Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs away from its site

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs away from its site

#141

Post by kevinpet »

kstrauser wrote: post #114
elric wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on where in the world you live. Also depends on the kind of misconduct. In general I'm of a mind that it isn't any of my employer's business what I get up to when I'm off the clock. If they can define "misconduct" in a sensible way they're probably free to add it to my employment contract, in which case I can decide for myself whether or not to work for them. Anything less is arbitrary nonsense and will likel…

There's such a huge grey area, though. On one extreme: I work at a desk job and it'd be insane for my employer to fire me for getting a speeding ticket doing 70 in a 65 zone. On the other: if I were shown in a CNN video carrying a swastika flag in a parade, I absolutely 100% expect I'd be jobless by the time I got home. I wouldn't pause for a moment at an employment contract that says the latter violates their rules.

Not in California. Political activity off the clock is legally protected.

Because it isn't ever actually carrying a swastika flag. It's supporting the opposite side of a current contentious issue like abortion.

Re: Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs away from its site

#142

Post by Alupis »

tw04 wrote: post #111
redm wrote: post #8

"The company said users will be able to report such behaviors but it may also investigate cases proactively, for instance if there is a verified news report that a user has been arrested." So we've arrived at "innocent until accused" instead of "innocent until proven guilty"? And if proven guilty, they will both be punished under the law, and again by companies like Twitch? If proven innocent will they be restored? W…

So you want the government to force private companies to continue doing business with someone they no longer wish to provide services to? We aren't talking protected class here, we're talking private companies picking and choosing who to do business with via non-discriminatory means. That's called a free market. Will they be restored if they're proven innocent? Maybe. Maybe not. Again, that's called a free market.

At a certain point, these platforms have such enormous, unprecedented influence and control over public discourse, that they aught to be thought of differently than, say a restaurant refusing service to a guy without a shirt or shoes on. We're clearly in uncharted territory, when it comes to the control and release of information.

Just using Twitter and Facebook for example - they've silenced the second-most voted for President in American history, because he isn't their brand of politics. Regardless what you think or feel about the guy, he is a former US President - we aught to know what he thinks, even if we disagree or think it's outlandish - no?

How can we, as a society, claim to value free speech, yet allow social discourse platforms to censor and silence political enemies?

Re: Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs away from its site

#143

Post by dkersten »

Bud wrote: post #36
voldacar wrote: post #28

The infantile hyper-moralization of online discourse, on social media but also elsewhere, is starting to get really, really tiring. Is there any solution other than total anonymity, keeping one's online and IRL personae hermetically sealed off from one another? What do you all think? Is this atmosphere here to stay or do you expect the winds of culture to shift anytime soon?

Private companies reacting to hate crimes is "infantile", now? Banning people for making credible threats of mass violence is "infantile"? No it's not. And you should retract that.

The problem is that the "online outrage mob" often defines "hate crime" as anything they don't like or hurts their feelings. Ie something subjective.

Now, I don't know how well Twitch define what you can or can't do. I didn't read their terms, the article states:

It said examples of this “severe misconduct” include terrorist activities, child sexual exploitation, violent extremism, credible threats of mass violence, carrying out or deliberately acting as an accomplice to sexual assault and threatening Twitch or its staff.

Which by itself doesn't sound so bad. All of those things are definitely things I would want to disassociate my company from and are bad. But I question whether Twitch is a good judge... I certainly don't trust a corporation and its employees, many who have their own views and agendas, to give a fair "trial" and due process. There have been plenty of examples of rogue employees pushing their own agendas in companies and there's no oversight. What is the appeals process like? How thorough are their investigations (and how well will they handle the equivalent of swatting)?

That's what the legal system if for, even if its not perfect either.

Re: Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs away from its site

#144

Post by bluefirebrand »

thelean12 wrote: post #37
redm wrote: post #8

"The company said users will be able to report such behaviors but it may also investigate cases proactively, for instance if there is a verified news report that a user has been arrested." So we've arrived at "innocent until accused" instead of "innocent until proven guilty"? And if proven guilty, they will both be punished under the law, and again by companies like Twitch? If proven innocent will they be restored? W…

I'm not sure why you say "arrived". People have always been fired for arrests at some companies. Twitch is basically their employer, so it's not much different here. Whether it should be allowed or not by law can be a different discussion, but we don't have to pretend that this is new

Twitch is closer to being their pimp than their employer.

Re: Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs away from its site

#145

Post by echelon »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #106
Areibman wrote: post #66

It's strange to see a company that once prided itself on active engagement with its users to find product-market fit antagonize its content creators so much. And as a user, it gives me the perception that the platform is just plainly unfair. (Plus the platform is unusable without Adblock). Top streamers have been banned or lost partnerships for playing their own music[0], stating controversial political opinions[1][2…

Your 2nd source links to Hasan saying "America deserved 9/11". Since not everyone will click on your sources, I just want to point out what you consider "political speech" for others to see.

That's a horrible and toxic thing to say, but thousands of teens on TikTok are saying exactly this and getting insane traction.

Two social networks with very different ways of handling their communities.

edit: My comment was fairly benign. What gives?

Re: Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs away from its site

#147

Post by ctrlp »

tw04 wrote: post #111
redm wrote: post #8

"The company said users will be able to report such behaviors but it may also investigate cases proactively, for instance if there is a verified news report that a user has been arrested." So we've arrived at "innocent until accused" instead of "innocent until proven guilty"? And if proven guilty, they will both be punished under the law, and again by companies like Twitch? If proven innocent will they be restored? W…

So you want the government to force private companies to continue doing business with someone they no longer wish to provide services to? We aren't talking protected class here, we're talking private companies picking and choosing who to do business with via non-discriminatory means. That's called a free market. Will they be restored if they're proven innocent? Maybe. Maybe not. Again, that's called a free market.

Would you be ok with businesses refusing to serve accused/convicted criminals? How about illegal immigrants? If the standard is law-breaking does it meet the definition of non-discriminatory?

Re: Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs away from its site

#148

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

marcinzm wrote: post #88
s7atic wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, presumption of innocence is first and foremost a moral principle. Our legal systems are reflections of our collective morals.

The moral principle in this case is that we don't think jail (or worse) should happen without being proven guilty. That does not mean we collectively believe all consequence requires proof of being guilty. Morals and punishment are not binary systems.

There's a point where this kind of ostracism becomes worse than jail. For many Twitch users, streaming is a substantial part of their social environment or even their full-time job. If I had to choose between a couple weeks in jail and a lifetime ban from working in my industry, or a couple weeks in jail and being banned from all my friend group chats, I'd take jail in a heartbeat.

Re: Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs away from its site

#149

Post by tw04 »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #125
tw04 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you want the government to force private companies to continue doing business with someone they no longer wish to provide services to? We aren't talking protected class here, we're talking private companies picking and choosing who to do business with via non-discriminatory means. That's called a free market. Will they be restored if they're proven innocent? Maybe. Maybe not. Again, that's called a free market.

I'm getting to the point where yes, I want to force these "private" companies to uphold civil liberties and principles such as innocent until proven guilty. I care way more about citizen freedom and expression than the concept of a "free market" which is a platonic ideal that has never existed and never will.

Sure it exists, but you need collective bargaining for it to be a level playing field. Content creators want to fight back against Twitch? Form a union.

Re: Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs away from its site

#150

Post by beej71 »

fX0rObfoMN4 wrote: post #50
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we've arrived at "innocent until accused" instead of "innocent until proven guilty" For a platform like Twitch, this is fine. They have a brand. They’re akin to a modern television channel, and television has always been this ruthless. There are lots of other streaming sites.

If someone who stream on Twitch does something bad off of Twitch, would people blame Twitch for that? I know I wouldn't.

Depends on what they did. If Twitch lets, say, the Unibomber stream video, it looks bad to advertisers (Twitch's customers). They don't want to be associated with that.

It all makes sense when you look at it from a money angle rather than an ethical angle.

Post reply on HN