Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event • Hacker News Board

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#291

Post by Latty » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 1:35 AM UTC

dextralt wrote: post #248

Latty wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between neo-nazis and democratic protest? The difference is content. I hate the tendency to fall back to arguments about free speech when that is not the point. Yes, of course everyone should be able to express views individually, but that doesn't mean I don't care about the content of what is being said. That doesn't mean everyone is entitled to the ability to ram that message down everyone's throat t…

Hell yes I support waterboarding terrorists. There's no way the definition of 'terrorist' will ever change. There's no way it will be ever done to me. Hell yes I support civil forfeiture with no due process. There's no way it will be ever done to innocent people. Hell yes I support the executive branch getting more and more power. There's no way someone terrible would ever be the President and use that power. and now…

Your first examples are all completely different. The government should not be able to punish the expression of ideas (usual caveats, calls to harm, etc...), no.

Beyond the government? It's just not that simple. The solution is compelled speech? If I run a company, I have to broadcast people calling for my death, for example?

Should Blizzard be forced to allow anyone to say anything on their show? What if someone starts promoting a competing product? How do you deal with who is allowed to demand airtime on their particular thing? What proportion of exposure are given bits of speech given?

I'm not saying there aren't issues with companies having control over speech—this case is absolutely an example of that—but you are pretending that compelling companies to allow any speech is simple.

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#292

Post by belltaco » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 1:36 AM UTC

falcolas wrote: post #229

jknoepfler wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Insofar as radio frequencies, internet domains, cable infrastructure and the like are effectively government induced oligolpolies, they are protected media as well. In general though, yes, you have no right to have a particular editorial published in the new york times on your behalf. What the press deigns to publish is protected. You're also free to start your own paper, or blog, or whatever.

> or blog That's exactly what this discussion is about - you're not free to start a blog. Running any form of web site on the internet requires the support of multiple private companies, which can and do shut sites down at their whims.

If it's just a blog couldn't you host it on a home internet connection using an ip address?

I doubt ISPs would easily cut someone's home internet off. Is there precedent for that?

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#293

Post by mustaflex » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 1:37 AM UTC

Video games are made by creators and there is an artistic side to it. People get emotionally attached to them and it's hard to remove this positive emotion associated with it, but when developers and editors treat it only as a money machine and disregard everything else it is like breaking up with your s.o. and the love is replaced with an irreversible hatred.

I think Blizzard has definitely lost their special place in most of their hardcore fans. The market has become global but so have the conflicts and whether they like it or not, sometimes they will be forced to pick a side.

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#294

Post by Latty » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 1:38 AM UTC

legostormtroopr wrote: post #197

Latty wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between neo-nazis and democratic protest? The difference is content. I hate the tendency to fall back to arguments about free speech when that is not the point. Yes, of course everyone should be able to express views individually, but that doesn't mean I don't care about the content of what is being said. That doesn't mean everyone is entitled to the ability to ram that message down everyone's throat t…

> No hypocrisy because what is being said matters. Free speech - for people you agree with. Well, I'm glad we sorted out that mess.

The government shouldn't be able to lock you up for your expression, but we are talking about if Blizzard can stop an employee from expressing a view on their product. How can you possibly enforce that anyone should be allowed to express anything in that context? How must time be allocated? Who must be allowed to speak? Can they promote rival products or badmouth Blizzard?

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#295

Post by belltaco » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 1:38 AM UTC

afranchuk wrote: post #256

cjbprime wrote: post #10

The huge question here is what's going to happen at BlizzCon in two weeks. There'll be 40,000+ attendees, cameras everywhere, there are usually Q&A panels, homemade signs for player support, cosplay, everything. How can you host BlizzCon when you're terrified of political speech?

Yeah that is really going to be interesting. My friend linked [0] to me. I'm not sure if it's getting around to a lot of people, but some of the speech/plans in the document are likely concerning to the organizers. I hope they don't overreact in anticipation. [0]: https://docs.google.com/document/d/19lgo0jxM5jYcPYvce-muR0JN...

Doesn't sitting down and refusing to leave when asked to, violate trespass laws?

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#296

Post by sterileopinions » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 1:40 AM UTC

nyolfen wrote: post #279

Pfhreak wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI, for folks who aren't familiar, Mark Kern's history also includes full throated support of GamerGate and being removed from a CEO role at Red 5 by the board of directors. (Allegedly for erratic and disruptive behavior.) It's been a really, really wild ride seeing lefty twitter and righty twitter hold hands and agree that Blizzard did the wrong thing. (Though for different reasons.)

> FYI, for folks who aren't familiar, Mark Kern's history also includes full throated support of GamerGate and being removed from a CEO role at Red 5 by the board of directors. (Allegedly for erratic and disruptive behavior.) how are these relevant to the subject at hand, particularly the second issue? it comes across like fnords

Because almost everything he said reads like a really generic right-wing narrative shaping about media manipulation, complete with conspiracy theory accessories. Like the most egregious one he included in that thread involves a total misunderstanding of publication dates and general time zones.

Don't read that thread and expect to learn much or gain insight, save for the fact that Blizzard really messed up here.

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#297

Post by belltaco » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 1:43 AM UTC

mintplant wrote: post #289

falcolas wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps not cleanly stated, but true. Blizzard quite explicitly catered to the LGBTQ+ demographic recently via an Overwatch promotion, a move that can easily be construed as political speech (and which was voluntarily censored by Blizzard in Russia and China). They stuck their feet into this arena, and are now realizing that making political statement can affect their revenue in both directions.

So, what, as an LGBTQ+ person, I'm not allowed to be represented in media? Because my existence is "political"?

That's what a bunch of people have been saying in Reddit comments about Blizzard allowing "political speech" for acknowledging the existence of LGBTQ+ people.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Blizzard/comments/dgodfz/we_wont_al...

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#298

Post by Latty » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 1:44 AM UTC

ditonal wrote: post #189

Latty wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between neo-nazis and democratic protest? The difference is content. I hate the tendency to fall back to arguments about free speech when that is not the point. Yes, of course everyone should be able to express views individually, but that doesn't mean I don't care about the content of what is being said. That doesn't mean everyone is entitled to the ability to ram that message down everyone's throat t…

I understand how people arrive at this position, but it's not a free speech position. You can't be pro free speech as long as you agree with it, that undermines the entire concept. You can't be pro free speech, as long as there are horrible consequences for free speech you don't agree with. If right-wing extremism and other factors are making people re-think the value of free speech, fine, there are plenty of compell…

Free speech is about the government not punishing you for your expression, not that all speech should be without limit or repercussion in general.

How would it possibly work if I couldn't be fired for insulting a customer at work, or telling them to shop at a rival instead. How would it work if news networks were required to broadcast my rant about whatever I want? Do I have to associate with the neo-nazi who wants me dead because I can't apply consequences for their speech?

I agree that this case is an example of unjust consequences of speech, and I think Blizzard did the wrong thing. It is not the same as being arrested and convicted for it, and it's not that simple.

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#299

Post by Latty » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 1:46 AM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #182

Latty wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between neo-nazis and democratic protest? The difference is content. I hate the tendency to fall back to arguments about free speech when that is not the point. Yes, of course everyone should be able to express views individually, but that doesn't mean I don't care about the content of what is being said. That doesn't mean everyone is entitled to the ability to ram that message down everyone's throat t…

> I hate the tendency to fall back to arguments about free speech when that is not the point. What you're saying isn't free speech at all; it's supporting the right to express speech you agree with and being ok with views you don't being taken down. In particular, free speech isn't "the point" to you .

Free speech is about not being arrested for expression. You are talking about companies being compelled to repeat speech, and that begs a lot of questions: what speech, by whom, how much relative time and visibility are different bits of speech given?

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#300

Post by FooHentai » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 1:48 AM UTC

cloakandswagger wrote: post #65

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #4

This is a crisis point for everyone who supports political free speech. Every corporation and business person is watching this to see which hurts their bottom line less, suppressing free speech globally, or angering China. As consumers, we must make sure that they get the message loud and clear that suppressing free speech globally on behalf of China is going to hurt their bottom line far more than China will. Otherw…

I agree with you completely, but this whole debacle has highlighted what seems to be hypocrisy in the general public's reaction to this. Remember when The Daily Stormer got kicked off CloudFlare and a whole host of other platforms, to the point that no one would take their business and they were effectively censored? The average take on that seemed to be a mix of "Free speech doesn't apply to private companies" and "…

>highlighted what seems to be hypocrisy in the general public's reaction to this.

I don't think there's a hypocrisy here. Private company removes someone from their platform because of a position they've taken that the company disagrees with, and members of the public react in line with their own values.

In the example of Cloudflare & TDS, members of the public that disagree with TDS generally support Cloudflare. Those that support TDS or take a stricter view of the private sector's duty to facilitate free speech criticize Cloudflare.

In the example of Blizzard & BC, members of the public that disagree with BC generally support Blizzard. Those that support BC or take a stricter view of the private sector's duty to facilitate free speech criticize Blizzard.

The difference is the portion of the public agreeing or disagreeing in each case. Which is not hypocracy because TDS and BC do not espouse the same views.