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

#981

Post by koheripbal » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 11:00 AM UTC

natsup123490 wrote: post #716

kodah wrote: post #253

I had to type in this box more times than I'm willing to admit to produce something that didn't violate the guidelines. Let's examine why this is problematic: - This will absolutely be leveraged on anyone in a precarious position. It's their ultimate out. Minority groups, majority groups, it doesn't matter - you're in trouble and need a platform to tell your story? Not happening on Twitch. Expect more to sign on to t…

> I can't imagine staying in this country much longer. If you are serious about that statement, I encourage you just as I have encouraged all my family and close friends. I have never regretted leaving America. There are dozens of nicer countries to live in. However, tech platforms exert their dominance worldwide. Americans have made this a global problem. Most of my family and friends still feel like they don't need…

> This new stage of American moralism is pretty tiring

This exists in Canada too, in case anyone is wondering. You cannot escape the toxic teenagers of the internet by moving to a different country.

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

#982

Post by uvnq » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 1:44 PM UTC

natsup123490 wrote: post #716

kodah wrote: post #253

I had to type in this box more times than I'm willing to admit to produce something that didn't violate the guidelines. Let's examine why this is problematic: - This will absolutely be leveraged on anyone in a precarious position. It's their ultimate out. Minority groups, majority groups, it doesn't matter - you're in trouble and need a platform to tell your story? Not happening on Twitch. Expect more to sign on to t…

> I can't imagine staying in this country much longer. If you are serious about that statement, I encourage you just as I have encouraged all my family and close friends. I have never regretted leaving America. There are dozens of nicer countries to live in. However, tech platforms exert their dominance worldwide. Americans have made this a global problem. Most of my family and friends still feel like they don't need…

American here. What countries do you recommend?

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

#983

Post by uvnq » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 1:57 PM UTC

Clampower wrote: post #905

ngokevin wrote: post #646

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Terrorist activities, child sexual exploitation, violent extremism, credible threats of mass violence, carrying out or deliberately acting as an accomplice to sexual assault" falls under moralism and cancel culture? We've seen things that fester online that lead to real life tragedies or to the damaging of the fabric of democracy itself. Including insurrection on the US Capitol which took its roots on Twitter. There…

And all of this while twitch’s “Just Chatting” section is basically Soft Core porn, “hot tub streams” accessible to underage users, exploiting vulnerable, desperate people for insane amount of donations. Twitch is definitely a slippery slope, especially in distributing soft core porn to underage kids.

Agreed. Personally I think we need to do a better job of preventing kids from being exposed to this kind of stuff. Not just on Twitch but everywhere else.

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

#984

Post by uvnq » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 2:06 PM UTC

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #842

ngokevin wrote: post #646

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Terrorist activities, child sexual exploitation, violent extremism, credible threats of mass violence, carrying out or deliberately acting as an accomplice to sexual assault" falls under moralism and cancel culture? We've seen things that fester online that lead to real life tragedies or to the damaging of the fabric of democracy itself. Including insurrection on the US Capitol which took its roots on Twitter. There…

You say this as if that list is fixed for all of eternity. If you don't want to call this a slippery slope, then how about the thin end of the wedge.

Wow, that's a really interesting idiom. I've never heard that before and will definitely use it over slippery slope, especially since pointing out a slippery slope is often incorrectly called a fallacy (from my understanding, it is only a fallacy if there is no established trend).

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

#985

Post by uvnq » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 2:32 PM UTC

jlawson wrote: post #650

slg wrote: post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Held accountable by whom? We didn't elect twitch. Society. Don't like it, pick a new society like the two commenters you responded to you are considering. >Who decides who needs to be held accountable, and for what? Once again, society. >Shouldn't that be the justice system? The justice system is purposely setup in a way to make it difficult to punish people. This is good. We don't want the government throwing peopl…

No, it's not society . That makes it sound like everyone has a say. It's only a very small minority of people are the ones that decide who gets punished and excluded. It's not society, its the powerful . This is how you have people getting banned for supporting a national politician who won election with ~49% of popular vote. Those 49% clearly didn't get a say in who gets punished and excluded. Only the powerful get…

I'm willing to bet there are a significant number of people who didn't vote for him who would be opposed to an individual getting banned for supporting him. This pushes the percentage of individuals who are opposed to this punishing/excluding over 50%. "The powerful" that you are referring to would also be a minority if your numbers are correct.

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

#986

Post by goatcode » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 3:41 PM UTC

marcinzm wrote: post #95

goatcode wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some time up until people started getting the internet on their phones, roughly. Of course, no definition is perfect.

Before then we had control of most media by a small set of companies (with many fun documented examples of people being blacklisted for going against the owners). Before that we had the Television Code, Comic Code, and so on. Before that we had McCarthyism. Public and media speech was always moderated. In the past it was simply harder to notice since there were fewer un-moderated channels.

The FCC is an unelected, mostly unaccountable entity. I think George Carlin had some things to say about them. That they have any control over transmission of anything outside of a technical, practical scope is a travesty, imo.

Beyond the hardened strawmen of actual written law, we have a shifting sense of what is publicly acceptable. Given that most people do what everyone else around them is doing, or at least what they believe others are doing, there exists a powerful tool in that to control the public discourse. We've gone from "I disagree with what you say, but I will die to protect your ability to say it," to "I think someone will find this offensive, so I will also find this offensive, despite my not knowing anyone who'd actually be offended by it."

The laws are a harder target, so those who would wish to stifle inconvenient discourse likely would find it easier to convince a mostly pliable, trusting public to not say the things they don't want said. That there still are a small number of companies controlling what a majority of people consume might be convenient to this.

All conjecture, of course. More of the Paul Harvey "If I Were The Devil" kind of thing.

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

#987

Post by throwawaysea » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 5:21 PM UTC

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #978

throwawaysea wrote: post #859

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many people were engaged in activities that fit the definition of “insurrection” and how many have been charged with more than just trespassing? How many with conspiracy? If that number is nearly zero, out of hundreds who entered the Capitol grounds, who in turn were a small fraction of the tens of thousands in DC that day to support Trump, how can all of it and all these participants be described in such extreme…

I never said every single person in the crowd was an insurrectionist. They don't need to be. Hundreds of people physically stormed the Capitol with the explicit intention of overturning a democratic election. What else would you call that but insurrection? If they failed, it doesn't mean they weren't insurrectionists. It just means they were incompetent insurrectionists. It's not a good look to downplay crime and vio…

> Hundreds of people physically stormed the Capitol with the explicit intention of overturning a democratic election. What else would you call that but insurrection?

I would call it a protest or a riot. The vast majority were protesting against the legitimacy of the election results or simply there to rally for their candidate, both of which are legally allowed. That's not "overturning a democratic election" - that's drawing attention to the problem and calling for investigations. The fact that a few people within that crowd may have conspired to do something more shouldn't change the intent of the majority who were there. This is also why almost no one who entered the capitol will face any jail time or charges beyond trespassing.

Keep in mind, there have been numerous past protests at the Capitol in the last decade, mostly from the political left. To claim that this one is somehow worse does not seem fair. Likewise, Democrats have challenged election results numerous times - including the 2000, 2004, and 2016 presidential elections. Even right now, during this very election cycle, there is a case where Democrats are challenging election results for a House seat, with Pelosi's support (https://time.com/5950292/iowa-congress-election-rita-hart/).

> It's not a good look to downplay crime and violence just because the people doing it voted the same way you did.

I'm not downplaying anything, but rather describing things as they are. I feel your use of the word "insurrection" is exaggerating things. The only people using the word "insurrection" are activists and biased journalists - not our justice system. How many people have been charged or convicted for "insurrection"? How does that number compare to the number of people at the capitol?

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

#988

Post by stonogo » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 5:42 PM UTC

cblconfederate wrote: post #897

stonogo wrote: post #846

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps you'd be interested in HAM radio or public-access TV. I don't see why the answer has to be national.

TV is 20th century. It has to be public the same way that roads are public.

Gatekept by testing and licensure requirements?

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

#989

Post by edmundsauto » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 6:30 PM UTC

a1369209993 wrote: post #722

edmundsauto wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a need to negate the narrative attributed to the phrase "cancel culture" - said narrative is that liberals are censoring conservative voices. (IE, it's often discussed as a directional issue, and not a systemic one.)

Actually I don't really care about conservatives getting censored[0]. I care about decent people, the ones who are not liberals or conservatives[1], getting censored or otherwise attacked for not supporting liberals (or McCarthists, or Christians, or whoever happens to be popular at the time). 0: except in a "huh, the canary just died" kind of way. 1: or whoever happens to be popular at the time.

Ah, in that case, one small bit of feedback - you might find a new term, rather than "cancel culture". To my understanding, that is a rallying cry for the American right wing. Specifically, it seems to be a criticism of a situation where private businesses decide what behavior is disallowed on their platform, especially when the violating entity is a conservative.

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

#990

Post by thephyber » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 7:47 PM UTC

esyir wrote: post #891

thephyber wrote: post #882

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Overcoming this requires the construction of a superior and more addictive product, and the incentives just aren't there for such platforms. Nope. You can have a smaller, simpler substitute if you have comparative advantage in some other niche. DuckDuckGo is making a decent showing against Google, despite arriving on the scene almost 2 decades later. A handful of righty / unPC social media properties (Gab, Parler,…

Didn't said righty social media properties literally have to face existential threats like getting multiple hosting providers drop them? Moreover, this is only something that's fine if you accept ceding control of the vast majority of communication to private control. I. E, we now get cyberpunk thoughtcrime dystopia.

> if you accept ceding control of the vast majority of communication to private control

When our lifetimes has it not always been this case? Newspapers, television, internet have always been this way (owned by an organization and provided with contractual limitations). Talking face to face in your own home is the only unabridged communication method, even in the USA. I have always found this issue strange that people demand that App Stores, cloud platforms, web hosting, etc must allow any content despite the companies’ freedom of association (and disassociation). We aren’t talking about companies which are covered by Common Carrier laws.

And “existential” doesn’t mean what you think it means. They are rebuilding on different platforms and other substitutes are coming online.