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

101–110 of 1001 posts

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

#101

Post by mrguyorama »

benja123 wrote: post #61

I have a hard time with this. Don’t get me wrong overall I am for banning terrorists, pedophiles etc. from services like twitch, but, it needs to be done in a smart way. The concerns I have around this is that 1. It’s not clear where you draw the line of what counts as severe misconduct 2. What happens if someone did something that counts as severe misconduct five years ago and today they are a completely different p…

Specifically, when it comes to entertainment and mass market stuff like this, the rules have always been crystal clear:

1. Make us money. Make us so much goddamned money. If you don't, we'll probably just get rid of you at some point

2. Don't embarrass us, cost us money, waste our resources, bring media scrutiny upon us, make literally any small part of our life even a little bit more difficult, or screw with us.

Rule 2 is a very flexible scale that depends on rule 1. Wasn't there that streamer that abused her cat live on stream and she still is a golden child of the platform?

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

#102

Post by [deleted] »

Bud wrote: post #84
Veen wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I can understand why you have to minimize. Although, I don't understand how anyone fails to fear the consequences of "people being held accountable by society for their conduct"—an idea that gladdens the hearts of authoritarians, sectarians, and zealots who are absolutely convinced of their righteousness and moral superiority. It will not result in healing, but in deeper division and ever greater polarization. He…

I would say that a compromise position can be found. Certainly I join in your healthy fears of some misguided actions which have been attributed to "cancel culture". And I also concede that there have been quite a few such actions. However, I'd also ask that you recognize that many of the reactions and consequences attributed to "cancel culture" have been entirely justified, and appropriate, and have resulted in over…

[deleted]

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

#103

Post by corndoge »

paxys wrote: post #89
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 people had internet it was ~5 media companies that decided what could be said in public and who could say it. It was hardly as "free" as people imagine.

And when they had internet but before they had it on their phones, you could work around those media companies by saying things online. I believe parent was referring to that period.

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

#104

Post by Alupis »

Judgmentality wrote: post #100
Alupis wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We may be arriving at a time and place where we must consider broadening the scope of the First Amendment to not just apply to government. I'm fully aware there's good reason for organizations and companies to limit free speech, but it often (lately) has gone way too far, dabbling in political witch hunting. I can think of few things less inline with classical American Constitutional ideals than to cheer on organizat…

> I can think of fewer things less inline with classical American Constitutional ideals than to cheer on organizations that hunt down individuals and silence them for thoughts expressed on other platforms. The moderation team of twitch is pretty much universally hated by the internet. I don't think anybody is cheering them on.

Twitch is just the latest organization to jump onto the political silence bandwagon.

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

#105

Post by adzzzz »

kube-system wrote: post #99
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.

Presumption of evidence is morally important because the force of the state is ultimate: they can deprive a person of life and liberty as a consequence. The suggestion that it is immoral for a different standard being applied to a private clubhouse is not something that was supported by the influential thinkers who gave us the former idea.

In a capitalistic society where corporations hold as much power or more than governments do in our day to day lives you surely must see how this is a moral principle that must apply to them also. There's life ruining things beyond jail such as being homeless and shunned.

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

#106

Post by ApolloFortyNine »

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.

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

#107

Post by crowbahr »

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.

Right, and it's worth emphasizing that companies do not provide free speech, nor are they required to.

If you want that to change talk to Congress.

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

#108

Post by tssva »

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…

Free speech is several principles. One is that you should be free to express yourself. Another is that others should not be able to coerce you into forced speech. Many commenters on HN like to forget that 2nd part because most of their 'solutions" to the first principle violate the 2nd.

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

#109

Post by marcinzm »

corndoge wrote: post #103
paxys wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before people had internet it was ~5 media companies that decided what could be said in public and who could say it. It was hardly as "free" as people imagine.

And when they had internet but before they had it on their phones, you could work around those media companies by saying things online. I believe parent was referring to that period.

And very few people, relatively, were online so you could reach only a small number of people. You can probably still reach just as many people online in unmoderated channels as you could back then.

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

#110

Post by leephillips »

whatshisface wrote: post #80
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.

> For a platform like Twitch, this is fine. They have a brand. As someone who does not operate a streaming platform, I don't care whether they have a brand or not - I care about the pragmatic benefits of living in a society where principles like innocent-until-proven-guilty are available and practiced in a way that benefits average people like me. I think the number of people who would consider "they have a brand" to…

Nobody is “innocent until proven guilty”. You are either, as a matter of fact, innocent or guilty. Our constitution prohibits the government from depriving you of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. But Twitch, or I, or you, can make up our own minds about your innocence or guilt, trial or no trial, and proceed according to our rights and inclinations. That right, the freedom of association, is as important as the right to be free of penalty from the government absent due process.
Post reply on HN