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

#601

Post by yakubin » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:25 PM UTC

dkersten wrote: post #132

crisdux wrote: post #24

My employer can fire me for severe misconduct that occurs away from the office. Is that any different? Isn't this normal at most companies?

What about your ISP or electrical company or other service provider? Can they shut you off because you did or said something they don't like? What about your payment provider or your bank? Twitch are providing a service to streamers, they are not employing them.

Streamers don't pay Twitch for the service. Twitch pays streamers in return for the ad revenue/subscriptions that they generate. They make Twitch money and get a tiny part of it in return. It sounds a lot more like being employed than being a customer. It's the subscribers who fit the picture of service customers.

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

#602

Post by filoleg » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:25 PM UTC

krapp wrote: post #585

gotoeleven wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I get your point. Like those witches in Salem, they really didn't like being held accountable for performing witchcraft.

The "witches" in Salem weren't actually witches. Racist and violent assholes on social media trying to drape themselves in the false flag of liberty are still racist, violent assholes.

I think the parent comment is trying to point out that the people who were deciding who was a "witch" in Salem back then could be the same type of people who are deciding what counts as "racist" or "hate speech" these days when it comes to "canceling" others.

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

#603

Post by fwip » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:25 PM UTC

refenestrator wrote: post #595

viraptor wrote: post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're thinking of it like a legal process. Think of a private party instead - you're happy to invite lots of people, but everyone heard Adam was a real asshole to someone in public, so you don't want to have him at the party anymore (even though he was never bad at your previous parties specifically). It's a reasonable thing to do and you have about the same level of responsibility for your party as twitch has for t…

I don't have the power to ban Adam from all parties. Twitch effectively does, in this case.

There are many services that let you livestream. Twitch is just one of the most popular.

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

#604

Post by sudosysgen » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:26 PM UTC

wongarsu wrote: post #567

Pfhreak wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are correct in that these tools will undoubtedly be used against progressive folks and minorities, as that's historically where they've been used. I believe that Twitch has too much power/authority, but also I believe that it's reasonable to moderate speech in communities and platforms. That said, I believe there's a material difference between examples and what was shared in the parent comment. I don't t…

Both "I think gay folks should have equal rights" and "America deserved 9/11" are fundamentally statements about ethics, and neither is calling for violence.

Yes, that's very true.

The second statement though, was a blatant call to violence (if white redneck militia dudes...), and the author did not get banned from twitch, instead they were simply limited in their monetization options.

But "America deserved 9/11" was an ethical statement, you're right.

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

#605

Post by oth001 » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:27 PM UTC

Patreon recently banned journalist Whitney Webb for something that somebody else posted on her website. This policy is already being used nefariously, against journalists nonetheless.

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

#606

Post by ativzzz » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:27 PM UTC

reificator wrote: post #569

koluna wrote: post #556

What’s being missed in this thread is that nobody (streamers) is an employee of Twitch - Twitch graciously offers them their platform, but that’s like your local fruit stand offering you a place to juggle next to it. They can take that away at any point because you are not their employee. If you had some legally enforceable contract, maybe there was a leg to stand on. Otherwise, twitch is under no obligation to give…

> If you had some legally enforceable contract, maybe there was a leg to stand on. Otherwise, twitch is under no obligation to give anyone a platform. Twitch partners (I.E. most of the people who make a living on the platform) absolutely have a contract with Twitch. Twitch affiliates don't as far as I know, but those are (mostly) the people in the awkward stage between hobby and profession, and most of them are tryin…

And I assume that contract has a clause in it that says Twitch can revoke their streaming status for any reason, otherwise they would have been sued to death by now.

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

#607

Post by floatingatoll » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:29 PM UTC

CharlesW wrote: post #578

refenestrator wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Held accountable by whom? We didn't elect twitch. Who decides who needs to be held accountable, and for what? Shouldn't that be the justice system? Twitch mentioned proactively banning people who are arrested, without using the word 'convicted'. Which demographics is that likely to affect?

Twitch is a private company (Amazon). Simply don't use it if you don't like it's ToS, or otherwise disagree with how it handles relationships with the creators who've agreed to it.

Describing the options available currently today is not a helpful contribution here, and seems intended to silence discussion of something considered unjust by others. Beyond the facts you've cited — as a private company, Amazon owes no duty of 'guaranteed platform' whatsoever — is there anything else you're able to contribute to this discussion? What are your views? Do you agree or disagree with the "simple" circumstances you cite? Do you consider Twitch's actions likely to promote injustice against minorities?

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

#608

Post by rangewookie » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:29 PM UTC

Twitch doesn't see itself as a platform for creative freedom even though everyone wants to perceive them as such (because they market it that way). Twitch wants to become a network, like cable TV. It's easier, and more predictable.

Pros: maintain control of the brand perception, market to their target demographic with simple messaging, everyone in the inevitable echo chamber is satisfied (including employees).

Cons: Some people are mad and move to create an opposing "rival" network. (which is likely to happen anyways)

This logic can be applied to other major social media networks, the surviving ones anyway.

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

#609

Post by sudosysgen » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:29 PM UTC

clarifier123 wrote: post #362

After reddit started banning people for upvoting the wrong things, this is a logical next step. Contrary to the popular belief, slippery slope isn't a logical fallacy. Anonymity is the only way to combat this. Make sure your online identity isn't connected to your real name. Ideally, you should have separate identities for each website. Using Tor or a VPN is also a good idea.

>After reddit started banning people for upvoting the wrong things, this is a logical next step. Contrary to the popular belief, slippery slope isn't a logical fallacy.

People might read this and think that people were banned for upvoting things that were insanely bigoted, or personal attacks.

While I'm sure that was the case, the slope was indeed slippery, and reddit ended up banning people for upvoting posts such as "John Brown did nothing wrong" and "it is justifiable to kill slave-owners".

Moderators that agreed that this was unreasonable then saw their subreddits (some fairly major) banned for advocating violations of reddit policy.

All in order to score PR points and do some both-sidesisms. The actual ethical good didn't matter, it was all PR to Reddit.

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

#610

Post by beaner » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:29 PM UTC

ativzzz wrote: post #591

beaner wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it just means your eligibility for a professional career may come down to whether or not a random mod on a streaming platform simply thinks it's "funny" to ban you.

Then maybe you should reconsider your choice of professional careers if that's a risk factor and your risk tolerance isn't high enough.

Imagine this response in the context of a sport like the NBA. If the ref is secretly racist and bans you from the sport because it's "funny" as their excuse, would you react this way? The nature of videogames doesn't make the professional sport of them juvenile and less worthy of rigorous standards for inclusion.