Glad we could agree something.
1 Like
Doubt ten characters
Genuinely the most “i am 16 and only understand politics/law from social media” post I have ever seen in my entire life. Truly a work of art. I don’t think anyone could have faked something as stupid as this.
4 Likes
There’s addons that increase the amount of people you can ignore.
It’s unfortunate that my previous argument was dismissed with such a childish response, So I’m going clarify my position:
Firstly, it’s important to consider the broader implications of enforcing restrictions on discussions within the game. Given that Blizzard has incorporated various ideologies into the game, penalizing players with opposing will be seen as VERY hypocritical. This could create a sense of bias within the community and have underlying repercussions.
Furthermore, as long as the content being discussed does not violate Blizzard’s ToS, restricting players’ ability to participate in trade, general, and LFG channels would infringe on their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech. Blizzard’s role is to ensure a safe and respectful environment for all players, addressing any behavior that breaches the ToS, but not censoring opposing viewpoints that are respectfully expressed.
Creating an inclusive environment means respecting diverse perspectives and allowing players to express their views within the boundaries of the ToS. Players who find certain discussions disruptive can use available tools like ignore to manage their chat experience without infringing on others’ rights.
Hey, guess what? These are 100% facts. You know what the crazy thing about facts is? They don’t have feelings! Just because the words on a computer screen hurt your feelings does not mean they are hate speech. You also want to know another fact? The truth hurts.
The fact that you needed to throw insults out to try and counter but ultimately fail at dismissing the facts really shows that you are the one who is
PPGF
In summary, it’s essential to balance maintaining a respectful gaming environment with allowing freedom of expression. This approach fosters an inclusive and fair community for all players.
MPH
1 Like
Makes sense, 90% of his posts are copy/pastes from chatgpt. I recommend just putting him on ignore, if everyone on the forum did that maybe we’ll be rid of him for good
3 Likes
I agree with what you’re saying, but one thing I’d like to bring up is that while the first amendment does protect freedom of speech, it doesn’t mean private entities can’t ban you for your comments. I only say this because censorship is on the rise over social media. Especially Youtube. I would post all kinds of comments that, while they were respectful, they were just a bit critical of certain policies or people doing things that were kind of messed up. And some of my comments end up getting deleted. I even had a warning on my account calling one of my comments “hate speech” Even though I was not insulting people.
I really, really do not like automated moderation bots. I think they’re such a horrible idea, and this is just something I worry about making it’s way into WoW. I mean, heck, it’s already in CoD now, and I refuse to ever touch that game again because of it.
100%
I appreciate your agreement and your additional points. You are absolutely right that private entities do have the ability to moderate and ban users for their comments, even if they do not violate the First Amendment. Censorship on social media platforms like YouTube is indeed on the rise, and it can be frustrating when respectful, critical comments are removed.
I also share your concerns about automated moderation bots. They can often be overly strict or misinterpret context, leading to unfair bans or censorship. This is indeed a worry as it might make its way into games like WoW, potentially affecting the player experience.
However, I would like to reiterate that my primary point was about maintaining a balance within the game environment. As long as the comments do not violate Blizzard’s ToS, players should have the freedom to express their views. Blizzard’s role should be to ensure a safe and respectful environment for all players, addressing any behavior that breaches the ToS, but not censoring opposing viewpoints that are respectfully expressed.
Creating an inclusive environment means respecting diverse perspectives and allowing players to express their views within the boundaries of the ToS. Players who find certain discussions disruptive can use available tools like ignore to manage their chat experience without infringing on others’ rights.
In summary, while private entities do have the right to moderate content, it’s crucial to ensure that this moderation is fair and respectful of free speech, as long as it remains within the established guidelines.
1 Like
Yeah. And that’s where the problem lies. A lot of these people running the games/websites do not take a balanced approach. Anyone who disagrees with them is banned or labeled as hateful, and thus censored.
Ideally, it’s best for people not to talk politics unless it’s with friends or a very close guild. but I completely agree that as long as it’s not hateful, they shouldn’t be banned over expressing their point of view. But as time goes on, it just keeps getting worse. We’re at the point now where we are walking on egg shells and have to watch every single word for fear of being silenced :\
100% have you heard of the “respondeat superior”?
Companies should hold employees accountable for their actions. If it is proven that an employee oversteps and wrongfully bans/penalizes a player due to their personal feelings, they should be held accountable for these actions in some manner. Additionally, if the company does nothing, they should be held accountable for their employees’ actions.
Under the legal doctrine known as respondeat superior (Latin for ‘let the superior answer’), employers can be held liable for the actions of their employees when those actions occur within the scope of employment. This means that if an employee wrongfully penalizes a customer or player based on personal feelings and the player’s actions did not violate the Terms of Service, the company can still be held legally liable.
1 Like
I’ve never heard of that before. Being in a moderation position, you know it’s hard to keep a neutral mindset and to set your feelings aside. Although I’m sure people are being wrongfully banned every so often, you think companies still enforce that?
Edit: I tried to quote you and the system ended up deleting it lol.
In 2025 certain words are so broad in scope…I go they may be one of those people. their definition is so broad its not even funny anymore.
Example, it could be someone who hated a movie or show with marginalized actors, writers, etc.
that now falls under racist misogynistic transphobic bigot by default. The actor/show/writing was just really bad is not even factored in. straight to bigot you go.
First amendment does not apply to private companies.
6 Likes
In public, sure. In a private environment using a platform owned by a private entity using characters owned entirely by the same entity… no. In this instance, you do not have any rights to do anything outside of what Blizz says. If Blizz was so inclined, they could take your character out of your control, change their appearance to an oompa loompa, dress them up in a pretty pink tutu and march them through Org / SW while making all nearby characters / NPCs spam emote that they are slapping the oompa loompa’s butt.
Doesn’t apply to people using systems / properties owned by private companies. They dictate what they will and will not allow and have every right to censor / penalize / delete anything and everything you do with their private property.
Section 2 of Blizz’s EULA:
The following components of the Platform (which do not include content or components of the Licensors’ Games), are owned or licensed by Blizzard:
Characters: The names, likenesses, inventories, and catch phrases of Game characters;
All data and communications generated by, or occurring through, the Platform
All Accounts, including the name of the Account and any Battle Tags associated with an Account.
Section 10 of Blizz’s EULA:
This Agreement is effective upon your creation of an Account, and shall remain in effect until it is terminated or superseded by a New Agreement, or, if neither of the foregoing events occur, as long as you continue using the Platform.
Blizzard reserves the right to terminate this Agreement at any time for any reason, or for no reason, with or without notice to you.
In the event of a termination of this Agreement, any right you may have had to any pre-purchased Game access or virtual goods, such as digital cards, currency, weapons, armor, wearable items, skins, sprays, pets, mounts, etc., are forfeit
And from the Code of Conduct:
Acceptable behavior is determined by player reports and Blizzard’s decision
What I just quoted are facts. Citations, evidence, authoritative documents… those are facts. Just because LtDan says something doesn’t make it a fact.
Please refer to the EULA and CoC citations. Blizz employees, acting on behalf of Blizz can do anything they want as far as your access goes. Pay particular attention to:
Blizzard reserves the right to terminate this Agreement at any time for any reason, or for no reason, with or without notice to you.
They did this WAY too much and it truly started since BFA and only got worst since then and it kicked into OVERDRIVE in War Within.
I’ll take a bunch of cringe political enjoyers in chat over being force fed political views and IRL social issues by the devs with their stories.
(post deleted by author)