I have a question regard how subjective 'hate speech' is determined, and if a code of conduct violation means removal of ability to download $10,000 worth of purchases when this "code of conduct" was not agreed to at the time of purchase. What justification would you have to remove a user ability to download what they bought, when it would be GOG that broke contract with the purchaser?
For instance. Say a person does not agree with your current forced contract, and wishes to remain having the ability to download all their purchased software under the original agreement by which it was purchased? How do you accommodate those who do not accept this 'proposed' agreement?
Would GOG give such a person reasonable time (as understood legally) to backup their purchases before permanent banning, and what recourse do current users have, if they don't agree to this forced agreement? After all 'hate speech' is illegal in some countries, and would be defined as a 'major violation' resulting in permanent ban, and I'm assuming that if you don't agree with the new code of conduct, your account would be deactivated?

This is of course a thought experiment, and I would like to know how GOG would handle such a case.

There is already a thread about this:

https://www.gog.com/forum/general/updated_gog_user_agreement_and_other_terms

I disagree, this is not the same as a thread just discussing peoples problems with the agreement.
I'm asking GOG to tell me how they would handle this situation.
As an 18 year customer with over 600 purchases, I think I deserve a moment of their time.

Then email them about it. You're not going to get response this way.

GOG needs to CLEARLY define what they mean by "hate speech"...

... and...

... CLEARLY show the steps on the process of how a member loses their ability to access / post on the forum... and also (possibly most importantly) CLEARLY show the steps of how a member loses access to their purchased games.

Yes, GOG forum members should always be trying to get along together and treat each other with respect, but when you start having severe repercussions against breaking these rules, you must CLEARLY define those rules so everyone understands 100% what is expected. Otherwise members are at GOG's whim (or the subjective whim of lone moderators).

"No threats" is clear. "No harassment" is pretty clear. But no "hate speech?"

That needs a CLEAR definition so everyone from all of the various regions of the world is on the same page.

Vague rules are often used as threats (not saying GOG is doing this) meant to have a chilling effect (self-censorship) on conversation and engagement.

While GOG's heart may be in the right place, a corporation can't make vague rules with strong consequences and then just walk away... or... a corporation can in fact do that, but they have to expect an exodus of members / customers.

I did.

Well then, you'll be rolling the dice and playing solitaire for a while. It could take up to 2 days-5 weeks for you to get a prescient, coherent reply. None of us are psychic and cannot intone the intent of GOG's policy changes.

I think they'd start with a forum ban rather than a whole account ban.

It's quite simple, hate speech is speech they don't like.

its pretty much this to be honest, which "hate speech" being so vague and undefined its pretty much open to the interpretation of the moderator looking at the case, so if personally that moderator finds it to be hate speech then to all definitions under GOG's new rules. it is.

and I am a bit uncomfortable with that to put it mildly.