Will the TOS be enforced on everyone that breaks them?

Account sharing is considered as "shady" by administrators because they don't have full access on user's personal information. If they do, it may cause more negative impact on the consumer side.
Generally they don't even want to hold such sensitive information or impress they do.

Technically they have individual contracts with each customer. It needs to be fair, but it doesn't matter if it's equal among all. We don't even want to get involved in "contract" just to play the game.

Btw having only indirect evidence does not violate the requirements for whistleblowing of antisocial conduct in general. Concrete, non-false evidence is still required regardless of whether it is indirect proof.

Edit
You must protect GGG in the first place to mess around with them. :P

Let him be; the said cheater (You-Know-Who) is very petty. He has the power to cause significant problems for GGG. While banning him would earn huge respect for the devs, that respect pales in comparison to the potential trouble he could cause.

"

SelkieTheSeal#5934 wrote:

Let him be; the said cheater (You-Know-Who) is very petty. He has the power to cause significant problems for GGG. While banning him would earn huge respect for the devs, that respect pales in comparison to the potential trouble he could cause.

I would love to see the showdown between Tencent and Spoiled Billionaire tho.

"

finisterre#5659 wrote:

"

Hazed_Parallax#0178 wrote:

7. Restrictions: Under no circumstances, without the prior written approval of Grinding Gear Games, may you: h. Perform in-game services during your use of the Website, Materials or Services for any form of compensation outside of PoE.

How did you read this part ?

I think reservation of rights shall not be deemed a waiver of rights. Otherwise, we would have to justify everything we do/we don't do and risk being criticized for doing/not doing so.

If they don't give the full access to their own property where they claim it is, there should be something dirty they are hiding ?

Edit
What you share is up to the other person to interpret.
You can change it later without them noticing, but it's still a matter of trust sharing, and it's up to the other person.

I have no idea what you think you're talking about, but "under no circumstances" is explicit and direct. It does not leave room for interpretation.

"

SelkieTheSeal#5934 wrote:

Let him be; the said cheater (You-Know-Who) is very petty. He has the power to cause significant problems for GGG. While banning him would earn huge respect for the devs, that respect pales in comparison to the potential trouble he could cause.

Not banning him will lose huge respect; it will be a very, very clear case of favouritism. Previous examples of favouritism in the scope of PoE have been received exceptionally poorly; take the existence of the streamer queue, for example.

"

Pathological#1188 wrote:

"

finisterre#5659 wrote:

"

Hazed_Parallax#0178 wrote:

7. Restrictions: Under no circumstances, without the prior written approval of Grinding Gear Games, may you: h. Perform in-game services during your use of the Website, Materials or Services for any form of compensation outside of PoE.

How did you read this part ?

I think reservation of rights shall not be deemed a waiver of rights. Otherwise, we would have to justify everything we do/we don't do and risk being criticized for doing/not doing so.

If they don't give the full access to their own property where they claim it is, there should be something dirty they are hiding ?

Edit
What you share is up to the other person to interpret.
You can change it later without them noticing, but it's still a matter of trust sharing, and it's up to the other person.

I have no idea what you think you're talking about, but "under no circumstances" is explicit and direct. It does not leave room for interpretation.

Care to describe the exact interpretation = no room for interpretation ?
For example, when you said "I have no idea", you should have nothing to say.

"

finisterre#5659 wrote:

"

Pathological#1188 wrote:

"

finisterre#5659 wrote:

How did you read this part ?

I think reservation of rights shall not be deemed a waiver of rights. Otherwise, we would have to justify everything we do/we don't do and risk being criticized for doing/not doing so.

If they don't give the full access to their own property where they claim it is, there should be something dirty they are hiding ?

Edit
What you share is up to the other person to interpret.
You can change it later without them noticing, but it's still a matter of trust sharing, and it's up to the other person.

I have no idea what you think you're talking about, but "under no circumstances" is explicit and direct. It does not leave room for interpretation.

Care to describe the exact interpretation = no room for interpretation ?

I have a feeling that English isn't your first language? "Under no circumstances" is a statement of absolute scope; there are no circumstances that allow for the behavior to take place that do not break the terms of service, period. That is what the words "under no circumstances" mean.

The logical extension of that is that there are no circumstances under which he can avoid the punishment for that action that don't require intervention from GGG to excuse that rule breaking behavior, because, as stated, there are no circumstances where the behavior itself is not explicitly disallowed.

"

For example, when you said "I have no idea", you should have nothing to say.

"I have no idea" is colloquially understood to mean "you're talking nonsense", and would not be used in the context of a set of rules. That said; I didn't have anything to say about the content of your thoughts, which is what I said I had no idea about. I responded to the content of your words, but I'm not sure your words represent your actual thoughts because they are demonstrably and obviously wrong.

What is the scope of absolute scope ?

"

finisterre#5659 wrote:

What is the scope of absolute scope ?

.... absolute?

All inclusive?

Without exception?

Infinite in bound?

Again; a native English speaker has zero issue with the phrase "under no circumstances". There isn't another simpler, more direct way to state the intent of the sentence - it is the most basic, obvious, literal way to state the phrase.

Edit: I looked back at your post history and you clearly aren't a native English speaker, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm not trying to make fun of you or anything like that; speaking a second language is very difficult and often context or native-level understanding is missed. What I will say is that in this case, the ruling is very, very, crystal clear. There is no possible way to excuse what happened in terms of the rules that doesn't require special treatment from GGG.

I am not included "under no circumstances" according to your interpretation.
I think I got my situation. Ty!

Edit
I understand the purpose of their statement is to avoid unnecessary arguments.

Edit2
Some additional context

Since "GGG's code of conduct by GGG" is self-referential, I respect GGG as the main body of judgment (so that they can be clear for things they are not.)

Unless there is a specific mention of the interpretation of individual cases, I would contact GGG directly by email (it will be on the record).

If you've noticed there was an inductive context in my remarks, that is regarding the handling of personal information (specifically "outing").

Btw, I personally see it as a mild abusive behavior (self-harming).

At the end of the day who truly cares about the specific actions of other players because this isn't an actual online game where the user experience is grossly effected by other participants.

I'd like most games to be "mmo" in the future for that true multiplayer experience and sense of self worth but never going to happen any time soon because too much money and time wasted on graphics and well constructed gameplay still.

Leaderboards in a non mmo are just senseless and no one should be proud of them, in any kind of degree if you consider the factor of actual player participation, direction and knowing.