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

311–320 of 1001 posts

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

#311

Post by AnimalMuppet »

Alupis wrote: post #254
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That probably would change the current discussion, yes. An amazing number of people would flip positions. For that to happen, though, the current president would have to do something that was at least colorable as a violation of terms and services. I haven't heard even right-wingers claim that this is so, so far. (But maybe I just haven't heard, not being one who listens to those circles.)

Well, just like anything can be securities fraud, anything can be a political lie. It just depends on perspective.

Right, but Trump wasn't suspended for political lying. He was suspended for inciting violence. Political lying is not a violation of the terms of service, so far as I am aware.

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

#312

Post by pgsimp »

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.

People invest massive amounts of time to build a following and create content on those platforms. It seems reasonable to ask that it can't be taken away from them at a whim. However, in theory, they should have read the contract before entering it. If they accept those terms, perhaps they should have to live with it.

An analogy would perhaps be a musician signing a contract with a record label? I think they expect some reciprocity, like if they owe three albums to the label, the label also owes them marketing for those albums.

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

#313

Post by literallyWTF »

ctdonath wrote: post #289
literallyWTF wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

What insurrection?

Oh I don’t know, I think it was that mob of people who were spurred into literally storming the US Capitol building?

Ya know, that mob that followed the beck and call of a man who still refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy and results of democratic election?

Yeah I think that was the one...

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

#314

Post by subjectsigma »

Bud wrote: post #34
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…

[flagged]

https://www.businessinsider.com/barack-obama-slams-call-out-...

> Former President Barack Obama derided "call-out culture" in a speech at the Obama Foundation summit on Tuesday, saying achieving real change was more complex than being "as judgmental as possible."

> "That is not activism," he concluded. "That is not bringing about change. If all you're doing is casting stones, you are probably not going to get that far."

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

#315

Post by z3ncyberpunk »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #264
newbie789 wrote: post #250

Coming from the perspective of someone that was an admin of a medium-large forum back in the vBulletin heyday of the early 2000s, I’m somewhat amused by people getting angry at moderation decisions. The rules were pretty clear: This is my website. I pay the bills and maintain it. Here are some clear rules that if you break them, you will be punished with a ban/suspension/shadow an/redirect to goatse upon login/etc. a…

>medium-large forum That's the key. You were not operating a massive media platform with a significant marketshare that many people use to make a living with.

that is a risk the people using platforms to make money with should have taken into account

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

#316

Post by Causality1 »

newbie789 wrote: post #250

Coming from the perspective of someone that was an admin of a medium-large forum back in the vBulletin heyday of the early 2000s, I’m somewhat amused by people getting angry at moderation decisions. The rules were pretty clear: This is my website. I pay the bills and maintain it. Here are some clear rules that if you break them, you will be punished with a ban/suspension/shadow an/redirect to goatse upon login/etc. a…

We really need a public utility alternative for electronic discussion and multimedia sharing. There's no argument that internet is an essential service so where's the internet post office?

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

#317

Post by [deleted] »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #264
newbie789 wrote: post #250

Coming from the perspective of someone that was an admin of a medium-large forum back in the vBulletin heyday of the early 2000s, I’m somewhat amused by people getting angry at moderation decisions. The rules were pretty clear: This is my website. I pay the bills and maintain it. Here are some clear rules that if you break them, you will be punished with a ban/suspension/shadow an/redirect to goatse upon login/etc. a…

>medium-large forum That's the key. You were not operating a massive media platform with a significant marketshare that many people use to make a living with.

[deleted]

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

#318

Post by gsich »

kvia wrote: post #299
Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone and their cat understands that it is hypocritical bullshit. They'd let his incitements slide easily if he was their political ally and not an opponent. I don't have a horse in that race, but it is disgusting how people defend this blatant and obvious bias as perfectly normal thing.

Twitter is a company, not a court of law. Trump tarnished their reputation like nobody else, so they ceased doing business with him when it was convenient. This was facilitated by him flagrantly violating their rules for years, culminating in the riot he incited via their platform. It's as simple as that.

Tarnished? No.

Twitter was in the news every day. They profited massively, but now that his presidency is over there is no interest anymore.

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

#319

Post by falcolas »

Bud wrote: post #74
falcolas wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about we do something silly like letting the police and justice system handle things like "credible threats of mass violence" and "hate crimes", since both are fairly illegal, at least in the US.

How about we also defend the rights of people and companies to react in the way they see fit, to such actions, as well. As an aside, our police, to put it rather mildly, have historically sucked, in regard to such issues. And they suck right now, too. Badly. For hints on this, tune in to the Derek Chauvin trial, now in progress. Our "justice system" doesn't have a great record, either.

History tells us quite clearly that extra-legal justice systems as a response to even some of the worst justice systems creates more problems, not fewer.

So no we shouldn't, to use your phrasing, react as we see fit. That's how humanity has historically justified lynching.

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

#320

Post by Lammy »

ronsor wrote: post #60

Because this is always brought up, I will remark that I believe what the majority of commenters likely mean by free speech is the principle itself, and not the restrictions imposed on the government by the First Amendment. First and foremost, free speech is a moral principle. Secondly, while private companies can do what they want, that does not mean they should . Private companies like Apple can avoid taxes, yet man…

We only call it "speech" because speech is the lowest-latency and highest-bandwidth method us humans have to exchange ideas. I tend to distrust people who are pro-eumemics the same as I would distrust a person who is pro-eugenics.
Post reply on HN