New Terms of Service
 

Is this for real? This limits the rights of players and strengthens the power of staff, and even TAKES AWAY being warned, which has been something to happen on Graal for a decade. It gives the staff of UN, which I know some are not, more of a reason to be corrupt and do whatever they want. Although I do agree with some of them, I feel that the rest is nothing more than an act to give them more power then they already have over the players that occupy the server.

I must admit, these rules are awful vague in certain point-outs.

Also, I've logged on a few times onto the server with this agreement popping up, I do not stay on long and I've also logged out without accepting terms, but I do have one question; Why is there no right to deny?
Is this a Terms of Service agreement or a Code of Conduct?

Considering I do not have a law degree, I am not familiar with the said differences.

Not sure what the problem is. Pretty much ANY game ToS can be summed up in once sentence:

"We reserve the right to disallow access to your account at any given time."

Pretty sure they could jail/ban you before without warning anyways. Do you really think their ToS gives you more or less rights? At the end of the day your account is still being handled by a bunch of people who volunteer their time, have no obligation to remain fair and just, and play the same game with the same people they're meant to approach with an unbiased attitude. If a problem arises, contact PWA as Graal rules > PW rules.

I personally think that the globals need to take a look into this because it seems more like a Dictatorship than anything else. Do what I say, or you will be imprisoned.

Understandable, but how come it isn't addressed then?

This seems to just dictate what will happen if you are qualified for any action we've described here.

Could they not simply state that?

This is exactly the problem. They are trying to override the rules of Graal. I agree that if there is a problem contact PWA, but at the same time a player should be given the right to be warned to stop their actions before an action is taken. These new "rules" take that way, so you have to deal with an injustice while you wait for the PWA to handle it. Sometimes their fast, other times they are not.

Because they need a clause that says they can ban/jail without warning. People feel that because they pay money in a game that somehow rules don't apply to them, or that their account is worth more than a player that has no money linked to it.

"What do you mean that because I massed tons of porn that I was banned... WITHOUT WARNING!? DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY I SPENT ON THIS SUBSCRIPTION!?!"

I didn't read the entire thing, but what exactly concerns you people? Seems like typical stuff to me, and again ALL OF THIS APPLIED BEFORE anyways. They're just spelling stuff out for some reason. Pretty sure there are tons of people who have been banned/jailed without warning or even reason. Again, take it up with PWA if a problem arises. Just because they SAY they can ban you without reason doesn't mean that suddenly their rules > graal ToS, and that they can just go banning anyone they don't like(which again, they could do before these ToS were apparently updated).

So this might be a bit of an overreaction, considering these rules you are taking issue with have been the server rules which you could access by pming the npcserver "serverrules" for the past couple years... just now in gui form so that people actually know about them and can't claim ignorance.

I never knew about that NPC-Server pm business, might I ask how before GUI this would've been known?

I simply have an issue with the right to be able to both accept and decline, because you can easily do that in any other ToS i've ever dealt with.

http://mmohuts.com/wp-content/galler...craft-eula.jpg

Probably told you in the server PM that there are a list of commands you can send to the server, such as serverrules.

Not really. Plenty of ToS have no way to actually "deny" them. For example with movies if you open the case you automatically agree to the terms. Many games have that if you login/play you agree to their terms. Plenty of EULA/ToS sneak in agreement clauses with various tricks. But does none of this even matter? I feel people are getting worked up over things that really don't matter. People will just accept any ToS because denying means not getting access. Would you stop playing UN? Also forcing a person to a ToS or EULA or whatever without their direct input(ala clicking 'I agree') typically doesn't float well in court.


The point however is all of this is very typical MMO ToS stuff. They need a clause saying they can ban/jail without warning because every situation is unique and needs to be approached differently, and some justify action without warning. Even the Graal ToS has this clause in it.

The basic matter is this, they are trying to take rights away from the players that beforehand they had; such as subject to warning before a jail/ban. UN has always been known for corrupt staff, once again not all of them are like this, but this gives them more freedom to do whatever they like.

lol what? So if I had massed porn before hand I had to be warned before I was banned? What about CP?

Anyways it's something reflected in Graal's ToS anyways so you never had these rights as a player in the first place.

Again, standard MMO stuff. Don't get worked up over nothing. And no it doesn't give them the freedom to do whatever they want, it simply means if they have to do something about something then they can without worrying. And I say for the last time PWA and Graal ToS still overrule this anyways. They can't just go banning people for no reason.

All of this is just screaming overdramatic.

nice lets highten our enforcement on a dwindling playercount

smart choice guys a++

You're right Dusty, I suppose If I decide I want to decline, I simply don't play. I am persuaded :)

If you wish to not accept, then don't everybody, because it actually doesn't force you in the first place

The rules have been cleared up probably for the sole fact of making it easier for players to understand what is and is not against the rules. It probably helps GP/staff to be more unified in their actions as well.

You say it as though discretion and approaching each problem as it is its own problem is a bad thing. It's not.

But by the time you get a hold of PWA and get it reversed, players have lost time. This is especially harmful for players with Gold Only time and they lose days on their time on a server they like to play because of this.

Read my deleted message reason, it is not relevant as I decided to rethink my reply.

Maybe. But if this gets out of hand then UN is going to be in a lot of trouble. Do you think that multiple reports of banning without reason is going to be tolerated? It won't be(or shouldn't be... but if it's not treated appropriately then why play in the first place?).

Like I said. EVERY MMO EVER HAS THIS SORT OF CLAUSE. Just because it wasn't written out before doesn't mean it wasn't applied. You're not losing any rights, they're just being more transparent about it.

I'm all for discretion in certain issues, but it does not imply what issues require it or not. This leaves a big loop hole for staff to exploit. And I agree with your porn comment that you've had, that is not acceptable. At the same time of these rules, staff limits need to be set to avoid a Dictatorship, where what I say goes and if you go against me you will be killed.

This is true.

But might I ask how this changes for those who wish to argue against the persecutors themselves? Bring a PWA to cause a ruckus? That's inefficient.

I'd also like to state that this also does have small holes for players to exploit as well.

Small holes compared to the big ones the staff are allowed to exploit to their advantage.

I can't believe you guys are making a discussion out of this. Any server has the right to punish you without warning. Your warning is agreeing to the new rules. We all know what is jailable and bannable offenses. If you dont, read the rules...

lol UN ToS, awesome.

The GUI is pretty bad (too small) and wasn't even centered properly on my screen.

You act as though staff wouldn't do shady things before; as though they need to use holes to exploit in the first place, as if this is something that will be scrutinized under a legal court. If they wanted to ban you before without warning they would have. If they want to ban you now without warning they will. Do you think now that there is a rule staying they can, that if they do other staff will not question it? That PWA will not question it? If someone bans a player because they don't like them, and another staff questions them about it and they say "rules allow me to ban without a reason" and the staff don't do anything about , I've got a surprise for you: They wouldn't have done anything about it before. Nothing has changed.

Apparently you managed N-pulse. Surely you had a "ban without warning when justified" mentality. It's standard stuff.

This is from 347 days ago from the in-game UN forums.

Okilian
"If you pm the NPC-Server 'ServerRules' you will notice that the rules have been updated.

Please read them as you are expected to follow them when signing on to Unholy Nation. If there are any concern, feel free to message me here to discuss them.

Thanks"

These are the same rules that are being discussed right now. They haven't seemed to cause any problem in the last year they have been in place. The gui was just added in the (vain) hope that players (mainly new players) might read them.


EDIT: Also just made the gui bigger and properly centered it.

Why not just use a clientside swear filter so players can swear all they want and staff who are offended by naughty words don't have to look at them?

Agreed.

Those two can be fixed. Contact your local scripter. :noob:

This.

Even if the word is starred out, they will still jail you...

because that would actually make sense.

This exists (*SwearFilter). Generally, from what I see, another players feels harassed by the "naughty words" and then reports it to the GPs, or it's something going on in oms or mass messages, its not like the staff team are a bunch of prudes or something.

I'm not saying every situation is handled perfectly or every GP is perfect or anything, so please no sob stories, but I haven't personally ever had any problems with UN GPs ever regarding bad language, both before I was staff and since. Unless you are cursing someone out or being racist you are pretty safe.

I can confirm this considering I was once jailed for simply calling a GP fat.

I was jailed on UN for like 3 years because the jail script broke and everyone ignored me when I pm'd them asking about it. It took me participating the Era/UN Olympics to finally get out of jail.

lol

The only bans I allowed to happen,without warning, while I was manager was willful destruction of the server, deleting files, etc., and hacking.

Exactly. You allowed it, therefor there was a "clause" for it, so to say. If it can happen, then in a set of rules typically you should disclose that it CAN happen. That's all that's going on here.

That's two different scenarios.

Rick was protecting the actual server's stability. Which yes is the same goal as UN's, but I'm certain that the scenario of why it had been allowed could have changed whether a warning was necessary or not.

These rules are merely dictations of punishment for committing them, They appear to say that they don't need to warn you AT ALL, no matter the situation.

No it's not different. They would ban without warning if needed. It doesn't matter if it's for server stability, it's still the point that they would ban someone without warning them. UN is simply telling players that it can happen if it needs to happen. This is important because not every situation is the same. Massing porn for example. Maybe massing goatse would qualify to let them off with a warning, MAYBE(and that's being lenient). But massing CP? Does that mean because the rules say you're allowed a warning first that massing CP would get you off with a warning since it was just your first time? Do you think that's acceptable? No. Therefor the disclosure makes sense.

I seriously don't see what the hell all the commotion/confusion is about.

Goatse I'm certain would not be a warning at all. Last I checked the ******* is as offensive as any other part of the middle region of the body, back or front.

But back on topic: I think I'm understanding better, I promise my intention isn't to play devil's advocate.
Like you said, there's commotion and confusion, I'm merely on the confused portion.