Was it ever confirmed if "tea-bagging" is against TOS now?

SilverBride

BuildMan wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lord-Otto wrote: »

It's used to annoy your enemy and make him do mistakes out of emotion.

I'd like to add this. If the only way someone can beat their opponent is by playing mind games to annoy them so much that they make mistakes out of emotion... Well that doesn't say much about their PvP skills.

Strategy is strategy. All that matters is the win.

Good PvPers can win from their skills alone.

Casul

SilverBride wrote: »

BuildMan wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lord-Otto wrote: »

It's used to annoy your enemy and make him do mistakes out of emotion.

I'd like to add this. If the only way someone can beat their opponent is by playing mind games to annoy them so much that they make mistakes out of emotion... Well that doesn't say much about their PvP skills.

Strategy is strategy. All that matters is the win.

Good PvPers can win from their skills alone.

Perhaps it comes from my experience with dark souls pvp. Mind games are just another tool to be used.

rk1101320

You can tea-bag npcs, allies players, ennemies players. just dont continue if someone is asking you to stop but most of the time the person getting t bagged have to be t bagged

virtus753

rk1101320 wrote: »

You can tea-bag npcs, allies players, ennemies players. just dont continue if someone is asking you to stop but most of the time the person getting t bagged have to be t bagged

No one “has” to have sexual assault simulated on them.

SilverBride

You realize this has the potential to backfire on you.

Let's say Tbagr kills you and/or members of your group repeatedly, stopping you from meeting your objective, and follows up with teabagging. You are not necessarily offended by this, but you want Tbagr out of the picture, so you all report him. Tbagr may or may not be removed from the game over this, at the moderator's discretion.

Is this abuse of the system or just another "strategy"?

virtus753

SilverBride wrote: »

You realize this has the potential to backfire on you.

Let's say Tbagr kills you and/or members of your group repeatedly, stopping you from meeting your objective, and follows up with teabagging. You are not necessarily offended by this, but you want Tbagr out of the picture, so you all report him. Tbagr may or may not be removed from the game over this, at the moderator's discretion.

Is this abuse of the system or just another "strategy"?

It depends on context. If it works in their favor, it’s strategy. If it backfires, it’s abuse.

Casul

SilverBride wrote: »

You realize this has the potential to backfire on you.

Let's say Tbagr kills you and/or members of your group repeatedly, stopping you from meeting your objective, and follows up with teabagging. You are not necessarily offended by this, but you want Tbagr out of the picture, so you all report him. Tbagr may or may not be removed from the game over this, at the moderator's discretion.

Is this abuse of the system or just another "strategy"?

I doubt that will ever happen. I don't think the developers are against mind games and using enemy emotion against themselves. Just look at the description for Belly laugh, go quietly, and kiss this.

Belly laugh - Express your hilarious mockery of another with this over-the-top laugh emotion.

Go quietly - To a defeated opponent, express your concern-- or lack thereof-- by urging then to pass on softly and silently. Aww!

Kiss this - When words aren't strong enough to express your disdain, encourage them all to "kiss this".

These all seem directly encouraged to induce an emotional response from the enemy. Tbagging may not be from the crown store, but it serves the same purpose. The players allow it to mean what they want, and respond accordingly. For the person tbagging the goal of making the enemy angry is also achieved in this example.

TineaCruris

By the way, if you REALLY, REALLY, REALLY want to annoy someone who has griefed and teabagged you...you know who I'm talking about....the best way to get under their skin is to do nothing. Just stand by them for a second to let them know you see who they are, then go on about your business as if they are of no consequence. The best troll for a teabagger is to not do it back. There are other benefits too, like not getting sucked down into the gutter with them.

SilverBride

BuildMan wrote: »

Just look at the description for Belly laugh, go quietly, and kiss this.

Belly laugh - Express your hilarious mockery of another with this over-the-top laugh emotion.

Go quietly - To a defeated opponent, express your concern-- or lack thereof-- by urging then to pass on softly and silently. Aww!

Kiss this - When words aren't strong enough to express your disdain, encourage them all to "kiss this".

These all seem directly encouraged to induce an emotional response from the enemy. Tbagging may not be from the crown store, but it serves the same purpose. The players allow it to mean what they want, and respond accordingly. For the person tbagging the goal of making the enemy angry is also achieved in this example.

The big glaring difference in those emotes and teabagging is that those are emotes that mean what their description says they mean. While teabagging is using an unrelated movement, crouching, over and over to simulate an activity that's very definition is sexual in nature. The players don't allow it to mean anything. It is a known activity with a very clear meaning.

amapola76

Fischblut 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.

First of all, it's disturbing that you seem to be conflating "affection" with "sexual harassment," but let's leave that aside for the moment, that could just be a language barrier issue.

To address your main point, how on earth could it be considered anything *other* than sexual? It's the simulated forced contact of someone's *** with someone else's face. Obviously there are no criminal consequences here for this simulated act in a game, but the connotation is precisely the same, and it's clearly intended to be and is offensive. YMMV; obviously it's more offensive to some people than others, but the vast majority of people are going to consider this offensive coming from a stranger. (What your friend group or guild chooses to do, consensually, is your private business, as long as everyone's an adult.)

Maybe the real question for some of you shouldn't be, "will I get banned for this?" Instead, the question should be, why is this the hill I want to die on? Why is this what I care about? What is going on in your life and your brain that makes you really, really, really intensely desire to do something that you know is going to be offensive and likely even trigger PTSD for a subset of people in the game who have been sexually assaulted in real life? Maybe you could care more about, I don't know, playing the game well? Or exploring the interesting sights or meeting new friends? Or making lots of gold in a trade guild? Or lag, or skill nerfs, or twitch drops, or... like, literally anything other than this.

I know, self-examination is hard, but you know, maybe take a few seconds between loading screens to ponder, "Gee, is it possible I might actually be a bad person?"

[Edit to real-world politics]

Recremen

SilverBride wrote: »

You realize this has the potential to backfire on you.

Let's say Tbagr kills you and/or members of your group repeatedly, stopping you from meeting your objective, and follows up with teabagging. You are not necessarily offended by this, but you want Tbagr out of the picture, so you all report him. Tbagr may or may not be removed from the game over this, at the moderator's discretion.

Is this abuse of the system or just another "strategy"?

Obviously we're all just playing 9-D chess and these baggers are falling for it. We won't actually report your accounts. Or will we? Oh boy hope the anxiety of it all doesn't eat you up inside and cause you to perform badly in combat. It's just a mind game, honest, and therefore totally legit. Anyway do y'all have the names reserved for your new accounts yet? You know, just in case.

idk

I think many are missing the point of what Gina said. Tea-bagging itself is not against the ToS.

What Gina said is the will not close the door on the possibility of a situation involving tea-bagging may reach the point that it is genuinely harassment, and Zos will feel action is required. I am surprised Zos thought they needed to add more clarification to something that should be common sense, but they are smart to keep the door open to the chance someone will find a way to go too far.

Jeremy

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

What I don't understand is why companies don't take their ToS in the opposite direction. It would be a lot easier to enforce and let Game Masters focus more on actual problems.... like bugs, cheats, botting, etc.

All they would have to is add they are not responsible for any emotional effects the animations of their video game characters have on other players and that by playing this game you are agreeing and consenting to allow other players to use all manner of animations against them.

Problem solved.

Problem created.

I don't want to play a game that not only allows toxic behavior to continue, but requires people to accept it. And I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Nothing good can come of normalizing toxicity, in any situation.

Nah. Problem solved.

As I said earlier, I could easily consider animations that slaughter my character to death by butchering him with great swords "toxic". So this argument of yours that the game is supposedly normalizing toxic behavior by allowing players to crouch up and down on a player in a game where people are literally running around hacking each other to death is silly to me.

Now I know you are probably going to switch arguments suddenly and say that you gave your "consent" to this kind of behavior by playing the game. But that has nothing to do with so-called normalizing toxic behavior. So if you and others are so concerned about "normalizing" toxic behavior why are you playing a game where you are running around slaughtering other players medieval style? Because I don't know about you, but I think it's way more "toxic" to put a great sword through someone's head. So if you want to draw real life comparisons with this game there is no question as to which kind of behavior is more "toxic".

So why aren't you making the same arguments that this game is normalizing toxic behavior by allowing others to brutalize each other with medieval weaponry?

Shantu

What's so bad about banning tea-bagging? It's sole purpose is to humiliate. There's no question of context here. You either do it or you don't. It's not funny...nor fun...except for the idiot who does it. ZOS position on it gives them wiggle room to do nothing. If there was a clear, unambiguous zero tolerance of such behavior, I bet you would find many more people willing to play PVP. The constant refrain you hear from people who refuse to PVP is the toxicity of the experience. Most people despise the behavior. The unwillingness to take meaningful action against it only perpetuates the situation. It's not an integral part of PVP...and about as cowardly as making fun of somebody in a wheelchair.

anitajoneb17_ESO

amapola76 wrote: »

Maybe the real question for some of you shouldn't be, "will I get banned for this?" Instead, the question should be, why is this the hill I want to die on? Why is this what I care about?

^^THIS^^

It is indeed quite disturbing to have to always put things in the correct perspective in the mind of people who are so emotionally brainwashed and formatted already that they think everyone should disconnect themselves from the meaning of things and gestures.

This is a combat game. Winning is symbolized by our opponent falling to the ground, "dead". It's not actually killing, it's simply winning.
T-bagging on the other hand does not remove any health point from your opponent, it is totally useless within the game's design. So why do people do it ? To reach the human person beyond the character, on the other side of the screen. To hurt. Why the need to do this... ? Some see it as shaking hands after a match. For those of you who genuinely see it this way : find another emote or /w message. For everyone else, why hang on to something as obviously out of place as t-bagging ?

Jeremy

idk wrote: »

I think many are missing the point of what Gina said. Tea-bagging itself is not against the ToS.

What Gina said is the will not close the door on the possibility of a situation involving tea-bagging may reach the point that it is genuinely harassment, and Zos will feel action is required. I am surprised Zos thought they needed to add more clarification to something that should be common sense, but they are smart to keep the door open to the chance someone will find a way to go too far.

True, she didn't come right out and say "tea-bagging" itself is against the ToS.

But she did say if a player asks the individual to stop and they continue doing so it can get you banned. Which basically means it's against the ToS if it can be considered a from of harassment. Which opens the door to all kinds of silliness.

For example: what if a player starts jumping on top of my body and I tell them to stop but they don't? Is that harassment too? Or what about other players who role play as assassins and murder innocent people in my presence, which upsets me. So I ask them to stop doing it around me but they don't?

I think it would be wiser for ZoS to just to close the door on this entire subject of animations being considered harassment due to the emotional impact they may have and say that in their ToS. Their employees need to be focused on correcting bugs, cheating, bots... things of that nature, and not responding to complaints about certain animations upsetting the feelings of other players.

There was a time when being a mature adult meant that a person had learned how to not let petty insults and slights bother them. I think it's time we started getting back to that idea.

SilverBride

Jeremy wrote: »

There was a time when being a mature adult meant that a person had learned how to not let petty insults and slights bother them.

Being a mature adult means acting like one. Performing a simulated sexual act on another player is as immature as it gets. And is far more offensive than a petty insult.

I would love nothing more than seeing the ban hammer start dropping and this type of player eliminated from our community.

anitajoneb17_ESO

Jeremy wrote: »

There was a time when being a mature adult meant that a person had learned how to not let petty insults and slights bother them. I think it's time we started getting back to that idea.

Well... there are things that cannot be changed and that you have to learn to deal with - that's part of being "adult" (dealing with reality and its frustrations).
There are also things that CAN be changed and that noone should have to deal with. In those cases, it's better to eradicate/eliminate the problem, and being an "adult" consists in fighting the problem rather than living with it.

Does toxicity online is something that belongs to the first or the second category ?

What bugs me is why (some) people insist on belonging to the wrong doers (for the "lulz" !) when they could belong to the right-doers with so many alternatives available "for the lulz". All while shifting the responsibility onto other people for "dealing with it" and "sucking it up". Why not do the right thing in the first place, and what's so frightening and shameful in simply taking care of "others" and behaving friendly and not agressively ?

anitajoneb17_ESO

Jeremy wrote: »

So why aren't you making the same arguments that this game is normalizing toxic behavior by allowing others to brutalize each other with medieval weaponry?

This has been discussed already to the point of no return. Please don't start over again wit this. Bottom line is, ESO is openly a combat-centric game set in a medieval fantasy environment. If don't don't like it, don't play it.
T-bagging is the symbolic and graphical representation of a non consensual sexual act. ESO is NOT a p*rn / perv game and when buying and playing it, you do NOT agree to be confronted with this sort of depictions. Full stop.

Jeremy

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

There was a time when being a mature adult meant that a person had learned how to not let petty insults and slights bother them.

Being a mature adult means acting like one. Performing a simulated sexual act on another player is as immature as it gets. And is far more offensive than a petty insult.

I would love nothing more than seeing the ban hammer start dropping and this type of player eliminated from our community.

Being a mature adult used to mean both. Acting like one and not letting like petty things like animations on a video game get to you.

So we're just going to have to disagree about the seriousness of this "simulated sexual act".

DarknessShallFall

Getting rid of T-bagging will be nearly impossible. Almost ANY PvP game out there, that allows crouching or sneaking of any sort, will always have t-baggers. Not much you can do about it, they will have to probably ban more than 25% of players to get rid of all t-baggers at the current rate.

Not unless they make it to where you can't crouch and have a waiting period, but then people would complain about it being unfair. No matter what ZOS does, it will be considered unfair and people will complain. Besides, this is a game that is meant for teenagers and up. There is a lot of sexual remarks in certain quests as well. If you have issues with t-bagging, then why not complain to ZOS to remove that, and ban anyone who talks about sexual things, as well as politics, religions, race issues, and other things. The servers would be so empty at that rate.

Casul

I mean when it comes down to it this thread should probably just disappear. We got the answer and there's nothing more both groups can ask. The side that sees it as simulated sexual assault will never see our side, and we won't see theirs. Best to just accept the rules for how they were defined and move on.

PrayingSeraph

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

Just re-read the pages. I didnt see a refutation.

Look again. It's there.

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

However I would rather ESO be populated by teabaggers than with a bunch of puritans.

Everybody knows that the world is split into 2 categories : toxic and puritans, and nothing in-between.

I'm not looking a third time. I don't think it's there. For someone who has consistently been arguing on this thread(and older teabag debate threads), it seems rather silly that you wouldn't actually respond to my points. You could have *easily* responded to me properly by now instead of making pointless replies. If you can't be bothered to *apparently* reiterate your point, why continue on this thread?

PrayingSeraph

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

So why aren't you making the same arguments that this game is normalizing toxic behavior by allowing others to brutalize each other with medieval weaponry?

This has been discussed already to the point of no return. Please don't start over again wit this. Bottom line is, ESO is openly a combat-centric game set in a medieval fantasy environment. If don't don't like it, don't play it.
T-bagging is the symbolic and graphical representation of a non consensual sexual act. ESO is NOT a p*rn / perv game and when buying and playing it, you do NOT agree to be confronted with this sort of depictions. Full stop.

ESO being a medieval combat game has *nothing* to do with ethics of gameplay. ESO encourages and rewards murder, brutality, assault and thievery.

Also, ESO is rated M, with "Sexual themes" under said rating. So yes, people should expect sexual themes, and if they didn't, it's their fault they didnt read the label. If they don't like it, they dont need to play. And frankly, if teabagging bothers you, Stendarr forbid you look and read through Lamae Bal lore, where something far worse occurs...

anitajoneb17_ESO

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

Regarding your second point, I just edited my comment. Subjects and lore exist in ESO that are far worse sexualy. Lamae Bal and the lore behind her are far worse than teabagging. So yes, there are non consensual sexual acts depicted in-game without any player involvement.

What's it got to do with the topic on hand ?
Can't you understand the difference between a narrative involving fictional characters (NPC) and something that happens in real time with a graphical depiction and triggered by a real human to hurt/humiliate another human... ? Really ?

PrayingSeraph

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

Regarding your second point, I just edited my comment. Subjects and lore exist in ESO that are far worse sexualy. Lamae Bal and the lore behind her are far worse than teabagging. So yes, there are non consensual sexual acts depicted in-game without any player involvement.

What's it got to do with the topic on hand ?
Can't you understand the difference between a narrative involving fictional characters (NPC) and something that happens in real time with a graphical depiction and triggered by a real human to hurt/humiliate another human... ? Really ?

Okay that is nonsense. Teabagging isn't a graphical depiction of a sexual act. If you honestly believe that teabagging is a even remotely accurate depiction of a sexual act, I honestly recommend visiting a health professional to learn what is and isn't a sexual act.

The facts remains, when you buy ESO, you agree to buy a game depicting sexual acts. Some which may trigger you, including lore involving the main story antagonist and progenitor of the vampires. This isn't the type of game for people with said vulnerabilities. What is described in lore about lamae bal is far more disturbing than a player character crouching on a dead corpse.

SilverBride

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

Teabagging isn't a graphical depiction of a sexual act.

You need to Google the definition of teabagging. It is so sexually graphic that we aren't allowed to put it in our posts.

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

The facts remains, when you buy ESO, you agree to buy a game depicting sexual acts.

Blood and Gore, Sexual Themes, Use of Alcohol, Violence

Sexual themes. Things like the book "The Lusty Argonian Maid" and other similar references. Nowhere does it say, or even hint at "depicting sexual acts".

anitajoneb17_ESO

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

It's not. But of course, you could prove me wrong and an actual discussion can occur.

No. Because you're obviously more in the mood to "win" a discussion rather than understanding your contradictor's point of view (and that criticism probably applies to me as well at this stage). But that's not the only reason why I don't quote it nor repeat it. This thread (and the posts of mine I'm referring to) have been heavily moderated (simply because of the topic being discussed), although not deleted entirely. I've been particularly honest in those posts, unreasonably open (for internet standards) in the hope to be understood, so I don't want to go over it again, and I don't want to draw even more moderators' attention towards it.
Find those posts, recognize them, read them with an open mind and try to understand a different point of view - or don't.

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

Gina had made it very clear. Teabagging in itself is allowed, but harrassment is not. If someone asks someone to stop teabagging, the other player must abide. Context matters. So if this is such an issue to you, perhaps its best to avoid pvp or play somewhere else.

My understanding of Gina's post is quite different. For me it translates as :
"We do not want ESO to bear the image of a game that openly welcomes toxic players, and T-bagging is toxic behaviour, or at least, we're forced to publicly describe it that way. But we cannot ban everyone who T-bags because we'd loose too much money. As a result, we suggest you to first ask to stop before contacting us for taking action. Since it is practically unachievable, you're on your own and our image and wallet are safe".

Just to make things 100% clear, if I were ZOS I'd say exactly that. I don't believe this issue can be regulated at developer's level. I believe people have to deal with it themselves. Which is what some of us are trying to do here by expressing ourselves. Some people may listen and stop t-bagging, some (most?) people won't listen and will carry on t-bagging, and for those, I am tough enough to not let it go under my skin (as you suggest).
I am not one of those who think everything should be regulated by Mom, Dad, the state, the landlord or, in this case, the developers. But I'm glad Gina acknowledged that ZOS doesn't want to endorse the image of a game that sees T-bagging exclusively as good fun and that there's a more serious issue to it. That's already something.

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

I don't teabag, but I would cringe seeing ZOS ban players for such an act.

I understand - and agree to a certain extent (see paragraph above).
But what matters most is that you don't teabag.

idk

Jeremy wrote: »

idk wrote: »

I think many are missing the point of what Gina said. Tea-bagging itself is not against the ToS.

What Gina said is the will not close the door on the possibility of a situation involving tea-bagging may reach the point that it is genuinely harassment, and Zos will feel action is required. I am surprised Zos thought they needed to add more clarification to something that should be common sense, but they are smart to keep the door open to the chance someone will find a way to go too far.

True, she didn't come right out and say "tea-bagging" itself is against the ToS.

But she did say if a player asks the individual to stop and they continue doing so it can get you banned. Which basically means it's against the ToS if it can be considered a from of harassment. Which opens the door to all kinds of silliness.

For example: what if a player starts jumping on top of my body and I tell them to stop but they don't? Is that harassment too? Or what about other players who role play as assassins and murder innocent people in my presence, which upsets me. So I ask them to stop doing it around me but they don't?

I think it would be wiser for ZoS to just to close the door on this entire subject of animations being considered harassment due to the emotional impact they may have and say that in their ToS. Their employees need to be focused on correcting bugs, cheating, bots... things of that nature, and not responding to complaints about certain animations upsetting the feelings of other players.

There was a time when being a mature adult meant that a person had learned how to not let petty insults and slights bother them. I think it's time we started getting back to that idea.

No, teabaging itself it not against the TOS as you are claiming. Gina laid out a very clear example of when teabaging begins to cross the line into harassment.

I'm afraid I also disagree that Zos needs to treat us like unruly children because a few may cross the line and harass other players. There is no reason to eliminate animations that someone might use for harassment. Besides, it not possible to eliminate the animation for going into sneak (that which we are discussing here) unless we remove sneak altogether.

That does not make sense. What does make sense is Zos follow up these changes with actual action and eliminate the small percentage of players who harass others.

Edit: BTW, Gina did specifically say teabagging and spamming emotes is fine in Discord, look at the first page of this thread. She went on to explain that there is the context that those actions would cross the line into harassment. So again, teabagging itself is not against the ToS, harassment is.

anitajoneb17_ESO

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

Okay that is nonsense. Teabagging isn't a graphical depiction of a sexual act. If you honestly believe that teabagging is a even remotely accurate depiction of a sexual act, I honestly recommend visiting a health professional to learn what is and isn't a sexual act.

T-bagging IS a graphical depiction of a sexual act. This is sooo factual that every.single.link to official definitions of T-bagging has been moderated/censored from this thread right here.
It is a fact
- by commonly accepted / academic definition
- by the graphical translation of it
- and last but not least, by the simple fact that people would not do it if it had not such a strong sexual connotation.
- also please note that, while T-bagging can be a consensual act, in video games it is used exclusively in a non consensual meaning (when the "partner" is "dead").

Maybe denying undisputable facts is a better reason for seeking help than what you suggested. But I like to refrain from saying to anyone I disagree with that they should see a shrink. That's as unconstructive and childish an argument as can be.