Board 8 > Blizzard bans and withholds prize money from hearthstone player for HK support

(+) Yeah! (+)

DoomTheGyarados posted...

If you have to be won to my side, I don't want you on my side. Some things aren't about winning or losing, or they shouldn't be. If you weren't raised right already to know that a company's profits don't excuse them enforcing censorship of a horrible human rights problem constantly growing before our very eyes I am OK to be opposed to you. I am not a moderate person, for sure. I have strong opinions and if my time in the political sphere has taught me anything there are some people who can be won over and some people that can't. I am not "attacking everyone", I am making their point of view clear. This makes you uncomfortable. Trust me, we don't agree here and the fact that you think so is a mistake of perspective on your part.

I will not be stepping back an inch, thank you for your concern however.

Is the freedom of the competitor in a privileged competition with rules against the political statement mean more regarding free speech than the freedom of speech of the company to enforce their own rules and not want controversial things stated on their platform in which they give the privilege to.


---

UItimaterializer posted...

The rule is moronic. "Can't offend a portion of the public"? A portion of the public is offended by literally anything.

Again, I agree with you, but in hindsight (and actually also in foresight) it's pretty obvious the rule itself was written for cases like these. It's not really an argument of oh this rule is dumb lets ignore it, it's that Blizzard had an out to not enforce the rule as laid out in the very same set of rules and chose not to take it.

GranzonEx posted...

basic human rights is not an agenda

are you for real right now

Are you?

Do you think my use of the word "agenda" fundamentally changes my point?

Or are you just putting on a show where you pretend to think I'm a terrible person because I'd dare say that some places are not appropriate venues to launch into a tangent, even if the tangent is about "basic human rights," so you can feel better about yourself?
---

Lopen posted...

But to be clear I also don't think you putting on a show where you blow your reaction out of proportion here in order to virtue signal makes you a better person than me by any measure.

I am not putting on a show, and I never said I was a "better person" than you.

I said that I think you are scum. that is all.

I am pro freedom and anti censorship. you are siding with an entity that used censorship to support an anti-freedom regime. ergo, you're scum in my eyes.
---

I definitely get that Blizzard had to do something here, despite me being on the HK guys side in this. Obviously, this being brought up was just asking for trouble. Reprimand, small suspension, some kind of middling penalty for breaking the rules (which he did, lets be real), fine.

This response? Waaaay too far. That takes it from measured protection of our interests to flat-out capitulation in my book.

I doubt Blizzard lacking my time or money is going to affect their bottom line much, but screw them, I feel better personally putting it somewhere else.

If this isnt that big of a deal to you, well, that does put me off a bit, but I dont have a right to choose what you do with your resources. Just dont dismiss my concern as muh outrage culture when it should be clear this retribution was disproportionate.
---

Are you pro freedom and anti censorship? How are you furthering those causes beyond feigning disgust over people on message boards?
---

Corrik7 posted...

DoomTheGyarados posted...

If you have to be won to my side, I don't want you on my side. Some things aren't about winning or losing, or they shouldn't be. If you weren't raised right already to know that a company's profits don't excuse them enforcing censorship of a horrible human rights problem constantly growing before our very eyes I am OK to be opposed to you. I am not a moderate person, for sure. I have strong opinions and if my time in the political sphere has taught me anything there are some people who can be won over and some people that can't. I am not "attacking everyone", I am making their point of view clear. This makes you uncomfortable. Trust me, we don't agree here and the fact that you think so is a mistake of perspective on your part.

I will not be stepping back an inch, thank you for your concern however.

Is the freedom of the competitor in a privileged competition with rules against the political statement mean more regarding free speech than the freedom of speech of the company to enforce their own rules and not want controversial things stated on their platform in which they give the privilege to.

I am fine with Blizzard taking some action here. I would never expect them to do nothing. However, the extreme action taken not only against the person but also the casters shows exactly what this is, and that is what I am firmly against. Basically I am not a big fan of broad stroke arguments. I like context and nuance.
---

trdl23 posted...

I definitely get that Blizzard had to do something here, despite me being on the HK guys side in this. Obviously, this being brought up was just asking for trouble. Reprimand, small suspension, some kind of middling penalty for breaking the rules (which he did, lets be real), fine.

This response? Waaaay too far. That takes it from measured protection of our interests to flat-out capitulation in my book.

I doubt Blizzard lacking my time or money is going to affect their bottom line much, but screw them, I feel better personally putting it somewhere else.

If this isnt that big of a deal to you, well, that does put me off a bit, but I dont have a right to choose what you do with your resources. Just dont dismiss my concern as muh outrage culture when it should be clear this retribution was disproportionate.

I have a feeling a winner won't do it again vs the "Hey, take your money and a few months off and come back and win next time!"

---

Corrik7 posted...

Is the freedom of the competitor in a privileged competition with rules against the political statement mean more regarding free speech than the freedom of speech of the company to enforce their own rules and not want controversial things stated on their platform in which they give the privilege to.

Legally no

Court of public opinion yes
---

An example was clearly made. No one will ever think about doing anything like this ever again. Not just in any blizzard sponsored tourney but probably any other e-sports event ever.

---

Lucavi000 posted...

An example was clearly made. No one will ever think about doing anything like this ever again. Not just in any blizzard sponsored tourney but probably any other e-sports event ever.

Not sure if serious
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Legally no

Court of public opinion yes

There is a good reason we don't use the court of public opinion. Very good reason.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Not sure if serious

clearly, i dont give a fuck about any of this lol.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Legally no

Court of public opinion yes

There is a good reason we don't use the court of public opinion. Very good reason.

What? We use the court of public opinion ALL THE TIME.
---

Lopen posted...

GranzonEx posted...

basic human rights is not an agenda

are you for real right now

Are you?

Do you think my use of the word "agenda" fundamentally changes my point?

Or are you just putting on a show where you pretend to think I'm a terrible person because I'd dare say that some places are not appropriate venues to launch into a tangent, even if the tangent is about "basic human rights," so you can feel better about yourself?

of course I'm for real

I understand the stakes and I'm not supporting and enabling a totalitarian shithole

only difference in our stakes is that if China wins, you'll be the second class citizen and I'll carry on just fine because I speak the language and look the part
---

Jakyl25 posted...

What? We use the court of public opinion ALL THE TIME.

No. We have a legal system. Precisely because the "court of public opinion" is by the least reliable judge that can exist.

---

Lopen posted...

Are you pro freedom and anti censorship? How are you furthering those causes beyond feigning disgust over people on message boards?

I don't have to defend my beliefs to you. this is such an absurd response.

especially if you're going to immediately come out of the gate accusing me of "putting on a show" and "feigning disgust" over things that are opposed to those beliefs. you are clearly arguing in bad faith.

what, do you feel bad about being called scum? do you want to try and ruin my credibility to try and make yourself feel less like scum? go ahead and try.

my track record on this board is pretty fucking consistent, I don't think this is gonna go how you want it to go.
---

Corrik7 posted...

trdl23 posted...

I definitely get that Blizzard had to do something here, despite me being on the HK guys side in this. Obviously, this being brought up was just asking for trouble. Reprimand, small suspension, some kind of middling penalty for breaking the rules (which he did, lets be real), fine.

This response? Waaaay too far. That takes it from measured protection of our interests to flat-out capitulation in my book.

I doubt Blizzard lacking my time or money is going to affect their bottom line much, but screw them, I feel better personally putting it somewhere else.

If this isnt that big of a deal to you, well, that does put me off a bit, but I dont have a right to choose what you do with your resources. Just dont dismiss my concern as muh outrage culture when it should be clear this retribution was disproportionate.

I have a feeling a winner won't do it again vs the "Hey, take your money and a few months off and come back and win next time!"

Oh they certainly made an example of him. Just like China itself makes examples out of people.

This might not be the analogy you want for public relations, though. The message could have been sent firmly but not so egregiously.
---

trdl23 posted...

Oh they certainly made an example of him. Just like China itself makes examples out of people.

This might not be the analogy you want for public relations, though. The message could have been sent firmly but not so egregiously.

Dude broke the rules and clearly seemed to be aware he was breaking the rules prior. Dude was subjected to punishment stated in rules for doing so.

I mean...

---

MariaTaylor posted...

Lopen posted...

Are you pro freedom and anti censorship? How are you furthering those causes beyond feigning disgust over people on message boards?

I don't have to defend my beliefs to you. this is such an absurd response.

especially if you're going to immediately come out of the gate accusing me of "putting on a show" and "feigning disgust" over things that are opposed to those beliefs. you are clearly arguing in bad faith.

what, do you feel bad about being called scum? do you want to try and ruin my credibility to try and make yourself feel less like scum? go ahead and try.

my track record on this board is pretty fucking consistent, I don't think this is gonna go how you want it to go.

he's saying we're virtue signaling when he's probably the one that spends 90% of his time on this board virtue signaling in the politics topics arguing against Russian paid internet trolls
---

Corrik7 posted...

Blizzard doesn't want involved in it

It is impossible for them not to be involved. It is impossible for them to be neutral.

The way they reacted here is decidedly NOT neutral. And the way you and everyone here reacts to their reaction is NOT neutral.

That's totally fine though. In fact, it's impossible for ANYONE to be neutral here, or in most controversies. The fallacy of "objective neutrality" is the direct cause of the majority of terrible shit that is going on in modern times.

I'm not even talking about the cliche "when good men do nothing" line. I'm talking about the immense shirking of responsibility from those with real power and direct influence, because they pretend they are "neutral" and "objective".

What a sad wish, that you and Blizzard are so powerless in this situation that you can be neutral here.
---

foolm0r0n posted...

It is impossible for them not to be involved. It is impossible for them to be neutral.

The way they reacted here is decidedly NOT neutral. And the way you and everyone here reacts to their reaction is NOT neutral.

That's totally fine though. In fact, it's impossible for ANYONE to be neutral here, or in most controversies. The fallacy of "objective neutrality" is the direct cause of the majority of terrible shit that is going on in modern times.

I'm not even talking about the cliche "when good men do nothing" line. I'm talking about the immense shirking of responsibility from those with real power and direct influence, because they pretend they are "neutral" and "objective".

What a sad wish, that you and Blizzard are so powerless in this situation that you can be neutral here.

They reacted by using their previously stated rules as stated. About as neutral as can be expected.

---

Corrik7 posted...

trdl23 posted...

Oh they certainly made an example of him. Just like China itself makes examples out of people.

This might not be the analogy you want for public relations, though. The message could have been sent firmly but not so egregiously.

Dude broke the rules and clearly seemed to be aware he was breaking the rules prior. Dude was subjected to punishment stated in rules for doing so.

I mean...

...Right, Lawful Neutral to the umpteenth degree. I have been away from the board for a while; easy to forget things.

They had every right, technically, to do this. Whether they *should* have done so is the concern. Punishment isnt an all-or-nothing deal, but short of lifetime expulsion, this was pretty damn close to all.
---

The rules are loose enough that saying you like pineapple on pizza would qualify if Blizzard said so. Selective enforcement is never fun.
---

I'd hope you'd be punished for openly admitting pineapple belongs on pizza. I'd be outraged if you werent dragged off stage on the spot while getting beaten with clubs.

---

irony in all of this is doing business in China means handing over all the relevant assets for inspection by the CCP, and they will just copy your IP and hand it off to their own companies and run you out of the market

in the end you get nothing working for the CCP unless you're in the movie business with IP stretching decades that China can't easily copy, or you're the NBA and China can't clone your talent
---

Guys, read that rule. It says at Blizzard's discretion that you cannot offend a portion of the public. Do I even need to explain how awful that is?
---

https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/8/20905181/blizzard-hearthstone-player-ban-marco-rubio-ron-wyden-china-hong-kong-protests-blitzchung

Blizzard managed to get the Senate to agree on something.
---

JeffreyRaze posted...

The rules are loose enough that saying you like pineapple on pizza would qualify if Blizzard said so. Selective enforcement is never fun.

I honestly don't think a single person here is arguing it wouldn't have fallen under that rule comfortably.

trdl23 posted...

...Right, Lawful Neutral to the umpteenth degree. I have been away from the board for a while; easy to forget things.

They had every right, technically, to do this. Whether they *should* have done so is the concern. Punishment isnt an all-or-nothing deal, but short of lifetime expulsion, this was pretty damn close to all.

No reason to have rules if you aren't going to enforce them. It encourages rule breaking.

---

UItimaterializer posted...

Guys, read that rule. It says at Blizzard's discretion that you cannot offend a portion of the public. Do I even need to explain how awful that is?

A company that threw the tourney isnt allowed to make up the governing rules for that tourney? Interesting.

Go on.


---

Lucavi000 posted...

A company that threw the tourney isnt allowed to make up the governing rules for that tourney? Interesting.

Go on.

its just so incredibly vague a portion of the public could be offended by literally anything. A portion of the public is offended by Tracer being gay.

---

Corrik7 posted...

They reacted by using their previously stated rules as stated. About as neutral as can be expected.

Your ancestors died for nothing

At least we know you will stay neutral and not get in the way
---

UItimaterializer posted...

Blizzard managed to get the Senate to agree on something.

An American company enforcing Chinese social policies being bad should be the easiest thing for everyone to agree on.
---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

its just so incredibly vague a portion of the public could be offended by literally anything. A portion of the public is offended by Tracer being gay.

That isnt controversial enough to matter in the grand scheme of things.

Come up with a better scenario.

---

I think we all routinely benefit from capitalizing on China's abuse of human rights and labor conditions, whether it's in our electronics, clothing, transportation, recycling, and so on. I think this is where I see the corrik point of view. I'm not sure if boycotting the hell out of Blizzard will really amount to anything if that's where the buck stops for you. The censorship involved is only a small piece, I think - you can maybe force companies into awkward stances. yay?
---

UItimaterializer posted...

Guys, read that rule. It says at Blizzard's discretion that you cannot offend a portion of the public. Do I even need to explain how awful that is?

It's just gamefaqs mod rules
---

red13n posted...

An American company enforcing Chinese social policies being bad should be the easiest thing for everyone to agree on.

everyone except trolls on board 8, yes.
---

MariaTaylor posted...

my track record on this board is pretty fucking consistent, I don't think this is gonna go how you want it to go.

Yeah. You put on a big show about being superior to people for various reasons without any real substance behind it beyond your "cutting wit." You get off on cutting people down, and don't really contribute anything but negativity here. I know your track record well. Someone like you being a positive contributor to society in any sort of meaningful way sounds like a pilot to a bad comedy where you go out and make everyone you interact with feel worse.

I don't care if you call me scum. It means nothing from you.
---

UItimaterializer posted...

https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/8/20905181/blizzard-hearthstone-player-ban-marco-rubio-ron-wyden-china-hong-kong-protests-blitzchung

Blizzard managed to get the Senate to agree on something.

Wow. If you manage to get Wyden and Rubio to agree on something, you screwed up massively.
---

Really want to stick it to china? Stop using anything made in china.

I'll see you on the street corner next week.

---

MariaTaylor posted...

everyone except trolls on board 8, yes.

"Everyone who disagrees with me is a troll and lesser than me"

Surprising take.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

What? We use the court of public opinion ALL THE TIME.

No. We have a legal system. Precisely because the "court of public opinion" is by the least reliable judge that can exist.

This is so weird to me. Like do you not ever make any purchasing decision ever? There has to be some reason why you choose one product over another besides I dont choose products that broke the law
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

You realize that theres a difference between doing business in China and actively censoring for the Chinese, right?

No i don't think they do
---

Lucavi000 posted...

UItimaterializer posted...

Guys, read that rule. It says at Blizzard's discretion that you cannot offend a portion of the public. Do I even need to explain how awful that is?

A company that threw the tourney isnt allowed to make up the governing rules for that tourney? Interesting.

Go on.

There are many countries where being gay is punishable by death. Including parts of China, Russia, and the Middle East. Imagine someone won Blizzard's best of the best tournament (essentially what Grandmasters is), then got banned for being gay because China didn't like it. And two people recording the winning interview were also banned just because.

Like there is no legitimate counter argument here dude. Chris is 100% on point with this.
---

neonreaper posted...

I think we all routinely benefit from capitalizing on China's abuse of human rights and labor conditions, whether it's in our electronics, clothing, transportation, recycling, and so on. I think this is where I see the corrik point of view.

100% of China's improvements in the last few decades have been due to the outside financial and social influence that they allowed in. It's a virus that spreads and is impossible to remove once it's there, no matter how hard they try.

And they do try, really hard. You can't blame anyone for the damage that the communist government's resistance causes, other than themselves.

It is absolute pro-isolationist anti-freedom Trumpian nonsense to suggest that the way to improve this is to pull our financial and social influence out of the country and let their insular state-run propaganda take over.
---

Peace___Frog posted...

LordoftheMorons posted...

You realize that theres a difference between doing business in China and actively censoring for the Chinese, right?

No i don't think they do

This same sort of thing happened with WWE and Saudi Arabia. Theres a difference between a company doing a show in a repressive country, and a company taking money from that countrys government to produce a show for them.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

This is so weird to me. Like do you not ever make any purchasing decision ever? There has to be some reason why you choose one product over another besides I dont choose products that broke the law

This boy has never had raw milk in his entire life
---

Although my opinion is probably pretty irrelevant since Ive never bought or subscribed to a Blizzard game
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Peace___Frog posted...

LordoftheMorons posted...

You realize that theres a difference between doing business in China and actively censoring for the Chinese, right?

No i don't think they do

This same sort of thing happened with WWE and Saudi Arabia. Theres a difference between a company doing a show in a repressive country, and a company taking money from that countrys government to produce a show for them.

That was a massive deal. It's a shame wrestling is basically irrelevant and hated these days outside of the bubble (the Braun interview during Cubs/Cards was like 99% negatively viewed), because that incident deserved to blow up the internet just as much as this one.
---

The firing of the casters is just indefensible. Thats the exclamation point to the reason this isnt cool not just hitting the offending player but also anyone related to the incident.
---