This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Gamesindustry.biz Sr. Editor quits Steam over Valve's inaction with hate speech

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. Gamesindustry.biz Sr. Editor quits Steam over Valve's inaction with hate speech

User Info: jakisthe

jakisthe
4 weeks ago#151
No, what I'm saying is that, again, you can be ok with both sides, or you can be ok with neither side, but the hypocrisy is silly and a broader understanding of the effect is probably better than ignoring the actual end result and only rallying around the most narrow definition on censorship you possibly can. At least the Bayonetta 2 example was consistent, which is more than I can say for most.
-Why is there yogurt in this cap?!
-It used to be milk, but, well, time makes fools of us all. (cookie for reference)::160 cookies given thus far::

User Info: apathid

apathid
4 weeks ago#152
Just trying to understand but are people here getting upset and being reactionary because a dude made a personal decision about using steam and wrote about it?

I guess majority of people here are the brainwashed "imma neg review dem" kind.

It's really ironic because they were very upset a coupe years ago that anyone dare review a game negatively due to their politics or personal bias, but if your an anonymous gamer then ok whatever.
FC - 2981 9944 0262

User Info: AlleRacing

AlleRacing
4 weeks ago#153
jakisthe posted...
No, what I'm saying is that, again, you can be ok with both sides, or you can be ok with neither side, but the hypocrisy is silly and a broader understanding of the effect is probably better than ignoring the actual end result and only rallying around the most narrow definition on censorship you possibly can. At least the Bayonetta 2 example was consistent, which is more than I can say for most.

And what I'm saying is that they are not equivalent, and that being more okay with one over the other is far from hypocrisy. I don't participate in review bombs (btw, some review bomb, only down to mixed on Steam and 6.8 on metacritic user score, reading a handful of the recent negative reviews, not even sure if this qualifies), but they are, if anything, the appropriate avenue to criticize a game and its developer. Abusing the copyright system of YouTube is not an appropriate avenue to distance yourself from someone you disagree with.
http://i.imgur.com/6tJEBqH.jpg
http://steamsigmaker.de/new/AlleRacing.png

User Info: jakisthe

jakisthe
4 weeks ago#154
But again, that's missing the forest for the trees. Some would say that quantitatively damaging the financial potential for the single product of an entire company is much worse than removing a handful of videos out of thousands for one of the richest people in internet media. I'm not one of them.

Instead, I'm saying that looking at it in terms of "yes well the exact effect was removing a video, which is censorship and we hate that so boo them!" is completely besides the point, because they are both taken steps which are hard to directly compare, and therefore it would be prudent to view them on the standpoint that they are both politically motivated actions that each side feels it is justified to use within the tools they have, not who "is allowed" to do what in what crosses the line for our own morality, and that us trying to determine who is right and who is wrong by focusing on any very particular aspect of a side is then injecting our own lines in the sand needlessly when the idea is to try and at least be consistent.
-Why is there yogurt in this cap?!
-It used to be milk, but, well, time makes fools of us all. (cookie for reference)::160 cookies given thus far::

User Info: DaedalusEx

DaedalusEx
4 weeks ago#155
jakisthe posted...
You're missing the part where it's still striking back; a politically motivated action designed to create a chilling effect, saying "don't do that again, devs", except you keep getting caught up on the exact minutea.


It's not minutia, it's the crux of the issue. You're trying to equate two starkly different actions because 'they're both politically motivated.'

>Only wants the side which represents his own political interests to be able to have an "appropriate response"; anything else is "forcing a viewpoint" or "abusing the system" and should not be voiced


People can just as easily write good reviews praising the company's politics, and they should be able to. Only one side here is trying impinge on the others ability to express themselves.

Death_Born posted...
Randomly blurting something out implies you've said it so many times it's become second nature.


No it doesn't, and it's ridiculous to conclude that someone thinks a race is superior/inferior because they blurted out a word in frustration.

User Info: jakisthe

jakisthe
4 weeks ago#156
No, it's the crux of the issue for you. I mean, you already just saw it as "naughty language", so it's pretty easy to guess how you'd fall here. Others would say *that's* the crux. I'm sure you don't care that CS will suffer financially either, because that's ok, as long as it's "against censorship" (but don't bring up a chilling effect, whatever that is). You deem one action to be appropriate, but the other not. Congrats! Others disagree, and who are you to say they're wrong?

Two actions, two sides. Either be ok with both or be ok with none, but don't inject your own morals in fundamentally incomparable responses.
jakisthe posted...
>Ostensibly fights against censorship
>Only wants the side which represents his own political interests to be able to have an "appropriate response"; anything else is "forcing a viewpoint" or "abusing the system" and should not be voiced
-Why is there yogurt in this cap?!
-It used to be milk, but, well, time makes fools of us all. (cookie for reference)::160 cookies given thus far::

User Info: AlleRacing

AlleRacing
4 weeks ago#157
jakisthe posted...
Either be ok with both or be ok with none

See, this is probably the point of contention in this argument with you. You yourself said that they are hard to directly compare, but then you drop this like the comparison is absolute and that both actions are definitely equivalent. I'm going to be okay with one of these actions, and it's not hypocrisy to do so.
http://i.imgur.com/6tJEBqH.jpg
http://steamsigmaker.de/new/AlleRacing.png

User Info: jakisthe

jakisthe
4 weeks ago#158
To try and hem and haw about which one is precisely worse is putting too much stock in your own capacity to moralize, so yeah. Kinda my point. You can be ok with one, and I'm going to call that hypocrisy and a misunderstanding of the broader concept of censorship beyond "DMCA takedown".
-Why is there yogurt in this cap?!
-It used to be milk, but, well, time makes fools of us all. (cookie for reference)::160 cookies given thus far::

User Info: DaedalusEx

DaedalusEx
4 weeks ago#159
jakisthe posted...
I'm sure you don't care that CS will suffer financially either


It has nothing to do with caring. They are not entitled to sales. If someone decides of their own volition not to purchase their game they are fully within their rights to do so.

Others disagree, and who are you to say they're wrong?


The person with the better argument.

Two actions, two sides. Either be ok with both or be ok with none


I am OK with people writing reviews, good or bad. I am not OK with using legal frameworks to forcibly remove content or expressions for ideological reasons, regardless of the ideology. My position is consistent.

User Info: jakisthe

jakisthe
4 weeks ago#160
Hey look, I was right! You don't care. Others do. I'm sure they care about using a review framework to damage the financial prospects of a company as a chilling effect, regardless of ideology. Their arguments are in the other direction, whereas you continue to misunderstand the broader concept of censorious actions. Just gotta have that buzzword to rally around, never mind the actual effects. Very hypocritical.
jakisthe posted...
>Ostensibly fights against censorship
>Only wants the side which represents his own political interests to be able to have an "appropriate response"; anything else is "forcing a viewpoint" or "abusing the system" and should not be voiced
-Why is there yogurt in this cap?!
-It used to be milk, but, well, time makes fools of us all. (cookie for reference)::160 cookies given thus far::
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. Gamesindustry.biz Sr. Editor quits Steam over Valve's inaction with hate speech

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived