Page 29 of 46 FirstFirst ...
19
27
28
29
30
31
39
... LastLast
  1. #561
    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    Blizzard does not need to run the rules of their games by share holders or report them to share holders. That isn't what being a share holder entails. Lol.
    Like i said, when your company is under investigation for harassment, and you are making changes directly in response to that, these changes absolutely, 100% are being run by the board and various entities, including the people th4ey have hired to try and save their shattered public image. You wrongly assume that communicating things to shareholders means individually calling each shareholder - this is very naive of you and shows a complete lack of understanding of what is going on @ Blizzard right now.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Relapses View Post
    Yeah, sure. I'm sure Blizzard's shareholders give the faintest fuck about whether /spit is able to be used in the game. Are you serious? Like, really?
    Yes, I am dead serious when the company you have invested financially in is making changes based around "harassment", when they themselves have been charged with harassment, and the stock price is volatile as fuck - yes, they care.
    Quote Originally Posted by Utrrabbit View Post
    Any sane person would see your a moron.
    Quote Originally Posted by OokOok View Post
    you have to be a moron to of said .

  2. #562
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    Like i said, when your company is under investigation for harassment, and you are making changes directly in response to that, these changes absolutely, 100% are being run by the board and various entities, including the people th4ey have hired to try and save their shattered public image. You wrongly assume that communicating things to shareholders means individually calling each shareholder - this is very naive of you and shows a complete lack of understanding of what is going on @ Blizzard right now.
    That still is not how being a share holder works. Blizzard does not need to put every decision up for a vote with the share holders. In fact I would wager that no company has ever put rules for harassment in a video game up to a share holder vote. Being run by the board and various entities that are in-house is 100% different then what you are claiming.

    Each share holder needs to be informed of anything run by share holders. It is how being a share holder works. This is why share holders get packets mailed out when it comes time for the meetings and voting. And why they designate proxies that can make the choices for them instead of doing it in-person or at all. Whether or not a emote should be removed from the game was not at the consultation of a share holder.

    Provide some proof that it is standard practice to do so or stop calling people naive and not able to understand something. Or just flat out say you are making stuff up to win an online discussion.
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

  3. #563
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    Yes, I am dead serious when the company you have invested financially in is making changes based around "harassment", when they themselves have been charged with harassment, and the stock price is volatile as fuck - yes, they care.
    The allegations against Blizzard do not change the fact that changes made the game are still well outside the scope of a shareholder's responsibility. This is a ridiculous argument.

  4. #564
    Quote Originally Posted by Relapses View Post
    The allegations against Blizzard do not change the fact that changes made the game are still well outside the scope of a shareholder's responsibility. This is a ridiculous argument.
    All this anger because "someone" confused a public company with a private one - sometimes its best to just admit fault and move on. Blizzard is NOT a privately owned company, they are a publicly traded company, therefore the statement that they can "do whatever the fuck they want" is absolutely false.
    Quote Originally Posted by Utrrabbit View Post
    Any sane person would see your a moron.
    Quote Originally Posted by OokOok View Post
    you have to be a moron to of said .

  5. #565
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    All this anger because "someone" confused a public company with a private one - sometimes its best to just admit fault and move on. Blizzard is NOT a privately owned company, they are a publicly traded company, therefore the statement that they can "do whatever the fuck they want" is absolutely false.
    In regards to game rules Blizzard can do whatever they want. It isn't something that requires share holder approval or to inform share holders about.
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

  6. #566
    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    In regards to game rules Blizzard can do whatever they want. It isn't something that requires share holder approval or to inform share holders about. You seem to be the angry won when you feel the need to gloat while having a larger error in your statements.
    I never once said they needed to seek each individual’s permission to make changes. I pointed out two things – 1. Blizzard / Acti-Blizzard is NOT a privately owned company as stated, it is a public company. And 2. They absolutely cannot do “whatever the fuck they want” and are held to different standards, because they are public, not private. This means decisions like this go through various stages of approval beyond just “hur dur we can do whatever the fuck we want!” – their actions and decisions have consequences that impact not just themselves, but all the shareholders as well. As such, this absolutely is taken into consideration when making such decisions.

    As I have said before, this is especially interesting at the moment, when they are saying they are making these changes to reduce harassment, while currently being taken to court over harassment…And if you look at the stock price, the reaction has been as expected.

    This needs to be understood in context - Blizzards value is dropping - quickly - and the shareholders absolutely will be asking wtf Blizzard is doing to protect their investment. When all they can say is "er, well, we removed the /spit emote" I am pretty confident the shareholders will start asking some questions.
    Last edited by arkanon; 2021-08-02 at 11:33 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Utrrabbit View Post
    Any sane person would see your a moron.
    Quote Originally Posted by OokOok View Post
    you have to be a moron to of said .

  7. #567
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    I never once said they needed to seek each individual’s permission to make changes.
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    - they absolutely ARE required to report things to people - the shareholders.
    They are not required to report rule changes for a video game to share holders. Nothing about changing the rules, before and now, requires Blizzard to inform anyone outside of the company. Share holders are considered "outside of the company". Anything internal at Blizzard or ActivisionBlizzard is still doing whatever they want. Lmao.

    You were wrong. You took the conversation out of context to get a gotcha moment and it backfired.
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

  8. #568
    The Lightbringer Lollis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    3,411
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    All this anger because "someone" confused a public company with a private one - sometimes its best to just admit fault and move on. Blizzard is NOT a privately owned company, they are a publicly traded company, therefore the statement that they can "do whatever the fuck they want" is absolutely false.
    You are confusing Private and Public trading of companies with Private and Public ownership and the Private and Public sector. Just because a company is traded publicly does not mean that it has to follow a specific set of rules such as letting everyone get their say on how a business is run.

    A Privately owned company going public merely means that shares are open to be bought by anyone. A Publicly owned company is owned by the people, usually through a govermnent, they are absolutely not synonymous.
    Speciation Is Gradual

  9. #569
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    This needs to be understood in context - Blizzards value is dropping - quickly - and the shareholders absolutely will be asking wtf Blizzard is doing to protect their investment. When all they can say is "er, well, we removed the /spit emote" I am pretty confident the shareholders will start asking some questions.

    Well, exactly..

    They're not fighting harassment with this, they're protecting their whale milking operation while hiding behind the "fighting harassment" charade.

    Can't have all those whales feeling uncomfortable about their in-game purchases. They might just stop swiping that credit card.

    What do people think will actually happen with this perceived harassment situation? Do people honestly believe the people that go around /spit on lizard riders will go "GG BLIZZARD WELL PLAYED I CONCEDE". They most certainly will not.

    People are very creative and vindictive when they feel betrayed.
    Last edited by tikcol; 2021-08-02 at 11:46 PM.

  10. #570
    Quote Originally Posted by Lollis View Post
    You are confusing Private and Public trading of companies with Private and Public ownership and the Private and Public sector. Just because a company is traded publicly does not mean that it has to follow a specific set of rules such as letting everyone get their say on how a business is run.

    A Privately owned company going public merely means that shares are open to be bought by anyone. A Publicly owned company is owned by the people, usually through a govermnent, they are absolutely not synonymous.
    Sorry but this is all incorrect - acti blizzard is a publicly owned company, and as such, they absolutely ARE held to a different standard, in particular in regards to how the business is run and how things are reported. People are being extremely disingenuous by suggested I have claimed all decisions need each shareholders approval – I never made this claim.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    They are not required to report rule changes for a video game to share holders. Nothing about changing the rules, before and now, requires Blizzard to inform anyone outside of the company. Share holders are considered "outside of the company". Anything internal at Blizzard or ActivisionBlizzard is still doing whatever they want. Lmao.

    You were wrong. You took the conversation out of context to get a gotcha moment and it backfired.
    You are entirely wrong - about all of this. When stock prices are dropping in relation to a harassment lawsuit, you absolutely do need to report how you are responding to that situation. They have responsibilities to their shareholders, because they are a PUBLIC company.
    Quote Originally Posted by Utrrabbit View Post
    Any sane person would see your a moron.
    Quote Originally Posted by OokOok View Post
    you have to be a moron to of said .

  11. #571
    This is the game you are paying for.

  12. #572
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    You are entirely wrong - about all of this. When stock prices are dropping in relation to a harassment lawsuit, you absolutely do need to report how you are responding to that situation. They have responsibilities to their shareholders, because they are a PUBLIC company.
    You absolutely are not required to even when the prices of stock drop. The legal responsibilities to their share holders does not require them to inform about the rules of a video game changing. Can you provide the law that states such? Or the ActivisionBlizzard rule given to share holders that states such? It would be near impossible for Blizzard to inform share holders of every little detail as you are suggesting.

    To do so would cripple the company far more then this lawsuit has.
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

  13. #573
    This is by far one of the more crazy things I have seen since 2004.

  14. #574
    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    You absolutely are not required to even when the prices of stock drop. The legal responsibilities to their share holders does not require them to inform about the rules of a video game changing. Can you provide the law that states such? Or the ActivisionBlizzard rule given to share holders that states such? It would be near impossible for Blizzard to inform share holders of every little detail as you are suggesting.

    To do so would cripple the company far more then this lawsuit has.
    Legal proceedings: Information about any ongoing legal matters that may be material to the company

    This is something they legally must report on to all shareholders, and the link between their ongoing legal battles regarding their culture of harassment is absolutely tied to harassment in game and their response to it. If this was some change to gameplay, it does not fall under the same requirements. But as this is related to harassment, while Blizzard themselves are currently facing a very serious legal battle over exactly that, it absolutely would.
    Quote Originally Posted by Utrrabbit View Post
    Any sane person would see your a moron.
    Quote Originally Posted by OokOok View Post
    you have to be a moron to of said .

  15. #575
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    Legal proceedings: Information about any ongoing legal matters that may be material to the company
    Removing an emote from the game is not information about an ongoing legal matter. No part of the lawsuit involves in-game harassment or emotes. Lmao.
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

  16. #576
    Quote Originally Posted by Zalraki View Post
    I'm guessing only people who think like you get to decide that, right? Feels a lot like CEOs approving each other's bonusses because they all think the same way.

    If you buy a mount that you know should not be in Classic then don't go crying about any consequences. Just because Blizzard put in it the game to milk money from the whales does not mean you had to buy it.
    A nice strawman/assumption you got there.

    And there is no "it shouldn't be there". It's Classic, not "the exact same thing again". That was obvious from the way Classic was handled already. You know, just like a vast majority of remakes/re-releases are, tweaked in some ways.

    Quote Originally Posted by ellieg View Post
    Empathizing with people who go into panic attacks over orange text isn't either lol.
    No one said anything about panic attacks. In fact, the thing close to panic attacks I've seen here is people's kneejerk reaction to an emote possibly being removed. Since you know, there's still no official word.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kralljin View Post
    I'm not seeing any difference between spamming any of those emote, especially when the sorry emote was sarcastically used.
    Personally, recall that people preferred to spam hello emote, still have nightmares from "greetings traveller".
    Except as I've said, even in my own experience, I've seen far less spamming. Is that conclusive evidence, no, obviously not. But it's worth just as much as yours. Although I would say most people would raise an eyebrow I'm sure if you claimed "Hello" was spammed more than "Sorry". Especially for playing as mage.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kralljin View Post
    Is there any actual proof that it is working?
    The fact that Blizzard is doing the same method again...? Like, you can't really be claiming that Blizzard would be inept enough to try repeating the same thing again if it didn't even work the first time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kralljin View Post
    Blizzard further limiting the ability to interact with players surely isn't proof of that.
    Do you have literally anything saying otherwise?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kralljin View Post
    I think there is a huge difference between an action that can be entirely resolved by /ignore and an action that requires you to not play the game.
    That's great. It still doesn't change the initial point, that your random idea of "Only following would make it harassment" is pretty off the mark.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kralljin View Post
    By that logic, virtually any interaction between players should be removed because they could lead to "harassment" and expecting to /ignore others is seemingly too much.
    Weird stretch. Can the pretend ignorance be dropped about this honestly? You know fully well spamming /spit on someone isn't nearly the same as what you're trying to make it sound like. Twisting the scenario to try to make it sound less harmful is pretty telling.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kralljin View Post
    Sure, they take action because they have virtue signal, not get any resources to make any *actual change and because the "discriminated" audience are more valueable than the average player.
    Buzzwords.

    This is actual change. It's also not the end of the changes, they already said they're taking a firm stance against toxicity in WoW now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kralljin View Post
    As long as you have enough gold, you will get a carry, if you pay up and they fail to deliver the service, you can even get Blizzard to intervene.
    Like any people making off with gold or mats without providing the agreed upon service.
    They'll punish the player, they won't "intervene".
    https://us.battle.net/support/en/article/2521
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    Boosting services are not supported by Blizzard but if you are the victim of a scam, contact us. Game Masters cannot restore any of your losses, but will take action against confirmed scammers whenever possible so they won't scam other players.
    So you'd be wrong on that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kralljin View Post
    It's not like you have trouble finding boosts nowadays, they even advertise in channels where they're not supposed to.
    Doesn't mean they're the most reliable. And the more out of the way you go like that, the more likely you'll just get scammed and Blizzard won't do much.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kralljin View Post
    That you have to wait yourself, check the discord and not just pay a person to get it ready for you?
    Good luck getting a Voidtalon portal "ready". You'd still have to wait for the person to find the rare.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kralljin View Post
    Considering that their number pales in front of the multiplayer challenges and said multiplayer ones are far more prestigeous, that's damn ignorant.
    Is that really the best you got? You were shown to be wrong while I literally pointed out and admitted that they're not the most common though, and all you can do is repeat the same exact thing I said to call me ignorant?

    Like, that says far more about you. Point was it's not an "exception" like you claimed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kralljin View Post
    Yes, let us equate a Mythic or Gladiator mount with an outdoor zone mount.

    "See that guy? He has a Gladiator mount!"
    "Fuck Gladiator mounts, i got my Nazjatar crab!"
    Is this how you think the average player reacts?
    I mean, that's exactly how I would react. Like, what are you even on about lol

    Go back to the original quote-
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundering
    Becouse people want Blizz to develop the game, and have ingame rewards for playing the game not just to open the wallet and get stuff....... omgod right....
    In game rewards. Nothing about of what level or skill required. So honestly your weird attempt to shift the goalpost isn't exactly proving anything.

    Who cares whether or not the mount is a gladiator mount, a mythic one, or one from doing all the achievements in a zone.
    They're all part of IN GAME REWARDS FOR PLAYING THE GAME.

    Just because you fixated on the word "prestige" and assumed that must mean the top 1% doesn't mean that's all that matters.

    And honestly it's a bit weird to choose that as your point of comparison, since a lot of glad mounts end up just being mount models that already exist with armor on it, whereas the crab is still one of a kind.
    Last edited by Jester Joe; 2021-08-03 at 12:43 AM.

  17. #577
    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    Removing an emote from the game is not information about an ongoing legal matter. No part of the lawsuit involves in-game harassment or emotes. Lmao.
    It is when that action is in direct response to the court case, and is the exact same subject matter, as it is very relevant to shareholders. It is not "the removal of an emote" as you so disingenuously claim, it is an attempt to mitigate the current legal action against them - if they removed some random, unrelated emote, it would not be important. But they have stated more than once that this is 100% related to harassment.

    They have stated more than once, officially, that they will be making changes in game IN RESPONSE TO THE COURT CASE, and this is obviously one of said changes. The two things are directly related.
    Last edited by arkanon; 2021-08-03 at 12:45 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Utrrabbit View Post
    Any sane person would see your a moron.
    Quote Originally Posted by OokOok View Post
    you have to be a moron to of said .

  18. #578
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    It is when that action is in direct response to the court case, and is the exact same subject matter, as it is very relevant to shareholders.
    No. It is not part of the lawsuit. Using your logic any time Blizzard takes account action against someone for harassment they will now need to inform the share holders because a lawsuit was brought regarding company harassment. Lmao.
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

  19. #579
    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    No. It is not part of the lawsuit. Using your logic any time Blizzard takes account action against someone for harassment they will now need to inform the share holders because a lawsuit was brought regarding company harassment. Lmao.
    They have stated more than once that this is their response to the court case - they are ALREADY REPORTING these things both internally and externally - i dont know why you would claim they are not doing something they are ALREADY DOING.
    Quote Originally Posted by Utrrabbit View Post
    Any sane person would see your a moron.
    Quote Originally Posted by OokOok View Post
    you have to be a moron to of said .

  20. #580
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    They have stated more than once that this is their response to the court case - they are ALREADY REPORTING these things both internally and externally - i dont know why you would claim they are not doing something they are ALREADY DOING.
    Twitter doesn't count a legally obligated report to share holders. Lmao. Nothing about changing game rules for harassment is part of the lawsuit or a legally obligated thing that need to be reported.
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •