Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs away from its site • Hacker News Board

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

#211

Post by literallyWTF » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 8:51 PM UTC

Alupis wrote: post #142

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.

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 fo…

Are you seriously equating inciting an insurrection with “not their brand of politics”?

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

#212

Post by gentleman11 » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 8:51 PM UTC

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.

Why does everyone talk about the government forcing companies to do things whenever somebody criticizes a company policy? A company can be criticized without the speaker implying that there needs to be legislation.

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

#213

Post by justapassenger » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 8:52 PM UTC

fX0rObfoMN4 wrote: post #55

justapassenger wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should really educate yourself on what free speech actually is in USA. It protects you, from government limiting your speech (with some exceptions). Private companies can do whatever they want - that’s their free speech law, that was reaffirmed by Supreme Court in 2010. I don’t support twitch decision, but it’s their business, they are free to set their own rules. And I’m free not to use their services as a resul…

You are talking about the 1st amendment. Free speech is a principle whereas the 1st amendment restricts the government from violating that principle in its relations with the populace.

Free speech as a principle you’re after (aka truly free speech without any consequences whatsoever) never existed.

You’re free to say whatever you want, and I’m free to take actions based on that. You cannot give free speech benefits only to one side of the argument.

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

#214

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 8:52 PM UTC

Alupis wrote: post #142

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.

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 fo…

[deleted]

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

#215

Post by tryonenow » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 8:52 PM UTC

dopamean wrote: post #196

Alupis wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 fo…

I'll never understand the argument that Trump was "silenced." As you said, he's a former US president. He has ample resources to get his word out. The only people who think he has been silenced are people who spend too much time on twitter or people who are being disingenuous.

>If Trump really wants to get his thoughts out to the world, he can host his own website and publish them there

And what's the recourse when the same forces collude to shut someone or some group out of the hosting platform for wrongthink? Build your own server farm? Build your own cloudflare? Build your own DNS? How far do we go in allowing tyranny by a loud and powerful minority? If we can regulate corporations to prevent corporate monopolies, perhaps it's appropriate to implement loose regulations against social monopoly. Collusion to silence an entire set of viewpoints by unilaterally associating them with a minority of extremists is quite literally oppression.

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

#216

Post by lenkite » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 8:52 PM UTC

hackersword wrote: post #162

Alupis wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 fo…

They didn't "silence" him because his brand of politics. Their stated reason for banning him from their platform was literally " due to the risk of further incitement of violence." Their TOS have specific "Glorification of Violence policy", which aims to prevent the glorification of violence that could inspire others to replicate violent acts and determined that they were highly likely to encourage and inspire people…

I wish such matters were decided in a Court of Law with evidence. And not by private arbiters. Twitter banned Trump simply because they could so without any repercussions. All that "Glorification of Violence" is sheer hogwash. Risk of further incitement of violence is even more hogwash. Most of the democratic party leadership should be banned from Twitter in such a case.

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

#217

Post by austincheney » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 8:53 PM UTC

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…

As horrible as that sounds it doesn’t bother me.

When I was very young I remember a story of a high school student who horribly tortured a cat and drove around with its mangled but still living body. The high school baseball coach kicked that student off the team even though the student wasn’t arrested. This wasn’t considered cancel culture then and it didn’t bother me then either.

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

#218

Post by himinlomax » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 8:53 PM UTC

weego wrote: post #20

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…

Presumption of innocence is a legal principle and does not and will never apply to a corporation providing you services at their own discretion.

Presumption of innocence exists in the legal system for a reason, mainly that it is necessary for a judgement to be rendered fairly.

Twitch is not the legal system, but it is passing judgement and renders punishment that can be harsher than the justice system in some cases (losing your main income compared to a small fine). Therefore, it needs presumption of innocence as much as the justice system. I rest my case.

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

#219

Post by thiskeyboard » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 8:53 PM UTC

Pfhreak wrote: post #135

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…

To be clear, the controversial political opinions you believe should be platformed by Twitch are: "If that means white redneck militia dudes mowing down dipshit protesters that think they can torch buildings at 10 PM, at this point they have my fucking blessing." and "America Deserved 9/11"? Because those are the literal quotes from things that got people pulled from Twitch and you've labelled "controversial politica…

The full quote from Destiny—a liberal anti-racist, mind you—is:

The rioting needs to fucking stop. If that means white redneck militia dudes mowing down dipshit protesters that think they can torch buildings at 10 PM, at this point they have my fucking blessing. Holy shit, this shit needs to stop. It needed to stop a long time ago.

To the rest of us, he is expressing exacerbation that law enforcement is allowing chaos from one particular political faction.

If you do believe in good faith that Destiny is actually "suggesting that we unilaterally kill innocent people", then do you believe that bluechecks on Twitter who freely speak in similar terms about White people are actually advocating for the slaughter/genocide of Whites?

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

#220

Post by SllX » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 8:54 PM UTC

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.

> So you want the government to force private companies to continue doing business with someone they no longer wish to provide services to?

OP didn’t make that argument, and I’m not going to make that argument.

That said, with or without government coercion on the counter party, innocent until proven guilty is a fairly good standard to apply. It’s more important when it concerns the use of government force, but that doesn’t mean it is unimportant when dealing with private parties and it is fair to judge Twitch for not applying innocent until proven guilty as a standard when it comes to Twitch-streamers.

It’s easy to get someone arrested, and it is easy for a cop to make an arrest. An arrest is not a presumption of guilt and shouldn’t be used as a signal of guilt.