I want to address something here. That was one guy defending their right to do whatever they want because censorship is only when the Government does it.
But guess what? It seems like tech companies like facebook, twitter, and even Blizzard are treating like 1984 by George Orwell as manual and you defend that kind of behavior, this is how it starts. It’s because people don’t stand up against it.
The mods should not be crossing the lane, they shouldn’t be policing speech. There is zero reason for it. We’re mostly adults here. Stop treating like us children. Thanks.
question: have you actually read, 1984 or are you just riding off coattails of summarizes and associated tl;dr to make your claim?
The functional issue is you seem more concerned with ‘censorship’ in all cases, without care for reason or context, and you’ll also overgeneralize to suit the demands of what you want. Which, really, is more the sort of mindset if one were: in charge, in want to impose their perspective on others, and lash out with incomplete information.
Some court-case proceedings in regards to constitution rights do see some places of social media as an extension of the ‘free market place’ of ideas, and thus protect certain rights of free speech to access those platforms. However, some areas are not in the public sector, or more ‘private’ in their label, and well, some rulings have said its up to the companies to police themselves.
So, how much of what I summarized is something you actually know and how much did you not know, but are willing to investigate yourself accordingly?
Cuz that’s not even getting into the sort of social obligations sites like Facebook have in other countries where they’re expected to censor and police usage violations such as the spread of hate-speech and unfound slander.
are those distinctions you’re going to care to be informed about regarding the particulars, or are you just going to over generalize on principal and just denounce anything that doesn’t suit you accordingly?
Cuz get this, some forms of ‘speech’ aren’t protected. Might help if you know which ones are, so you’re not apart of a manipulatable reaction that gets you to double-speak on things you think support one area, but don’t care enough to be informed on particulars to realize the incongruity of conduct versus action.
Sooooo. If you’re gonna attack my knowledge on a book, at least be knowledgeable in the real world. Hate speech has zero legal definition because it doesn’t exist as law because too many sensitive people with fragile egos deem everything they dislike hearing is hate speech.
At least the American Supreme Court ruled it that way.
A little rant about the rotten core of blizzard as a company.
Blizzard is deep in left-wing California. I’m not sure they understand the rest of North America. They should take a hint from how their game is going right now. The more they enhance the report system, the more toxic the games seem to get. The more they try to promote team-play and rebuild their match making system, the worse the teams are getting.
The best design choices in video games, and the best moderators always respect the individual. The game design and the forums are the opposite.
They promote control over the experience, reject solo carry and punish a single voice that is taken as offensive. The whole experience is getting pretty bad in my eyes and it all started with shared experience.
Apparently it’s removed, meanwhile a guy who couldn’t argue with facts launched series of personal attacks against me and those comments can stay on the forum.
I’m not talking about being racist, dumb, whatever.
I’m talking about the right to openly criticize someone in a calm collective respectful manner - in which the poster did.
That’s just straight fascism.
Edit:
@Amei "
I sadly couldn’t see the post, I was at work, but if the OP truly lost is cool afterwards. I’m sorry. But I can’t witness or bring testify to your claims.
That is 100%. There is speech and only speech. You agree with it or you dont.
“hate speech” is just another way to brainwash people into censoring themselves and not saying what they really mean. Again, there is no such thing as Hate speech, there is only speech. It is either free or censored.
Lead designers saying the game is alright when they are firing and rehiring that particular role every year, due to incompetence probably.
Technical support lying over and over against facts everyone knows.
Censorship on the forum.
This place has became a complete mess lately. I really don’t know what is happening to this company, I used to like it since I was a child playing Diablo 1, now I just despise these people.
It does lol, simply because facebook is getting to define it for their terms of service (however problematic and mercurial that might), and not through some legal definition for the government. That’s the thing you don’t seem to understand. It’s a private company, just like Blizzard is.
The case you’re referring to is one in which the government stopped a trademark on grounds a band name might be racially insensitive.
@StrikerJolt it’s still in another topic but honestly I don’t wan’t anyone else involved. The only one thing he wasn’t wrong about it’s my hotslogs MMR and everything else was ill-disposed fabricated mumbo-jumbo.
About hate speech. Nowadays hate speech is often interpreted as disagreement. Why couldn’t we criticize something or someone in a respectful manner?
Hate speech is speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, national origin, sex, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity. The law of some countries describes hate speech as speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display that incites violence or prejudicial action against a protected group or individual on the basis of their membership of the group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected group, or individual on the basis of their membership of the group.
No one wants to hurt or humiliate anyone, especially not any protected groups who have inalterable attributes or religious beliefs.
Being dumb shouldn’t provide protected status against those who are willing to convince a person about the truth or something that can help the person to adapt in some way. It’s not hate speech and censoring these conversations can’t happen under the flag of delivering justice. It’s just being causeless and exaggerated SJW.
Under the rules it is considered a “threat” to type that you will report someone. So what you have written here is against the very rules you say you know and follow.
