Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitch removes every member of its Safety Advisory Council

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 89 posts

Re: Twitch removes every member of its Safety Advisory Council

#71

Post by selivanovp »

nubinetwork wrote: post #8
artninja1988 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like you haven't been on twitch for a while. The IRL section seems like a funnel for only fans for the model part

Twitch seems quite content with being a front for onlyfans. They recently started blurring stream thumbnails, and have never cared about linktree/etc links despite them being used as a "hide it under the carpet" for onlyfans as well. (Direct links bad, a link to a link is okay though?) They may as well stop pretending and fully allow adult content, because it's pretty obvious that these streamers will keep pushing th…

Allowing adult content will move them to a state wide ban list in many countries.

Re: Twitch removes every member of its Safety Advisory Council

#72

Post by nubinetwork »

SXX wrote: post #68
mrweasel wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that I use Twitch much anymore, nor am I really bothered by see a random boob or dick every once in a while. What does annoy me is that the OnlyFans "models" see every other platform as means to push their OnlyFans subscriptions. How the hell are the so much money flying around that it can finance that many OnlyFans creators? We can't funding for ad free search, video stream or software development, but we have m…

The Internet Is for Porn. People are hypocritical. There are a lot of religion fanatics, prude morality fighters and others activists fighting against "sins". But in the end of day they all come home and watch porn. And many pay for it directly or indirectly. And markets with most prude societies are usually ones with highest porn consumption. Humanity.

There is a time and place for everything, I don't go to PH for gaming or programming content, and I don't think it's wrong to ask for the opposite.

Re: Twitch removes every member of its Safety Advisory Council

#73

Post by bun_terminator »

suddenclarity wrote: post #70
threeseed wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safe platforms strongly correlate with successful platforms. So it's actually the opposite of leeching.

What is safe and in what way does the Safety Advisory Council improve it? The group that created a very toxic environment around Twitch when it included a political activist identifying as a deer (!) that threatened to silence everyone.

This is being faded, but I want to double-down: This is true, they're really that crazy.

Re: Twitch removes every member of its Safety Advisory Council

#74

Post by SXX »

nubinetwork wrote: post #72
SXX wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Internet Is for Porn. People are hypocritical. There are a lot of religion fanatics, prude morality fighters and others activists fighting against "sins". But in the end of day they all come home and watch porn. And many pay for it directly or indirectly. And markets with most prude societies are usually ones with highest porn consumption. Humanity.

There is a time and place for everything, I don't go to PH for gaming or programming content, and I don't think it's wrong to ask for the opposite.

Poster above wondered where are money coming from and this was the answer. There are people who pay to webcam models on Twitch and this is the reason why Amazon allow it to happen. Money.

Anyway I feel like power users are just more likely affected here and see soft porn on Twitch more often. To be honest I only ocasionally use Twitch, but last month I've been watching Trackmania there a lot. Like every day for several hours at least.

And know what? I dont see any NSFW stuff whatsoever because I only watch few top streamers playing certain game. There simply no need to ever go to twitch frontpage or look at boobs.

PS: As gamer I would really appreciate to just have NSFW toggle so everyone can watch whatever they want.

Re: Twitch removes every member of its Safety Advisory Council

#75

Post by celdon25 »

newswasboring wrote: post #26
eastbound wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Are you complaining about people bullying nazis? I... I really want to be misunderstanding.

You are. I was vulgarly called a Nazi once by one of those people for saying the taxes should be lower.

Re: Twitch removes every member of its Safety Advisory Council

#77

Post by mariusor »

nubinetwork wrote: post #8
artninja1988 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like you haven't been on twitch for a while. The IRL section seems like a funnel for only fans for the model part

Twitch seems quite content with being a front for onlyfans. They recently started blurring stream thumbnails, and have never cared about linktree/etc links despite them being used as a "hide it under the carpet" for onlyfans as well. (Direct links bad, a link to a link is okay though?) They may as well stop pretending and fully allow adult content, because it's pretty obvious that these streamers will keep pushing th…

Frankly I don't understand why all the naughty streams don't get moved to a sibling platform, call it Twitch Red that only deals with those. They can share 95% of legal and operational costs, but it has the benefit that it isolates the game streaming platform for any questionable content that might raise the eyebrow of sensitive jurisdictions and advertisers. There must be something obvious I'm missing otherwise this is a very large missed opportunity.

Re: Twitch removes every member of its Safety Advisory Council

#78

Post by mariusor »

cqqxo4zV46cp wrote: post #21
nubinetwork wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitch seems quite content with being a front for onlyfans. They recently started blurring stream thumbnails, and have never cared about linktree/etc links despite them being used as a "hide it under the carpet" for onlyfans as well. (Direct links bad, a link to a link is okay though?) They may as well stop pretending and fully allow adult content, because it's pretty obvious that these streamers will keep pushing th…

“Allowing adult content” is easier said than done for any organisation. This is incredibly common knowledge at this point. For example, orgs dealing with adult content need to work a little bit differently. Some employees may just be personally uncomfortable with being around “big titty goth gfs” all day every day, and their job might change to require it. Internal HR disputes can also become more complicated, as lin…

They only need to incorporate a separate entity that deals with the adult content, which then has to deal with the legal side of the problem and reap in the (probably) considerable rewards.

Re: Twitch removes every member of its Safety Advisory Council

#79

Post by rainonmoon »

raizer88 wrote: post #69
rainonmoon wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What problem is that? Why should other people's jobs forbid them from using a platform as long as they follow that platform's T&C's?

Because 99.9% of twitch problems, and bad press, from the last few years are focused on people using Twitch as an onlyfan funnel. I would cut them out asap.

That just doesn't seem demonstrably true but I'd love to see some citations. My recollection is that Twitch's biggest issues have been regarding gambling and high-profile bans for misconduct e.g. DrDisrespect or nudity from streamers who don't even have OnlyFans accounts.

Re: Twitch removes every member of its Safety Advisory Council

#80

Post by olsonjeffery »

viraptor wrote: post #39
pm90 wrote: post #22

> The outgoing members were paid between $10,000 and $20,000 a year, CNBC says. How can this be a cost saving measure? Thats a pittance for amazon.

Twitch is losing money. Now it's losing less. (I'm not saying it makes sense or will make a dent or anything else, just putting the fact out there - twitch has limited time to figure out how to make things work)

“just putting the facts out there” while stating a truism devoid of context is not a constructive contribution.

You make no comments on the impact of this choice beyond the nominal cost savings. Or does your lack of comment signal your perspective?

What even is your point?

Post reply on HN