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

Post by _qwfv » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 4:53 AM UTC

anchpop wrote: post #837

_qwfv wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the additional context. > None of the things you mentioned are incompatible with the group Americans call “liberal”. Disagree. In some contexts leftist and liberal are distinct and incompatible things. In American politics, liberal often means 'progressive', but 'classical liberal' is typically associated with libertarianism. That's not to say a classical liberal cannot hold progressive beliefs, but it cer…

I'm not sure why you keep bringing up "leftist", perhaps a parent comment was edited but it looks like you're the only one who has used that term to describe Destiny here and the original characterization of him as an anti-racist liberal is 100% accurate by both the American and polysci usage of the term.

Post by shard972 » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 5:07 AM UTC

darksaints wrote: post #836

garbagetime wrote: post #827

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The word is often taken to denote a violent uprising. The Capital protests weren't particularly violent - the protesters didn't kill anyone (not to mention they were hardly an uprising). >Your claims here are like saying that the civil war wasn't an insurrection because the confederacy didn't want to overthrow the US government, they just wanted to form a different government. There's not that much of a parallel. The…

> The word is often taken to denote a violent uprising. The Capital protests weren't particularly violent - the protesters didn't kill anyone. False. > There's not that much of a parallel. The Capital protesters wanted to show resistance to the election being stolen from what they saw as the legitimate winner. The Civil War was, like, a war, and way different in every way. It wasn't a war at first. The South Carolina…

Post by lurgburg » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 5:09 AM UTC

darepublic wrote: post #740

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…

The Chaz was worse wasn't it, there were more deaths, it lasted longer and the participants were given very charitable coverage. Violence and lawlessness is ok if you're on the right team basically.

Post by zouhair » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 5:18 AM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #553

zouhair wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is literally how the internet has worked forever. I don't know what specific fallacy is this, but stating that how it always worked does not mean it should have worked that way or that it should never change. Twitch would not exists without content creators. Neither would exist without the other. In that relationship Twitch has the last word on everything. I would argue that it shouldn't be this way or at leas…

Why though? They don't own Twitch. They didn't take any of the economic risk to start it. They're not on the hook for covering its server bills if revenue craters. If they wanted to put their money where their mouth is and buy a piece of the company proper, the current owners might be open to that, who knows. But you don't typically get to run a company you didn't start, haven't invested a dime in, and can walk away…

Post by weswpg » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 5:23 AM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #840

wslack wrote: post #804

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not if the evidence for such things isn't admissible. (like certain types of recordings)

Hmm, I wonder if the justice system has any reason for why some kinds of evidence aren’t admissible? Nah, they probably just want to let a few criminals off the hook for funsies.