And the trouble with that common argument put forward by many, is the people you are referring to don't actually think, or act, as though their subscription contribution entitles them to make policy. The argument is IMO how they should be treated when they act out, if they should be heard, and not punished for words and actions regarding that. Some critical posts, a few avatars and signatures - how exactly is that "calling the shots". It's a campaign for change, not a gun to the head demanding changes based on being one of thousands of others. Again, IMO every customer is a commodity, and even if kid gloves are required when dealing with the troublesome ones, actually removing them from a critical part of your business over bbs trivium, and risking losing them, is something I just don't understand.
Respectfully I have to disagree.
They were handled with kid gloves. As HTC as stated. As is the meaning of kid gloves as you are putting it here to mean.. they were asked nicely to discontinue what the HTC said was the offending behavior. When they did not comply, the gloves came off. That is the point of wearing kid gloves first right? To let the kid know you are being nice but that there is, in fact a big ole meaty hand simply wrapped up in that nice soft glove.
Unless you are using the term kid gloves to imply there is not solid structure behind the soft exterior of the glove. Point being.. if your going to treat someone with compassion or caring you are still trying to influence their behavior to get the result you are looking for. If they are unwilling to to change their behavior then, at some point, the gloves come off. Correct?
As you stated in your post here
Regarding the bouncer analogy, this is my opinion (I also did that job through school at the biggest rock bar in my country, over 1500 capacity). A customer yelling at the band from his table or the crowd "you suck!", while he's sitting there buying drinks for 4 people yet doing nothing else other than occasionally yelling his displeasure at the band - should I go over and crack him the head, and toss him and the other 4 people in his party out, while they're still pouring money into the business, and causing no damage whatsoever, even if other customers sometimes look over and take note of his stupid yelling? No. I leave him be.
You would not do anything to the guy yelling until he did x,y or z. (X,y or z being whatever you (as the venue representative) had predetermined to be the point at which to take the gloves off. As you stated here
If he gets up and chucks a beer bottle at somebody's head, starts a fight, pulls a weapon - anything that actually will have a negative impact on the business - one that outweighs his financial contributions or puts the company or other customers in actual danger - well, obviously he's going out the door.
Once he did x,y or z you then,
had to intervene without the gloves on. That's not something you wanted to do but it was something you had to do.
Here is the kicker to the problem - Chances are, the guy you treated without gloves on did not agree with you and thought those behaviors should be allowed. He either thought those actions should be acceptable or did them knowing full well that there would be consequences for his actions. (This sounds oddly like the title of the thread)
Here is where I think the disconnect is between HTCs actions and what some think. As you said
I equate the first part, the yelling, to the complaining on the bbs.
While you (in this case, a customer in the venue) equate the first part, the yelling, to the complaining on the bbs does not mean that HTC does.
I equate the second, the violent destructive action, to something like actively making cheats or trying to hack the bbs, something along those lines.
It's a BBS in this case and not a venue where folks can actually throw bottles, pull knifes or what not. Obviously, HTC does see some actions on the BBS as things that can, that actually will have a negative impact on the business - ones that outweighs a players financial contributions.
If a player can't do as HTC has asked or they even escalate the situation on the BBS or in game, then they are forced to do something they do not want to do. Show that person the door. They have stated they do not like doing it. Just the same as you did not like having to do it in your job as a bouncer.
It's another case of what some equate as acceptable behavior from their point of view as the customer not translating to the owners view of what is acceptable behavior.
