Overwatch dev talks about baning players over facebook posts

[therealbowser]

Who cares about toxicity? Just give us a vote kick to punish people who actively troll (like jumping down a ledge the entire game) and leave the fucking rest to the players...

It's probably the best solution, but frankly, this would be abused too. "This guy sucks, kick them." etc.

[Klingers]

And to sumarize other reasons that can get you banned from overwatch so far

-Using too many emotes
-playing only one character (even if you're very good at it)
-having a potty mouth
-posting naughty things on social media
-Winning too many games (there was a guy who was a one trick pony playing reinheard and got banned)

Honestly I don't care if someone thinks they're the most godly Hanzo or Widow in existence. If it's Point A on Hanamura and the enemy team has double barrier tanks at the choke and you won't switch at least until we're through the choke, get the fuck out of my game.

[OrcsRLame]

Nobody's losing any "freedom". A private company is telling customers who keep breaking their rules to please leave their premises. That's it. If you've got an issue with that, you're the one attacking that company's freedom to manage its own services.

I'm not the one monitoring people for wrong think.

And for the record, I'm not a libertarian. I'm not part of the "taxes are theft" crowd. If anything I'd be something like a social liberal, which I guess makes me center right these days.

Also, I don't consider corporations to be people just because US laws do. I think that's retarded. Corporations don't have freedom in the same way that my coffee mug doesn't have freedom. There's nothing there to take.

The shitty justification you're trotting out is the same reasoning that companies like Nestle use to fuck up third world countries. When Nestle offers young mothers milk to feed their starving babies they do so knowing that the mother's own body will stop producing milk when she stops breast feeding. When that happens, Nestle stops handing out the milk for free, but offers to sell milk to the mother. The end result is they make a profit and kids die.

The mother didn't have to use that company's service. It's still Orwellian as all hell. It's still extreme totalitarianism. And we have fucking people like you that want to be dominated. It's like Fahrenheit 451 except instead of the public not wanting books to exist you have the public wanting to be dominated by corporations. I say fuck that. I'm not giving Blizzard another goddamn cent. I hope the free market eats them. I hope the government breaks up the big tech companies like Google.

[Deleted]

Its inherently flawed and doomned to fail every x years. But it works better than the other options.


I do have some problems with behavioral guidelines being set by gaming companies however, but hey that’s just me.as long as drastic lines arent being oassed (i.e. exclusive or hatefull comments or inciting violence).. you know, the stuff thats forbidden by law.

Then ppl sill be fine

[AeneasBK]

<Holy Moly?>

Are you sure you meant to compare Blizzard monitoring toxic behaviour to the Nestly baby powder scandal?

[Venant]

lol, says free speech, doesn't know what free speech is

OT: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes!

Luckily I'm not a toxic nob on the internet because I didn't get enough hugs as a child and nothing is going to happen to my Overwatch account.

You know, some people would consider your language in this post pretty toxic, do you have any defense against being banned from any games you play as a result of this post?

[OrcsRLame]

Are you sure you meant to compare Blizzard monitoring toxic behaviour to the Nestly baby powder scandal?

Yes, Yes I did. You got a problem with that?

It's a great fucking example of why it's not okay to make excuses for corporate power.

[Venant]

Yes, Yes I did. You got a problem with that?

It's a great fucking example of why it's not okay to make excuses for corporate power.

There seems to be a correlation between people blindly supporting power and their belief that they hold the same opinions as those who would hold that power.

[Endus]

Yes, Yes I did. You got a problem with that?

It's a great fucking example of why it's not okay to make excuses for corporate power.

Except that, in this case, the only "power" being discussed is Blizzard's right to make decisions about how customers can use Blizzard's services.

And those customers have signed agreements conceding this, agreements the customers that have been banned broke.

So no. It's not comparable, at all. The only people attacking basic rights are those of you attacking Blizzard over this, because you don't want to abide by the user agreements you've already signed off on, apparently.

It's no different than if you went to a local pool, saw the big "no horseplay" sign, and proceeded to engage in horseplay. And got kicked out. And then you're standing outside the pool ranting about how unfair it is and how it's such an abuse of power.

It's their property, their rules. Don't like the rules? Stay off their property. Not that freaking hard.

[Machismo]

I'm not the one monitoring people for wrong think.

And for the record, I'm not a libertarian. I'm not part of the "taxes are theft" crowd. If anything I'd be something like a social liberal, which I guess makes me center right these days.

Also, I don't consider corporations to be people just because US laws do. I think that's retarded. Corporations don't have freedom in the same way that my coffee mug doesn't have freedom. There's nothing there to take.

The shitty justification you're trotting out is the same reasoning that companies like Nestle use to fuck up third world countries. When Nestle offers young mothers milk to feed their starving babies they do so knowing that the mother's own body will stop producing milk when she stops breast feeding. When that happens, Nestle stops handing out the milk for free, but offers to sell milk to the mother. The end result is they make a profit and kids die.

The mother didn't have to use that company's service. It's still Orwellian as all hell. It's still extreme totalitarianism. And we have fucking people like you that want to be dominated. It's like Fahrenheit 451 except instead of the public not wanting books to exist you have the public wanting to be dominated by corporations. I say fuck that. I'm not giving Blizzard another goddamn cent. I hope the free market eats them. I hope the government breaks up the big tech companies like Google.

Lighten up, Francis. If you don't like it, use a different company. Unlike an Orwellian government, you are not being forced to use their product.

[Deleted]

Except that, in this case, the only "power" being discussed is Blizzard's right to make decisions about how customers can use Blizzard's services.

And those customers have signed agreements conceding this, agreements the customers that have been banned broke.

So no. It's not comparable, at all. The only people attacking basic rights are those of you attacking Blizzard over this, because you don't want to abide by the user agreements you've already signed off on, apparently.

It's no different than if you went to a local pool, saw the big "no horseplay" sign, and proceeded to engage in horseplay. And got kicked out. And then you're standing outside the pool ranting about how this is just like a company poisoning people for profit.

The Nestle analogy is perfectly on point.
It being that companies can't just put anything they want on such contracts. And maybe we should not approve of some terms, independently of them being currently able to pass them under certain jurisdictions.

If you want to support some TOS or another, make the case for them. "It's a contract" is not an argument, but a dodge.

[Endus]

The Nestle analogy is perfectly on point.
It being that companies can't just put anything they want on such contracts. And maybe we should not approve of some terms, independently of them being currently able to pass them under certain jurisdictions.

If you want to support some TOS or another, make the case for them. "It's a contract" is not an argument, but a dodge.

In this case, the "terms" were basically "don't be a dick when using our services".

People proceeded to be dicks, and post video of themselves being dicks in Blizzard games to social media.

Sure, if a TOS said "you will give us your firstborn child", take issue with that. This isn't that. It's normal standard stuff. If you want to take issue with the specifics of these rules, go nuts. Nobody is. They're just running around like headless chickens, shrieking about "ABUSE OF POWER" and "MAH FREEDOMS (to be an asshole)!"

[Deleted]

In this case, the "terms" were basically "don't be a dick when using our services".

People proceeded to be dicks, and post video of themselves being dicks in Blizzard games to social media.

Sure, if a TOS said "you will give us your firstborn child", take issue with that. This isn't that. It's normal standard stuff.

Which is alright. Or more specifically, in my case, it's whatever, since I'm not particularly interested either way.

But

This

Nobody's losing any "freedom". A private company is telling customers who keep breaking their rules to please leave their premises. That's it. If you've got an issue with that, you're the one attacking that company's freedom to manage its own services.

Needs to be contested as a display of vacuity.
And one of the lowest tiers of rhetoric, bar insults: NO U.
And a particularly harmful at that, given that muh freedum of asociasun, has been used, and is still being used, to deny basic rights to many groups.

[OrcsRLame]

Except that, in this case, the only "power" being discussed is Blizzard's right to make decisions about how customers can use Blizzard's services.

That's exactly what Nestle did when they killed a bunch of kids in third world countries. All they did was made decisions about who could and could not use their services.

And those customers have signed agreements conceding this, agreements the customers that have been banned broke. So no. It's not comparable, at all. The only people attacking basic rights are those of you attacking Blizzard over this, because you don't want to abide by the user agreements you've already signed off on, apparently. It's no different than if you went to a local pool, saw the big "no horseplay" sign, and proceeded to engage in horseplay. And got kicked out. And then you're standing outside the pool ranting about how unfair it is and how it's such an abuse of power.

I'm not sure you understand what is happening here. This is a direct statement by Blizzard that they will ban people for what they do outside of Blizzard games. A more accurate analogy would be me engaging in horseplay on the other side of town at an establishment where horseplay is allowed, then going to the local pool and not being let in for the horseplay I engaged in at the other establishment.

I said it once, I'll say it again. Blizzard has no rights. Blizzard isn't a person, it's an abstract social construct. The fact that we grant abstract social constructs rights in this country is absurd. Most of the time it's just a way for CEOs to limit their personal liability when engaging in shady bullshit. I am not attacking basic rights because Blizzard is not a person. It's a ridiculous assertion.

It's their property, their rules. Don't like the rules? Stay off their property. Not that freaking hard.

As I said already, Blizzard isn't getting another cent from me unless they walk this back hard. I have played Blizzard games off and on for the last decade. It's been a few months since I've played a Blizzard game, and I'm not seeing a compelling reason to go back. A pity, I was looking forward to a Diablo 4 announcement. Oh well, other things can occupy my time.

- - - Updated - - -

Lighten up, Francis. If you don't like it, use a different company. Unlike an Orwellian government, you are not being forced to use their product.

This is a non-argument. Go away if you have nothing of value to say.

[Endus]

That's exactly what Nestle did when they killed a bunch of kids in third world countries. All they did was made decisions about who could and could not use their services.

That's false. You know it. You stated otherwise in your prior post.

I'm not sure you understand what is happening here. This is a direct statement by Blizzard that they will ban people for what they do outside of Blizzard games. A more accurate analogy would be me engaging in horseplay on the other side of town at an establishment where horseplay is allowed, then going to the local pool and not being let in for the horseplay I engaged in at the other establishment.

This is also false. It's a deliberate misrepresentation of what Blizzard is doing. They're using posts on social media, of toxic behaviour in Blizzard games, as justification for banning. That's it.

I said it once, I'll say it again. Blizzard has no rights. Blizzard isn't a person, it's an abstract social construct. The fact that we grant abstract social constructs rights in this country is absurd. Most of the time it's just a way for CEOs to limit their personal liability when engaging in shady bullshit. I am not attacking basic rights because Blizzard is not a person. It's a ridiculous assertion.

Even if you wanted to go down this road, Blizzard's owners are people, and they would have exactly the rights you're denying to the corporation. So you're not actually making your argument any better, you're just shifting it from attacking a corporation's property rights to attacking the property rights of individual persons.

Not a step in your favor.

At this point, you're lying about what's going on, apparently just so you can slam Blizzard. Why?

[AeneasBK]

Yes, Yes I did. You got a problem with that?

It's a great fucking example of why it's not okay to make excuses for corporate power.

Well then just fucking lol at you I guess.

- - - Updated - - -

...A more accurate analogy would be...

Positive you shouldn't be an arbiter of that now.

[Machismo]

That's exactly what Nestle did when they killed a bunch of kids in third world countries. All they did was made decisions about who could and could not use their services.



I'm not sure you understand what is happening here. This is a direct statement by Blizzard that they will ban people for what they do outside of Blizzard games. A more accurate analogy would be me engaging in horseplay on the other side of town at an establishment where horseplay is allowed, then going to the local pool and not being let in for the horseplay I engaged in at the other establishment.

I said it once, I'll say it again. Blizzard has no rights. Blizzard isn't a person, it's an abstract social construct. The fact that we grant abstract social constructs rights in this country is absurd. Most of the time it's just a way for CEOs to limit their personal liability when engaging in shady bullshit. I am not attacking basic rights because Blizzard is not a person. It's a ridiculous assertion.



As I said already, Blizzard isn't getting another cent from me unless they walk this back hard. I have played Blizzard games off and on for the last decade. It's been a few months since I've played a Blizzard game, and I'm not seeing a compelling reason to go back. A pity, I was looking forward to a Diablo 4 announcement. Oh well, other things can occupy my time.

- - - Updated - - -



This is a non-argument. Go away if you have nothing of value to say.

It is an argument, you just don't happen to like it. Instead, you want to continuously whine.

If you don't like how a company operates, use a competing company. Stop giving that company your money. No, you are too lazy to do that. Instead, you are going to demand that the government coddle you, because you are too lazy to do it yourself.

[ro9ue]

When I clicked I thought it was a dinoflask edit as a joke...

Holy shit Blizzard. This is way too far. People can simply ignore players. Yikes this is scary stuff.

I will say I do like the idea of people getting a warning first. I'm a second chances kind of guy, and I'd rather a player stay a part of the community if they change their ways.

[OrcsRLame]

That's false. You know it. You stated otherwise in your prior post.

Bullshit. Fucking quote me. What Nestle did, is they offered their services to the mothers. Then after a certain amount of time passed they rescinded that offer and made a different one. All they did was make decisions regarding the control of their own services. They didn't force anyone to do anything.

This is also false. It's a deliberate misrepresentation of what Blizzard is doing. They're using posts on social media, of toxic behaviour in Blizzard games, as justification for banning. That's it.

Do you have a source for this claim? It's my understanding that Blizzard will use posts on social media as justification for banning, without the caveat that it must involve toxic behavior in Blizzard games.

Even if you wanted to go down this road, Blizzard's owners are people, and they would have exactly the rights you're denying to the corporation. So you're not actually making your argument any better, you're just shifting it from attacking a corporation's property rights to attacking the property rights of individual persons. Not a step in your favor.

It is a step in my favor because individual persons can't get away with half the shit that corporations do. God I'm starting to sound like a communist, but it's fucking true. Also, if an individual person managed to legally usurp control of my life away from me, I would shoot them. Not saying Blizzard deserves to be shot. Google and Facebook maybe. It's easy to see though how Blizzard is walking that same path. Get money, get people to use your stuff, change the rules then threaten to take your stuff away from them if they don't abide by the new rules. If you can't see how that is incredibly authoritarian then I don't know what to tell you.

At this point, you're lying about what's going on, apparently just so you can slam Blizzard. Why?

I am not a liar. If I have said anything untrue it is because I am misinformed. Accuse me again and I will prove that I am much more competent and throwing insults than you are.

- - - Updated - - -

It is an argument, you just don't happen to like it. Instead, you want to continuously whine.

If you don't like how a company operates, use a competing company. Stop giving that company your money. No, you are too lazy to do that. Instead, you are going to demand that the government coddle you, because you are too lazy to do it yourself.

Learn to read before spouting your nihilistic bullshit at me. I am not currently giving Blizzard money and I never will again unless I see compelling evidence that they have stopped this behavior and will not start it up again.

Also, it's not an argument, it's particular kind of Red Herring called a Thought Terminating Cliche.

Unlike an Orwellian government, you are not being forced to use their product.

The quoted text is not an argument because I asserted that Orwell got his concept of the Orwellian government wrong, and that the reality is closer to Fahrenheit 451, where people sign away their rights willing because they no longer care about them due to social engineering. You didn't address my actual point, you just puked up a Red Herring.

- - - Updated - - -

Well then just fucking lol at you I guess. Positive you shouldn't be an arbiter of that now.

I'm going to ask the same thing of you that I asked of Machismo. If you have nothing of value to say, then please leave me alone.

[Machismo]

Bullshit. Fucking quote me. What Nestle did, is they offered their services to the mothers. Then after a certain amount of time passed they rescinded that offer and made a different one. All they did was make decisions regarding the control of their own services. They didn't force anyone to do anything.




Do you have a source for this claim? It's my understanding that Blizzard will use posts on social media as justification for banning, without the caveat that it must involve toxic behavior in Blizzard games.



It is a step in my favor because individual persons can't get away with half the shit that corporations do. God I'm starting to sound like a communist, but it's fucking true. Also, if an individual person managed to legally usurp control of my life away from me, I would shoot them. Not saying Blizzard deserves to be shot. Google and Facebook maybe. It's easy to see though how Blizzard is walking that same path. Get money, get people to use your stuff, change the rules then threaten to take your stuff away from them if they don't abide by the new rules. If you can't see how that is incredibly authoritarian then I don't know what to tell you.



I am not a liar. If I have said anything untrue it is because I am misinformed. Accuse me again and I will prove that I am much more competent and throwing insults than you are.

- - - Updated - - -



Learn to read before spouting your nihilistic bullshit at me. I am not currently giving Blizzard money and I never will again unless I see compelling evidence that they have stopped this behavior and will not start it up again.

Also, it's not an argument, it's particular kind of Red Herring called a Thought Terminating Cliche.



The quoted text is not an argument because I asserted that Orwell got his concept of the Orwellian government wrong, and that the reality is closer to Fahrenheit 451, where people sign away their rights willing because they no longer care about them due to social engineering. You didn't address my actual point, you just puked up a Red Herring.

Then, there is no problem, and no need to whine. It sounds like your problem is solved. It was an argument, not only that, you actually followed the advice I gave (you likely did it beforehand), meaning you supported what I said. How's that for a great twist, you agree with me.

You want to continue to whine about something that is simply not happening, and you have already found a solution to the issue. Your solution is my solution, so thanks for agreeing with me. I also agree with you, stop giving them your money.