or you could do as Gina says, and ask them to stop, then report if it continues or escalates via whispers.
I see a lot of people wanting to go "its always wrong!" when we just got the official answer that "context is very important."
ZOS' stance makes sense for a gesture that is both a well-known and common PVP gamer taunt AND a sexualized gesture. It can be used in good fun or as a generic taunt, as well as it can be considered a form of harassment - all depending on the mindset of the player its done to. Repeated usage or escalation when asked to stop is what takes it into clear-cut TOS-breaking harassment.4 -
Mariusghost84✭✭✭✭✭I love teabagging ppl that deserve it then get entertained by the hate whispers. 👍4 -
Recremen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Fuzzybrick wrote: »ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
Why are you going to such lengths to defend simulated sexual assault? It's a game, and most multiplayer games have rules about acceptable conduct. If they're not to your liking then you can stop playing at any time. You don't have a right to force others to associate with you when you fail to abide by the group's social contract. There is no separation between "real life" consequences (getting banned from the game) and in-game action. The actions you perform in game are already performed under the assumed purview of the aforementioned contract. In fact, in this case it's a literal contract that you acknowledged before being able to play. That's what that whole Terms of Service thing is from the launcher.
1. I am not "defending" simulated sexual assault. But nice try in trying to label me this way to the reader. T-bagging is not by its definition "simulated sexual assault". It could be determined that way by some, it is also determined in other ways by others. The action in and of itself does not mean " simulated sexual assault"
2. The problem with the "rules" is that they are vague and open to interpretation. Vague means, not specific. There is no specific clause about Tbagging, and "harassment" is vague enough to mean anything, literally anything.
Teabagging is definitionally simulated sexual assault. There is no alternative interpretation. It is an action that simulates touching another person with your *** without their consent. Zero people are going to take you seriously if you can't acknowledge this simple fact. So yes, you are definitely pulling a lot of weight trying to defend simulated sexual assault.
If you struggle to see how that is a harassing behavior, then we plainly do not need you in this community. I think that's not the case, of course. I think you see that it is harassing, and want to defend it because you specifically want to keep harassing people without consequences. Also, if you can't trust that the enforcement of anti-harassment clauses will be carried out fairly, then once again, you're free to leave at any time. The rest of us don't have low-key paranoid hangups about extremely standard behavior policies. What's the alternative you want, for them to list every possible bad behavior that someone could do? It's an impossible task, so the "vague" language is fine as is.
Touching without consent?
Ok...
With that logic, I'm headed into IC to do my quests... NO BODY TOUCH ME! I'm not there to pvp, I just want to do my quests and be done... I'll get back to you with how it goes.
Relax, don't have an aneurysm.
And enjoy some awkward elder scrolls lore
The Thirty-Six Lessons of Vivec, Sermon Fourteen
by Vivec
Vivec lay with Molag Bal for eighty days and eight, though headless. In that time, the Prince placed the warrior-poet's feet back and filled them with the blood of Daedra. In this way Vivec's giant-form remained forever harmless to good earth. The Pomegranate Banquet brought many spirits back from the dead so that the sons and daughters of the union had much to eat besides fruit.
If you go into a PvP zone then there is no expectation of not getting into combat with other players. It's the selling point of the DLC. If that's not up your alley, it's a simple decision to not buy it. However, no part of this game is sold as a sexual assault simulator. It's a simple matter to abide by the community rules and not try to bring that into the game.Men'Do PC NA AD Khajiit
Grand High Illustrious Mid-Tier PvP/PvE Bussmunster7 -
SpiderKnight✭✭✭✭✭
✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
Why are you going to such lengths to defend simulated sexual assault? It's a game, and most multiplayer games have rules about acceptable conduct. If they're not to your liking then you can stop playing at any time. You don't have a right to force others to associate with you when you fail to abide by the group's social contract. There is no separation between "real life" consequences (getting banned from the game) and in-game action. The actions you perform in game are already performed under the assumed purview of the aforementioned contract. In fact, in this case it's a literal contract that you acknowledged before being able to play. That's what that whole Terms of Service thing is from the launcher.
1. I am not "defending" simulated sexual assault. But nice try in trying to label me this way to the reader. T-bagging is not by its definition "simulated sexual assault". It could be determined that way by some, it is also determined in other ways by others. The action in and of itself does not mean " simulated sexual assault"
2. The problem with the "rules" is that they are vague and open to interpretation. Vague means, not specific. There is no specific clause about Tbagging, and "harassment" is vague enough to mean anything, literally anything.
Reading through your last few posts, you sure sound like you're defending it. If t-bagging irl is a sexual thing, then it is absolutely simulated sexual assault in the game. There's no way to defend that as wrong.6 -
scorpius2k1✭✭✭✭✭
✭
🌎 PC/NA
🐧 Linux (Arch)
🧑💻 ESO Addon Dev
⚔️ Stamplar | Magplar | Stamcro | Magsorc | Magcro Healer4 -
Fuzzybrick✭✭✭Fuzzybrick wrote: »ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
Why are you going to such lengths to defend simulated sexual assault? It's a game, and most multiplayer games have rules about acceptable conduct. If they're not to your liking then you can stop playing at any time. You don't have a right to force others to associate with you when you fail to abide by the group's social contract. There is no separation between "real life" consequences (getting banned from the game) and in-game action. The actions you perform in game are already performed under the assumed purview of the aforementioned contract. In fact, in this case it's a literal contract that you acknowledged before being able to play. That's what that whole Terms of Service thing is from the launcher.
1. I am not "defending" simulated sexual assault. But nice try in trying to label me this way to the reader. T-bagging is not by its definition "simulated sexual assault". It could be determined that way by some, it is also determined in other ways by others. The action in and of itself does not mean " simulated sexual assault"
2. The problem with the "rules" is that they are vague and open to interpretation. Vague means, not specific. There is no specific clause about Tbagging, and "harassment" is vague enough to mean anything, literally anything.
Teabagging is definitionally simulated sexual assault. There is no alternative interpretation. It is an action that simulates touching another person with your *** without their consent. Zero people are going to take you seriously if you can't acknowledge this simple fact. So yes, you are definitely pulling a lot of weight trying to defend simulated sexual assault.
If you struggle to see how that is a harassing behavior, then we plainly do not need you in this community. I think that's not the case, of course. I think you see that it is harassing, and want to defend it because you specifically want to keep harassing people without consequences. Also, if you can't trust that the enforcement of anti-harassment clauses will be carried out fairly, then once again, you're free to leave at any time. The rest of us don't have low-key paranoid hangups about extremely standard behavior policies. What's the alternative you want, for them to list every possible bad behavior that someone could do? It's an impossible task, so the "vague" language is fine as is.
Touching without consent?
Ok...
With that logic, I'm headed into IC to do my quests... NO BODY TOUCH ME! I'm not there to pvp, I just want to do my quests and be done... I'll get back to you with how it goes.
Relax, don't have an aneurysm.
And enjoy some awkward elder scrolls lore
The Thirty-Six Lessons of Vivec, Sermon Fourteen
by Vivec
Vivec lay with Molag Bal for eighty days and eight, though headless. In that time, the Prince placed the warrior-poet's feet back and filled them with the blood of Daedra. In this way Vivec's giant-form remained forever harmless to good earth. The Pomegranate Banquet brought many spirits back from the dead so that the sons and daughters of the union had much to eat besides fruit.
If you go into a PvP zone then there is no expectation of not getting into combat with other players. It's the selling point of the DLC. If that's not up your alley, it's a simple decision to not buy it. However, no part of this game is sold as a sexual assault simulator. It's a simple matter to abide by the community rules and not try to bring that into the game.
I believe you're living in a "dragon break""A TROLL, HUH? WELL, THERE'S ONLY ONE SOLUTION FOR THAT, DESTROY ALL THE BRIDGES IN THE WORLD!"-- Uncle Grandpa
VR 16 Stamina Templar
VR 16 Magicka Templar
VR 16 Magicka NB
VR 16 Stamina DK
VR 16 Magicka DK
VR 16 Stamina Sorc
VR 16 Magicka Sorc1 -
Raideen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭SpiderKnight wrote: »ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »As with many things in-game, context is very important. The act of standing and squatting over another NPC or character to teabag them can be considered a form of harassment which can be a violation of the Terms of Service (ToS). As with all forms of harassment, if a player asks you to stop a behavior, you need to stop. If you continue to teabag someone that asks you to stop, that is a violation of the ToS and may lead to your account being suspended or even permanently banned. Hope this helps clear things up
I understand this is the official rule, then. Fine, I'll accept it, since there's no choice in it.
I merely find it sad that a simulated sexual assault is authorized as long as "it stop when the victim asks".
The first teabag, before the "no" is still always non-consensual, however.. that's worth mentionning
So is killing in game. I have never once given consent for someone to kill me in game. Game is the key word.
Loaded argument.- You come PvP with the possibility of being killed (implicit consent). You don't come PvP with the possibility of being assaulted sexually (no consent).
- No victim of murder will re-live traumatic memory.
Loaded argument.
1. There is no such thing as being assaulted sexually in pvp.
2. Nope, they just cease to exist period and the entirety of their reach into the world, family and friends is affected.
You make no point at all, sorry.- Teabag IS a simulated sexual assault, wheter you want it or not.
- So, families of victims, who would be affected, don't come in PvP, since they know what to expect.
You made no point at all. This is a game, if something IN GAME affects you IRL, then it's probably best to seek help or hit the power button until you are no longer feeling anxious about the situation.
By your logic. I could claim sexual harassment when someone with the dutchess personality interacts with me. I find it offensive and sexually leading. /point emotes could also be seen as harassment. Someone speaking to me when I am in the middle of a conversation can be seen as harassment. Someone talking to me without my consent can be seen as harassment.
I am concerned about CV19, perhaps we should also social distance in game. Ensure players are always 6 simulated feet apart. I also want a "Consent" check box to allow someone to speak to me. I don't want random tells.
No one in the history of internet has one part of an argument convinced the other it was wrong.
I'll leave you to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. You can not expect a to have a free society and in the same breath ensure that everyone is "safe" from any and all types of prospective encounters. They are in practice almost mutually exclusive.
First, it is an opinion.
Second, don't throw "free society" around like that. You misuse it. We have rules and law to protect everyone. They do not make society "less" free.
1st, no it is not an opinion, its a very basic observable fact.
2nd. I am not throwing "Free society" around. In your posts you assert that changes must be made, and punishment enacted against those who choose to emote in game. Its a GAME, this is an important distinction from real life. You are asserting that REAL LIFE actions should be made for something that happens IN A GAME. That is by its very definition Orwellian. It is in fact stripping away freedoms and its a very slippery slope. This is why the 1st amendment exists and why it is so important and why it must not be treaded on.
I can clearly see the path this leads down to, I am sorry you cant see it but this much I can tell you, it's not going to be rainbows and unicorns like you think it will be.
Why are you going to such lengths to defend simulated sexual assault? It's a game, and most multiplayer games have rules about acceptable conduct. If they're not to your liking then you can stop playing at any time. You don't have a right to force others to associate with you when you fail to abide by the group's social contract. There is no separation between "real life" consequences (getting banned from the game) and in-game action. The actions you perform in game are already performed under the assumed purview of the aforementioned contract. In fact, in this case it's a literal contract that you acknowledged before being able to play. That's what that whole Terms of Service thing is from the launcher.
1. I am not "defending" simulated sexual assault. But nice try in trying to label me this way to the reader. T-bagging is not by its definition "simulated sexual assault". It could be determined that way by some, it is also determined in other ways by others. The action in and of itself does not mean " simulated sexual assault"
2. The problem with the "rules" is that they are vague and open to interpretation. Vague means, not specific. There is no specific clause about Tbagging, and "harassment" is vague enough to mean anything, literally anything.
Reading through your last few posts, you sure sound like you're defending it. If t-bagging irl is a sexual thing, then it is absolutely simulated sexual assault in the game. There's no way to defend that as wrong.
Then go read them again, I am not defending t-bagging, however I am against RL action taken against a player for something that is done in game, and has been used for decades in the PVP environment as a taunt. It's a rare day that the person T-bagging is doing so against a SPECIFIC PLAYER, meaning focused or "harassment". Others have said it best in this thread, but overall t-bagging is nothing more than a taunt, has nothing to do with sexual harassment and is simply part of the pvp environment regardless of the genre of the game. MY issue is people policing an innocent action that has real life consequences all because they, let me say that again THEY allowed it to get to them.
I said it before but apparently it needs repeating.
"sticks and stones may break my bones, but works will never hurt me". Do you know what that means? The power of the word does not come from the person saying it, it comes from the person hearing it. If someone calls you a nasty word, you can either let it get to you and grow grey hair, or you can shrug it off knowing the intent was just to incite. This is the exact same thing with t-bagging. You can either let it get to you, or you can shrug it off. Regardless, there is no reason someone should be banned in pvp for t-bagging (unless it IS undeniable, focused harassment).6 -
karliahquinn✭✭✭You don't get AP for teabagging, use those collective seconds over the day to do something useful for your alliance2
This discussion has been closed.