So.../spit has been removed from TBC.

[archelos91]

I dont get how you can get bullied when you can either ignore people (not sure if it works for opposite faction?) or turn emotes off.

[ghays]

/spit and killing your character are both make-believe. I'm assuming they will take all of the quest objectives where you straight up torture characters out? Oh right that too is make-believe.

Everything is harassment if you're this soft.

I'm sorry for harassing you by quoting you. I'm sure it was offensive.

They are this soft. It’s pathetic.

[ellieg]

Yeah dude, the people buying the Deluxe Edition of Classic definitely buy it specifically because they know it's not "supposed to be in the game." They deserve to be harassed!

- - - Updated - - -



Brother you don't get to be arbiter of what is and isn't acceptable in an online community.

Same to you lol

[Relapses]

I fail to see how your response is related in any way to the comment you quoted.

Blizzard is under no obligation to submit potential changes to a "judge/jury," like the guy I quoted implied. They are free to make whatever changes they deem necessary to the game for whichever reasons they feel are necessary. Bemoaning what you perceive as the unfairness of a private company's actions is (imo) completely pointless.

So I have one question for you - Do you feel Blizzard is the right company to be setting the standard for what is and is not harrassment, given their current situation?

It doesn't matter what I think. It matters that Blizzard has decided internally that this is a relevant enough issue for them to take action on. If I were to wager a guess, I'd say this is likely the first step among many that Blizzard is going to take to help dampen the impact of harassment in their video game.

- - - Updated - - -

Same to you lol

I never implied I was?

[arkanon]

Blizzard is under no obligation to submit potential changes to a "judge/jury," like the guy I quoted implied. They are free to make whatever changes they deem necessary to the game for whichever reasons they feel are necessary. Bemoaning what you perceive as the unfairness of a private company's actions is (imo) completely pointless.

You keep calling it a private company - it is NOT a private company, it is a public company. Im not sure why you keep saying that, even when corrected? And i assure you they ARE responsible to report things to their shareholders - obviously not each individual change, but if you think their response to the lawsuit is not being reported both internally and externally, you are wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

It doesn't matter what I think. It matters that Blizzard has decided internally that this is a relevant enough issue for them to take action on. If I were to wager a guess, I'd say this is likely the first step among many that Blizzard is going to take to help dampen the impact of harassment in their video game.

Wager a guess? They have outright said they are making changes, directly in response to their OWN INTERNAL HARRASSMENT CULTURE. One that has resulted in a massive court case, so big infact it has made main stream media world wide. Downplay it all you want, their culture is clearly a toxic cespit of harrassment and abuse, and you think its perfectly acceptable to have those same people telling others what is and is not acceptable? Hiding behind "it doesnt matter what i think" while desperately trying to get your opinion across to everyone is very strange - if it doesnt matter what you think, why are you telling everyone what you think?

[Relapses]

You keep calling it a private company - it is NOT a private company, it is a public company. Im not sure why you keep saying that, even when corrected?

It's private in the sense that they are under zero fucking obligation to run changes to the game past literally fucking anybody. Please don't turn this into a pointless semantic argument.

[rhorle]

You keep calling it a private company - it is NOT a private company, it is a public company. Im not sure why you keep saying that, even when corrected?

It is a publicly traded company. In the context of rules and who can make them private applies better then public since Blizzard controls the rules and not the public.

[arkanon]

It's private in the sense that they are under zero fucking obligation to run changes to the game past literally fucking anybody. Please don't turn this into a pointless semantic argument.

But the difference is huge - a private company could behave how you suggest, but a public one absolutely cannot, especially one under investigation and outright charged with harassment - they absolutely ARE required to report things to people - the shareholders. And currently, they are under investigation by various groups, and absolutely will be running all these changes by the various checks and balances put in place in reaction to their ongoing lawsuit for harassment in the workplace.

[Relapses]

But the difference is huge - because you are WRONG - they absoltuely ARE required to report things to people - the shareholders. And currently, they are under investigation by various groups, and absolutely will be running all these changes by the various chaecks and ballances put in place in reaction to their ongoing lawsuit for harrassment in the workplace.

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?

[rhorle]

But the difference is huge - because you are WRONG - they absoltuely ARE required to report things to people - the shareholders. And currently, they are under investigation by various groups, and absolutely will be running all these changes by the various chaecks and ballances put in place in reaction to their ongoing lawsuit for harrassment in the workplace.

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.

[arkanon]

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 - - -

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.

[rhorle]

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.

[Relapses]

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.

[arkanon]

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.

[rhorle]

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.

[arkanon]

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.

[rhorle]

I never once said they needed to seek each individual’s permission to make changes.

- 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.

[Lollis]

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.

[tikcol]

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.

[arkanon]

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 - - -

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.