And isn’t it so typical of the players to interpret rules and explanations in biased, selective ways to support their own pet peeves and narratives? This is a perfect example of why I keep saying that Funcom should improve the moderation process – by providing post-moderation explanation and perhaps implementing a warning system – rather than keep changing the wording of the rules and adding more explanations.
More words just leads to more “creative interpretation” like yours.
First of all, what you quoted is not a rule. The actual rules are laid out here. There is no “rule about villages” in the rules.
Instead, the post you quoted is an explanatory post, and what you quoted is one of the examples it offers of what you should avoid on official servers and why. So let’s look at the example you quoted:
Notice that it establishes, right from the start, that the example has to do with the function of your claim. So if you build a village, but it’s mostly decorative, then you’re breaking the following rule:
As you can see, the post you quoted from was linked from that particular rule. It’s meant to give clarity to that rule, and it does so by offering examples – and reasoning – about what kind of buildings are often found in violation of that rule.
The rule isn’t “don’t build a village”, it’s “don’t build stuff that claims the available land without having any in-game purpose”.
This is an important distinction, because now you will be able to build a fully functional and livable base that also looks like an actual, live settlement. It doesn’t matter if that settlement is a castle or a village. What matters is its purpose.