I asked you to make this thread, why would you then get banned for doing so? This seems just a tad bit dramatic. =P
Anyway, that’s a good point regarding the meaning of “accept”. I’d say instead of changing it we could remove it entirely and defer to the “Global Rule” section, which immediately addresses the commitment to the rules as a whole.
- Global Rules
By logging onto your game account, you agree to the rules described on this page. These rules are subject to change without notice.
Note again here that this is asking a player to agree to the rules, not with them. In other words, you are saying that even if you don’t like a rule you will still abide by it. In fact, nowhere do we require that players agree with the rules themselves.
Is it possible to not have to indicate such a commitment but still play?
Possible yes, but doing so would render the rules useless. These only work if everybody is bound by the same terms. If a player didn’t commit to them, they’d be permitted to cheat.
If rules can be changed and each time you change them doesn’t this force everyone to have to click some button to indicate they ‘agree with’ / ‘agree to following’ the rules.
No, players don’t have to re-accept every time. This is actually what makes it possible to say “These rules are subject to change without notice.” That phrase wouldn’t be necessary if we forced players to re-read every time there was a change.
In any set of rules, EVERYONE must necessarily ‘disagree with’ at least some aspect of the rules (by sheer law of probabilities it is impossible that any single person can ‘agree with’ any set of rules)
I don’t follow this logic. I think it’s the other way around actually; given even a totally bizarre and weird set of rules, the probability that a single person would agree with them in totality would actually increase over time/sample size.
It seems an odd statement that every single person in our community “must necessarily” disagree with some aspect of the rules. That just doesn’t make any logical sense. It is entirely possible that a player is 100% fine with the rules.
I think it should eb clarified that we are being asked to commit to following the rules rather than being asked to indicate our carte-blanche agreement with the rules (which, again, can change any time)…
That’s not what the rules say though. No player is being asked to agree with anything, they’re being asked to agree to them. To your point though, I can understand how this isn’t sufficiently clear to a casual reader. I’ll consider clarifying language.
Also, to be clear to everybody here, we are entirely open to feedback regarding this kind of stuff. In fact, we highly encourage it as can be seen from a very similar conversation here and resulting changes here. I don’t understand where this perception of hostility/oppression comes from. Feedback and criticism is always welcome.
Anyway, @xeno, thanks for the feedback.