Why are players like this not banned

Sitting here in this thread is making me understand many things about this community. Nearly nobody was sympathetic with the guy who was insulted. The responses are: it's normal, deal with it, close the chat if you are so sensible. Do you hear yourselves? Are you so sure there is nothing wrong about your statements?

It's a videogame not a MMA fight. Do you understand the difference? There is no title to win, trash talk in a videogame is just free toxicity. I can handle it. But some people don't, and it's not fair for more sensible people to have their game ruined just because of some toxic player.

Totallly wrong watch a hockey game they will discipline for racial stuff but theres plenty of trash talk way worse than what is in that chat that they let slide, because when you play in a competitive enviroment emotions get heated.

Now the issue with regards to the OP, if you cant handle the trash talk, dont engage with the trash talk. They stepped into the ring instead of just ignoring it, and started chirping back, which just elicits more response. Nothing said crossed a line, is it bad sportsmanship, sure but lots of things are on both sides, that arent punishable, so you just gotta move on.

That's sympathy.

People have given advice to try not getting so worked-up over something they consider insignificant.

The simple fact people have replied instead of simply ignoring the thread is already a display of empathy.

Don't you understand that?

What are you trying to do asking if trying to help is wrong? Make people feel guilty by using a victim card argument of some sort? That would not be very nice.

I'm not even taking about myself. I'm not a victim here. I'm just saying people should be more helpful and saying he is RIGHT about the excessive amount of toxicity he got. But he just got nearly ignored because the response he got was: you are too weak, ignore them. Ignoring a problem is never a solution.

Yes please give me attention. /s

I promise you, the intent is not to harm.*

Yes, there are people who say "gg ez" with malicious intent, because the act of putting someone else down is self-soothing.

But there are also people who say "gg ez" because the game left much to be desired. Like a person going back for second helpings, the act of taunting and jeering often elicits a stimulating response that satisfies those who felt the game was unsatisfactory.

For the latter group, offending people is collateral damage, not the objective itself. There is an acknowledgement that certain words and phrases (such as 'gg ez') are inherently harmless, but are capable of triggering reactions. The intent is to provoke like-minded individuals who get a kick out of this sort of banter, and have the conversation escalate from there. People who engage in this sort of behavior assume that those who can't tolerate it will ignore them or remove themself from the situation.

In this particular example, OP should immediately recognize that his opponents are not interested in engaging in meaningful conversation. Instead, OP chooses to entertain his opponents, in-turn signaling to them that their behavior is tolerable/welcomed.

If I was one of the survivors in this situation, and OP said "hey, no need to pour salt on the wound," my immediate response would be something to the effect of "you're right, i'm sorry. have a good day, gl next," or even extend the olive branch and try to learn a bit about them. Because, as I've tried to convey thus far, I'm not looking to put people down, I'm just looking to engage with other people that find this sort of behavior entertaining.

Whether or not the intent is to harm, I concede that the behavior is entirely self-serving.

*I don’t know the survivor in question’s intentions, so I’m speaking generically here to the point I was originally making.

Somehow I expected you to be better at reading than that.

Uh no, it's both people's fault but op stayed there and argued with the person instead of moving on which would have taken 0.5 seconds to click the leave button.

My comment started with "death threats are not the same as gg ez" and you opened with "the intent is the same". You're implying they're similar in meaning.

Anyway I'm not having this conversation with a bunch of people that get upset over things I've heard said at a children's football game.

"GG ez"

"Noob"

"My 4 year old sister plays better than you"

😂🤭

Yea telling someone to kill themselves is disgusting and supposed to actually harm people, saying gg ez is nothing like it means nothing.

You genuinely don't think players in scrums are trash talking each other on the field? 💀😂

Dbd isn't a professional setting, and that's something you're clearly missing.

I was never disagreeing with you, so much as trying to make you aware that the behavior is far more nuanced than you appear to believe.

I’m also not here to offer a critique or to pass judgement on the behavior, beyond the scope of “is it bannable?”

Whether or not it is ‘healthy’ is a question to be answered by someone with more professional experience than I.

I thought I’ve made myself pretty clear thus far, so I’m a bit thrown by your choice to mention legal terms. “gg ez” is hardly negligent. Where are you going with that?

It's honestly very impressive how many words it can take someone to say "I enjoy being a bully" without actually saying the words "I enjoy being a bully." Well done!

Calling out a bully isn't being a bully.

You've made it quite clear that you enjoy provoking negative reactions in others, under the guise of "finding like-minded people." If you are as reasonable as you claim yourself to be, you should easily be able to see how your behavior is harmful.

It was to take a jab at you, because you are deserving of it.

Random players in a video game, unless they have done something particularly egregious, are not deserving of it. Therein lies the difference between us.

Perhaps the reason you are being met with name-calling is because your admitted behavior warrants it. You claim we are ignorant, as though we are incapable of understanding the subtleties or, as you put it, "nuance" of your behavior. We can see through this veil of pseudo-intellectualism. (Insert "Skinner out of touch" meme here.)

All you've said can be reduced to a single statement: you say mean things to strangers after playing a video game with them, in the hopes that they enjoy saying mean things as well and you can befriend them and say mean things to each other. The second half of this sentence is fine (I do not begrudge anyone mutual entertainment like this) but you're using it as the justification for the first half of this sentence, which is where the problem lies.

Some people enjoy roughhousing as a form of mutual entertainment, but tackling a stranger after playing a game of chess with them in the hopes you'll both enjoy it would rightfully be classified as aberrant social behavior. This is analogous (but of a different severity) to what you've admitted to doing.

I did.

I didn't say that being one should be cause for an in-game ban.

I'm not judging you for enjoying engaging in banter.

I'm saying that when your opening remark to someone after beating them in a game is insulting outside of an understood social context where both parties enjoy such banter then it's going to be perceived as bullying, especially in a situation where body language is entirely absent. You are willing to effectively insult a random person in the hopes that they enjoy banter like that, without any regard for how this might make them feel.

And you don't see why this might make you disliked by your fellow forum members.

What happens in most cases when someone is being flamed in end-game chat and the person voices displeasure with the interaction? How often do you think that the antagonists are going to say "oh, sorry, I thought you might enjoy some banter, clearly I misjudged and overstepped." Do you really think this happens in even 1% of cases? No, the antagonists will take this to be a sign of weakness and double down, or they'll hit back with the classic "I'm just joking, chill out."

Now let's say that I accept your premise here, that you do not mean to aggravate the person you're talking to. How likely, in DBD end-game chat specifically when engaging with a person who finds this kind of banter from someone they don't even know to be over the line, do you think the they are to ask you politely to stop?

Your supposed de-escalation process doesn't work in this context. It might work in an IRL game where you can read immediately from the other person, before they say a word, that they don't like the banter, and sincerely apologize. Heck, you might even be able to tell from their body language how open they would be to such an interaction and simply not even try if you can tell they are already upset.

It does not work consistently in an online game where this dynamic doesn't exist, which is why you're going to be perceived as a jerk when you try engaging in banter with a person who doesn't like it. They've been around the DBD block and know what happens when they try to appeal to the humanity in the other person.

You can try to put the onus on the other person as much as you want. "Well, they shouldn't have engaged."

Or.... maybe you shouldn't antagonize strangers on the Internet hoping that they like it.

Do you think it's appropriate to try to open that door with an insulting comment to someone you've never met before and whose mental state you cannot judge by body language? This seems like the kind of thing you'd do after a few matches with the same player when you've had a chance to try to ascertain their mental state.

The difference between what you're doing in chat and what trolls do in chat is that you hope the other person enjoys it while the troll hopes they don't. This is a distinction without a difference for players who don't enjoy it, and they will (rightly) think you are a jerk after such an interaction. If this doesn't bother you then it sounds like you aren't a very empathetic person -- or, at least, that you value "finding like-minded individuals" more than the others' feelings.

"Worse stuff exists" is a poor justification.

There is where we have some common ground. People can find any reason to be offended.

All I'm saying is be mindful of how your words affect others.

Here's the thing, gg ez is a pretty innocuous taunt. If i feel like trashtalking i will start with something like that, it's a challenge, A "hey you wanna go?" If it goes by the wayside with no response it'll end there but if you respond, thats the equivalent of a "Bring it on lets go dude."

Thats exactly what happened in that chat, challenge issued, challenge accepted, game on. Nothing else that was said crossed the line no personal attacks, no threats, it was a group of people trashtalking about a game and the game alone.

Everyone's journey through life is different.

If I was currently the person I was at age 13, I'd be in @TheWheelOfCheese's shoes advocating for the righteous path.

I don't know what life was like for you as a 13 year old Pulsar, but in those developing years I dealt with many people who took advantage of a person's kindness and compassion. I was extremely selfless, and it was constantly thrown back in my face.

I'm a lot happier now than I was then, but I'm also a whole lot more apathetic.

I don't particularly care what others think about me--I don't think others should care very much about what people think of them. It has been my experience that quality of life improves as you worry less about what everyone around you has to say about you.

To quote coach John Wooden, "if you make the effort to do the best of which you're capable, trying to improve the situation that exists for you, i think that's success, and I don't think others can judge that; I think it's like character and reputation--your reputation is what you're perceived to be; your character is what you really are."

I don't disagree with any of this, but I'd point out that not worrying about what others think of you is orthogonal to the issue of how you treat others. You can not care what people think of you, but still treat others with respect.

What I'd suggest to you is to let the loser initiate smack talk in a match of random players. If you won, your opponent is likely feeling deflated and frustrated. As harmless as you may think it is, "gg ez" is likely to make them irritated and upset that some random person feels it necessary to belittle them only because they lost in a video game. This is where you come across as a bully, a sore winner. If the loser is up for smack talk, they will make that known.

Hey, I really do appreciate that.

And I'm sorry if I came across harsh at the start of the conversation. This is an issue I'm passionate about (perhaps somewhat unfortunately, knowing it's an uphill battle) and sometimes that gets the best of me.