LogFAQs > #928528722

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, Database 5 ( 01.01.2019-12.31.2019 ), DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Blizzard bans and withholds prize money from hearthstone player for HK support
Lopen 10/08/19 11:51:27 PM #304:	I think making it purely a profit margin thing is dumbing it down anyway Does China bow out completely with a less severe punishment or even no punishment at all? Hard to say, but honestly really doubtful. Was the decision to be severe largely about appeasing massive profit generator China? Possibly, but again, hard to say. For me the point of interest is less about "is Blizzard okay to make a decision entirely because it boosts their bottom line" cause I mean clearly they are and it's just about whether you find it scummy. The interesting thing to consider is more "is Blizzard necessarily in the wrong if they want to keep charged topics off their streams in general." Because I think the latter thinking is a bigger factor than a lot of people are giving credit for, and part of this was trying to make a decisive example to prevent further incidents. They're not entirely unrelated or anything and I'm not saying trying to purge that kinda stuff isn't ultimately being done with a profit driven mindset (more of a preventative potential bad PR measure) but I consider the latter a lot more acceptable as a mindset than "let's get in good with the regime by totally obliterating this guy" which is how everyone seems to be framing it. Like I just don't think it's reasonable to hold a company to a standard where they're expected to basically take the role of an activist-- the "these don't represent Blizzard" disclaimers are nice but they're technicalities more than anything. If you broadcast something, it's getting tied to you. Wanting to prevent that is fine. Blizzard is a gaming company not a news outlet or public forum and not wanting heat associated with their brand is acceptable. It's not a matter of straight censorship it's about whether a content creator has control over what gets associated with them. But yeah, the extent of the punishment was egregious so I don't support Blizzard here, but I just don't think they're necessarily scum of the earth either depending on what the mindset was, which we can't really know. Backpedaling and admitting they overreacted and dialing the punishment back a lot (and completely for the casters) would do a lot to mend the situation. --- No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love! <cite>Lopen posted [p:928528722] in Blizzard b... [t:78071335]...</cite> <quote>I think making it purely a profit margin thing is dumbing it down anyway Does China bow out completely with a less severe punishment or even no punishment at all? Hard to say, but honestly really doubtful. Was the decision to be severe largely about appeasing massive profit generator China? Possibly, but again, hard to say. For me the point of interest is less about "is Blizzard okay to make a decision entirely because it boosts their bottom line" cause I mean clearly they are and it's just about whether you find it scummy. The interesting thing to consider is more "is Blizzard necessarily in the wrong if they want to keep charged topics off their streams in general." Because I think the latter thinking is a bigger factor than a lot of people are giving credit for, and part of this was trying to make a decisive example to prevent further incidents. They're not entirely unrelated or anything and I'm not saying trying to purge that kinda stuff isn't ultimately being done with a profit driven mindset (more of a preventative potential bad PR measure) but I consider the latter a lot more acceptable as a mindset than "let's get in good with the regime by totally obliterating this guy" which is how everyone seems to be framing it. Like I just don't think it's reasonable to hold a company to a standard where they're expected to basically take the role of an activist-- the "these don't represent Blizzard" disclaimers are nice but they're technicalities more than anything. If you broadcast something, it's getting tied to you. Wanting to prevent that is fine. Blizzard is a gaming company not a news outlet or public forum and not wanting heat associated with their brand is acceptable. It's not a matter of straight censorship it's about whether a content creator has control over what gets associated with them. But yeah, the extent of the punishment was egregious so I don't support Blizzard here, but I just don't think they're necessarily scum of the earth either depending on what the mindset was, which we can't really know. Backpedaling and admitting they overreacted and dialing the punishment back a lot (and completely for the casters) would do a lot to mend the situation. --- No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love!</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1