I have to disagree. He had an issue at the time and asked a stupid question but the question itself wasnt vulgar or explicit. Its like a guy on EVE had in his bio "I LOVE NAZI'S" and got banned from the game. Although the statement isn't vular,rasist, or explicit but can mean so many things like maybe his wife is a nazi so it would be a true statement so he fought back, won, and was compensated for his troubles. Only difference here is that (as far as we know) the guy isn't banned from using his games only temp banned (oh and he's probably only saying he deserved the temp ban so they dont perma ban him). Either way its wrong what Bioware/EA did.Garak73 said:This is not a freedom of speech issue. I do wish people would quit saying that it is. EA/BW has every right to allow and disallow people on their forums as they see fit. So suspending/temp banning him is fine and even the guy who got banned admits that.
The problem comes when he is locked out of the activation servers. This is inexcusable but again, it isn't about free speech. They grounded him from his own games for 3 days...that is beyond their legal reach and also it is unethical.
If I buy something for 60s dollars and am not satisfied, it's my right to be an ass. It's my property. I can say I dislike it.FalloutJack said:BOTTOM LINE.
The kid was an ass. And EA was also an ass. But it will be EA that suffers more merely because it couldn't be the bigger man. You guys here talking about it are pretty much an indicator of that.
So, question is...why're we still having this conversation? There's nothing left!
Pretty much this, but there's an additdional problem.Garak73 said:This is not a freedom of speech issue. I do wish people would quit saying that it is. EA/BW has every right to allow and disallow people on their forums as they see fit. So suspending/temp banning him is fine and even the guy who got banned admits that.
The problem comes when he is locked out of the activation servers. This is inexcusable but again, it isn't about free speech. They grounded him from his own games for 3 days...that is beyond their legal reach and also it is unethical.
And I think that's bullshit. There. Those are my thoughts on the matter.Garak73 said:In the end he was grounded from his games because of behavior on the forums. That is the problem here.Sud0_x said:Just wanted to clarify for people, he wasn't banned from playing his games for 72 hours, he was suspended from the Bioware forums for 72 hours, after which he made that thread.
So he came back from a forum suspension only to discover he'd been EA Community banned and couldn't activate his game or play his old games with the DLC he'd paid for.
Thought I'd spell it out for the many of you who can't read...
Honestly some of you people are pants on head.. silly. Yeah you're silly.
At least do some fucking research before you go writing dumbass replies to people. Am I still the butthurt fanboy elitist? This shit is getting old.
Good day.
EULA's have some purpose, they can be used to keep an online community in check and allow moderation and banning for legitimate reasons (like cheating), but this isn't about banning because of cheating. This is about refusing a product because of personal reasons. If the OP had been banned from his games for stealing DLC or generally making the experience less enjoyable for others I wouldn't bother defending him.Garak73 said:So we agree.
Yes, I saw this stuff coming too. I made a fuss over the SC2 cheating/banning thing but I was shouted down, this is just a step beyond that. I am glad that most people are finally fighting back. It's about time.
Well... when you say like that... But what can the guy really do to such an agreement? It even says in the beginning that by clicking yes you have read and agree with all the terms? It just seems like an uphill battle. I know it is wrong what they did, but what can you do?Garak73 said:There seems to be this attitude that clicking "I Agree" trumps consumer protection laws, it doesn't.Hulten said:Well shit. I get the banning, but cutting him off from the game he bought? That doesn't seem right. I get his ignorance though. Not reading what you agree to is within their rights as long as you hit the yes option. I just see it as a very harsh punishment for something so small.
Though it is wrong. your hands are tied if you make an agreement to it.
Free speech just applies to the government making law not private companies. Wasn't there a thread about this awhile ago?ImprovizoR said:What they did is illegal. It's that simple. It's his opinion and his right to free speech.
Again, I said that EA was also an ass. The concensus I see here is that both parties lacked when one or both of them should not have. This isn't an opinion. This is what I see the thread coming to in terms of a conclusion. Neither side did what they should, so both of 'em are taking a hit in some way.Mcface said:If I buy something for 60s dollars and am not satisfied, it's my right to be an ass. It's my property. I can say I dislike it.FalloutJack said:BOTTOM LINE.
The kid was an ass. And EA was also an ass. But it will be EA that suffers more merely because it couldn't be the bigger man. You guys here talking about it are pretty much an indicator of that.
So, question is...why're we still having this conversation? There's nothing left!
Anyone who dosen't see a problem with this has to be blind.
They can revoke your right to something you own, my fucking government can't even do that.
Is it unreasonable to think he has the right to use the product he bought!?Eri said:Well if you sucker-punch a heavy weight boxer, you shouldn't be surprised when he turns around and clocks you. If you get sanctioned on steam, the sane thing happens, you're locked out of your games. If he's that unhappy with them, fuck if I know why he bought it.