There's no such thing as political neutrality just change versus the status quo. Acceptance of the status quo is tacit approval of those currently in power.
It stops being pure politics when it's a government that does things like openly harvest organs as part of their ethnic cleansing system, and murdering civilians openly for speaking out against the regime.
You can't support that and hide behind capitalism.
I feel that's unfair. In no way they ever said they support the politics. They are providing a game to play.
They have an open platform suddenly used for politics without their permission, forcing them to lose whatever side of the political side they decide to back.
Again, this isn't core politics. This is fundamental human rights. There does come a time when the line needs to be perceived. General political speech can perhaps be filtered, slippery slope as that is. Opposition to the literal definition of fascism, not the over use of the word, and to mass human rights atrocities is not "politics" though.
I feel my point still stands though. You can't blaim a gameprovider for not wanting either of those popping up in their streams, which are meant for the entertainment of their entire public.
In a perfect world no other business should work together with China because of how they treat their people, but here we are, completely entangled and we all buy stuff from there.
I don't feel you can blaim Blizzard for the solution they had to provide, because outside forces made a stream for entertainment something completely different. And while I agree with the streamers sentiment, I feel this outburst wasn't needed as the streamer and casters weren't saying anything new, and the News is already all over this, and yes it needs to change.
They just unfairly pulled Blizzard into a very hard decision with no good outs and the public seems to blaim the company as if Blizzard is the only company/individual that has business in China.
If they had suspended the player and stated they have no stance - fine. They took his prize money after he won and fired the casters. That's clearly taking a side themselves, so now it's up to people if they agree with Blizzard and China or agree with the player.
Anyone who runs any level of thing with a live component or freeform input knows this is a possibility, people using platforms for other reasons is nothing new.
Is it really supporting China or banning the three people who made a Blizzard stream a cause without permission so they cannot do it again on said streams?
Again, I agree with the sentiment of the guys, I just don't think that was the time and place.
Yes. By taking action beyond future suspension, you generally cross the line into "we're taking a side".
I don't feel they are taking a side, I feel they just don't want this type of speak in their gaming streams. If they allow this, it will just spread and more people will turn a HS stream political for good and bad intentions. It's not the time and place.
Siding with the status quo is taking a side. In a struggle between the oppressed and the oppressor, choosing silence is choosing the side of the oppressor. There is no such thing as a neutral stance.
Also, "it's not the time and place" is language solely used to make oppressed groups shut up and stay quiet in their corner, because it will be universally applied to all situations. You can't gain freedom by only making noise when your oppressor decides it's convenient to hear you.
If I won a championship and wanted to give a shoutout to my friends and family in my hometown, I feel like I'd be remiss in leaving out that my hometown is burning.
While I can see the argument about "what if somebody who advocates for some real bad politics wins and uses the platform to advocate for those policies" e.g. somebody winning and then saying they hope all the migrants get shot, or somebody winning and then advocating for donations to their favourite white supremacy org, or somebody winning and then advocating for whatever ethnic cleansing is current happening somewhere, I think stripping them of their winnings after they've won and firing the interviewers is beyond the pale.
In a vacuum a politics-free entertainment stream is not a bad thing, but you have to put in the work of making it clear that people whose lives are politics are welcome. Minorities like trans people need to feel that you don't consider their existence political. Streamers like Day9 will ask people not to discuss recent political events in streams in order to provide a place for everyone to chill out, but he'll also put in the work to chat normally with gay, trans, etc people in his stream to make it clear that their humanity and right to live and exist normally is recognized and not up for political debate.
The big issue that Hong Kong is currently facing is that they feel that their humanity, and their right to live and exist normally, is being threatened by Chinese interference with their government, and through foreign inaction in the interest of Chinese relations. Entertainment like this has an air of uncertainty to it, and results in a lack of total relaxation and enjoyment. Well, there's no longer uncertainty for Hong Kong citizens.
well people are kind of dying over in Hong Kong, so
for most of our lives there's been this pushback on where it's OK to talk about politics based on this sort of chill, blinders-on idea that everything will just sort of work out
and now hong kong's on fire and immigrants are in american concentration camps and people are tired of being told to let things just blow over
Even post-protest I feel like there has to have been a way to establish that Blizzard wants to wash its hands of controversial politics. Like making one of those "these views do not reflect blahblahblah" statements, either after the fact online or even on stage. Then make it clear to competitors privately that some sanction will take effect if they make political protests, i dunno.
Whatever the right way to do it was, this wasn't it. It didn't feel like enforcing neutrality, it just looks directly punitive of the specific person and their views.
well people are kind of dying over in Hong Kong, so
for most of our lives there's been this pushback on where it's OK to talk about politics based on this sort of chill, blinders-on idea that everything will just sort of work out
and now hong kong's on fire and immigrants are in american concentration camps and people are tired of being told to let things just blow over
We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was "well timed" in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word "Wait!" It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This "Wait" has almost always meant "Never." We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that "justice too long delayed is justice denied."
It stops being pure politics when it's a government that does things like openly harvest organs as part of their ethnic cleansing system, and murdering civilians openly for speaking out against the regime.
You can't support that and hide behind capitalism.
I feel that's unfair. In no way they ever said they support the politics. They are providing a game to play.
They have an open platform suddenly used for politics without their permission, forcing them to lose whatever side of the political side they decide to back.
Again, this isn't core politics. This is fundamental human rights. There does come a time when the line needs to be perceived. General political speech can perhaps be filtered, slippery slope as that is. Opposition to the literal definition of fascism, not the over use of the word, and to mass human rights atrocities is not "politics" though.
I feel my point still stands though. You can't blaim a gameprovider for not wanting either of those popping up in their streams, which are meant for the entertainment of their entire public.
In a perfect world no other business should work together with China because of how they treat their people, but here we are, completely entangled and we all buy stuff from there.
I don't feel you can blaim Blizzard for the solution they had to provide, because outside forces made a stream for entertainment something completely different. And while I agree with the streamers sentiment, I feel this outburst wasn't needed as the streamer and casters weren't saying anything new, and the News is already all over this, and yes it needs to change.
They just unfairly pulled Blizzard into a very hard decision with no good outs and the public seems to blaim the company as if Blizzard is the only company/individual that has business in China.
If they had suspended the player and stated they have no stance - fine. They took his prize money after he won and fired the casters. That's clearly taking a side themselves, so now it's up to people if they agree with Blizzard and China or agree with the player.
Anyone who runs any level of thing with a live component or freeform input knows this is a possibility, people using platforms for other reasons is nothing new.
Is it really supporting China or banning the three people who made a Blizzard stream a cause without permission so they cannot do it again on said streams?
Again, I agree with the sentiment of the guys, I just don't think that was the time and place.
Yes. By taking action beyond future suspension, you generally cross the line into "we're taking a side".
I don't feel they are taking a side, I feel they just don't want this type of speak in their gaming streams. If they allow this, it will just spread and more people will turn a HS stream political for good and bad intentions. It's not the time and place.
Suspensions are enough to dissuade. Also taking away winnings/status as winner means it's not really a sport. I never said no punishment, I'm saying the degree of punishment and the casters caught in it meant crossed the line from "you violated one of our speech rules" to "we are taking specific revenge on you for this" which correlates to a stance on the matter. If they had enforced the same as someone dropping f-bombs - no foul.
I still feel its an arbitrary place to make a protest, and i do wonder how other companies, having their event used like this would respond.
I also think blizzard is not leaning into "no politics" as much as "especially not these kind of politics as they hurt our moneymaking ability"
It is an arbitrary place, but look how effective it was in getting people to perk up. So, while arbitrary, it was good and well-chosen given what the player could realistically do to do something.
XBL: Bizazedo
PSN: Bizazedo
CFN: Bizazedo (I don't think I suck, add me).
It can be argued that microtransaction models are actually way better suited for protesting businesses.
If you buy an AAA video game for $60, they have your money up front. But a microtransaction model requires a steady income stream of purchases. If you can arrange a large-scale boycott of microtransactions, that hurts them more than boycotting a game after it's been released.
And looks like they're unsatisfied with that, based on how they pimped Diablo out last year. Gotta stay the course now and pimp their integrity out too, if they want to tap into that sweet sweet pot of Yuan
China is considered a largely untapped market with lots of future potential for a number of industries. Many companies are reluctant to piss them off not necessarily because of the direct power they wield now, but for growth opportunities in the future that they don't want to squander.
It stops being pure politics when it's a government that does things like openly harvest organs as part of their ethnic cleansing system, and murdering civilians openly for speaking out against the regime.
You can't support that and hide behind capitalism.
I feel that's unfair. In no way they ever said they support the politics. They are providing a game to play.
They have an open platform suddenly used for politics without their permission, forcing them to lose whatever side of the political side they decide to back.
Again, this isn't core politics. This is fundamental human rights. There does come a time when the line needs to be perceived. General political speech can perhaps be filtered, slippery slope as that is. Opposition to the literal definition of fascism, not the over use of the word, and to mass human rights atrocities is not "politics" though.
I feel my point still stands though. You can't blaim a gameprovider for not wanting either of those popping up in their streams, which are meant for the entertainment of their entire public.
In a perfect world no other business should work together with China because of how they treat their people, but here we are, completely entangled and we all buy stuff from there.
I don't feel you can blaim Blizzard for the solution they had to provide, because outside forces made a stream for entertainment something completely different. And while I agree with the streamers sentiment, I feel this outburst wasn't needed as the streamer and casters weren't saying anything new, and the News is already all over this, and yes it needs to change.
They just unfairly pulled Blizzard into a very hard decision with no good outs and the public seems to blaim the company as if Blizzard is the only company/individual that has business in China.
If they had suspended the player and stated they have no stance - fine. They took his prize money after he won and fired the casters. That's clearly taking a side themselves, so now it's up to people if they agree with Blizzard and China or agree with the player.
Anyone who runs any level of thing with a live component or freeform input knows this is a possibility, people using platforms for other reasons is nothing new.
Is it really supporting China or banning the three people who made a Blizzard stream a cause without permission so they cannot do it again on said streams?
Again, I agree with the sentiment of the guys, I just don't think that was the time and place.
Yes. By taking action beyond future suspension, you generally cross the line into "we're taking a side".
I don't feel they are taking a side, I feel they just don't want this type of speak in their gaming streams. If they allow this, it will just spread and more people will turn a HS stream political for good and bad intentions. It's not the time and place.
Siding with the status quo is taking a side. In a struggle between the oppressed and the oppressor, choosing silence is choosing the side of the oppressor. There is no such thing as a neutral stance.
Also, "it's not the time and place" is language solely used to make oppressed groups shut up and stay quiet in their corner, because it will be universally applied to all situations. You can't gain freedom by only making noise when your oppressor decides it's convenient to hear you.
But here is the thing.
I don't think they would have handled the situation any different if a Chinese player won the tournament and made a statement that HK should just roll over and listen.
And I do agree anyone should be allowed to talk about what is going on in HK. I just don't see the extra value by dragging Hearthstone into this: HK is already in the news and the world is watching.
I agree with the message, and it's good that now even more people talk about it outside of the normal threads about it, but I don't agree how the message was presented, especially because it threw Blizzard in a really akward decisions as if they are against HK being free by banning these three when they just want to keep HS out of these real world problems. All of it.
Wanna try my Mario Maker levels?
Shoot m to BITS (hold Y) [hard] C109-0000-014D-4E09 P-POWER Switch Palace 3838-0000-0122-9359 Raiding the Serpents Tomb 1A04-0000-0098-C11E I like to move it, move it FCE2-0000-00D7-9048
It stops being pure politics when it's a government that does things like openly harvest organs as part of their ethnic cleansing system, and murdering civilians openly for speaking out against the regime.
You can't support that and hide behind capitalism.
I feel that's unfair. In no way they ever said they support the politics. They are providing a game to play.
They have an open platform suddenly used for politics without their permission, forcing them to lose whatever side of the political side they decide to back.
Again, this isn't core politics. This is fundamental human rights. There does come a time when the line needs to be perceived. General political speech can perhaps be filtered, slippery slope as that is. Opposition to the literal definition of fascism, not the over use of the word, and to mass human rights atrocities is not "politics" though.
I feel my point still stands though. You can't blaim a gameprovider for not wanting either of those popping up in their streams, which are meant for the entertainment of their entire public.
In a perfect world no other business should work together with China because of how they treat their people, but here we are, completely entangled and we all buy stuff from there.
I don't feel you can blaim Blizzard for the solution they had to provide, because outside forces made a stream for entertainment something completely different. And while I agree with the streamers sentiment, I feel this outburst wasn't needed as the streamer and casters weren't saying anything new, and the News is already all over this, and yes it needs to change.
They just unfairly pulled Blizzard into a very hard decision with no good outs and the public seems to blaim the company as if Blizzard is the only company/individual that has business in China.
If they had suspended the player and stated they have no stance - fine. They took his prize money after he won and fired the casters. That's clearly taking a side themselves, so now it's up to people if they agree with Blizzard and China or agree with the player.
Anyone who runs any level of thing with a live component or freeform input knows this is a possibility, people using platforms for other reasons is nothing new.
Is it really supporting China or banning the three people who made a Blizzard stream a cause without permission so they cannot do it again on said streams?
Again, I agree with the sentiment of the guys, I just don't think that was the time and place.
Yes. By taking action beyond future suspension, you generally cross the line into "we're taking a side".
I don't feel they are taking a side, I feel they just don't want this type of speak in their gaming streams. If they allow this, it will just spread and more people will turn a HS stream political for good and bad intentions. It's not the time and place.
Siding with the status quo is taking a side. In a struggle between the oppressed and the oppressor, choosing silence is choosing the side of the oppressor. There is no such thing as a neutral stance.
Also, "it's not the time and place" is language solely used to make oppressed groups shut up and stay quiet in their corner, because it will be universally applied to all situations. You can't gain freedom by only making noise when your oppressor decides it's convenient to hear you.
But here is the thing.
I don't think they would have handled the situation any different if a Chinese player won the tournament and made a statement that HK should just roll over and listen.
And I do agree anyone should be allowed to talk about what is going on in HK. I just don't see the extra value by dragging Hearthstone into this: HK is already in the news and the world is watching.
I agree with the message, and it's good that now even more people talk about it outside of the normal threads about it, but I don't agree how the message was presented, especially because it threw Blizzard in a really akward decisions as if they are against HK being free by banning these three when they just want to keep HS out of these real world problems. All of it.
It's puzzling how you see this on the forum and recognize it as a good thing, but can't see how that's happening elsewhere or what the value of that is.
I've said it before: doing business in China isn't making them more democratic and free, its making our companies censor themselves so that they don't spread our ideals of democracy and freedom. Its making us less free in our own home, if you happen to work for a corporation that has interests in China, you can no longer be critical of China without facing retribution.
The US government can't punish you for your speech, but if you have any financial interests in China, the Communist Party sure can.
Jephery on
}
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
He is not talking about discussing HK in a vacuum, but in a way that forces Blizzards hand. And yes that hand is their moneygrabbing hand so i'm not surprised they went a bit overboard. Dissapointed, sure.
And i do feel it's not really Blizzards job to give anyone a platform, regardless of the message. Much more so in this case since there is close to zero international pressure on China and what's there gets casually ignored by China.
I've said it before: doing business in China isn't making them more democratic and free, its making our companies censor themselves so that they don't spread our ideals of democracy and freedom. Its making us less free in our own home, if you happen to work for a corporation that has interests in China, you can no longer be critical of China without facing retribution.
The US government can't punish you for your speech, but if you have any financial interests in China, the Communist Party sure can.
But all the free market worshipers told me that we're going to export liberty to China through trade! We're importing their oppression instead.
I've said it before: doing business in China isn't making them more democratic and free, its making our companies censor themselves so that they don't spread our ideals of democracy and freedom. Its making us less free in our own home, if you happen to work for a corporation that has interests in China, you can no longer be critical of China without facing retribution.
The US government can't punish you for your speech, but if you have any financial interests in China, the Communist Party sure can.
But all the free market worshipers told me that we're going to export liberty to China through trade! We're importing their oppression instead.
That would appear to be the real trade deficit we have with China.
Sure, Blizzard could come around on this, but i think it might be too late.
0
Warlock82Never pet a burning dogRegistered Userregular
Keep in mind Blizzard is currently working with Netease to develop Diablo Immortal for mobile phones which many assume is a move entirely made to capitalize on the lucrative Chinese mobile market.
I honestly assume this is 100% the main reason they took this action (along with Tencent being a large shareholder)
It stops being pure politics when it's a government that does things like openly harvest organs as part of their ethnic cleansing system, and murdering civilians openly for speaking out against the regime.
You can't support that and hide behind capitalism.
I feel that's unfair. In no way they ever said they support the politics. They are providing a game to play.
They have an open platform suddenly used for politics without their permission, forcing them to lose whatever side of the political side they decide to back.
Again, this isn't core politics. This is fundamental human rights. There does come a time when the line needs to be perceived. General political speech can perhaps be filtered, slippery slope as that is. Opposition to the literal definition of fascism, not the over use of the word, and to mass human rights atrocities is not "politics" though.
I feel my point still stands though. You can't blaim a gameprovider for not wanting either of those popping up in their streams, which are meant for the entertainment of their entire public.
In a perfect world no other business should work together with China because of how they treat their people, but here we are, completely entangled and we all buy stuff from there.
I don't feel you can blaim Blizzard for the solution they had to provide, because outside forces made a stream for entertainment something completely different. And while I agree with the streamers sentiment, I feel this outburst wasn't needed as the streamer and casters weren't saying anything new, and the News is already all over this, and yes it needs to change.
They just unfairly pulled Blizzard into a very hard decision with no good outs and the public seems to blaim the company as if Blizzard is the only company/individual that has business in China.
If they had suspended the player and stated they have no stance - fine. They took his prize money after he won and fired the casters. That's clearly taking a side themselves, so now it's up to people if they agree with Blizzard and China or agree with the player.
Anyone who runs any level of thing with a live component or freeform input knows this is a possibility, people using platforms for other reasons is nothing new.
Is it really supporting China or banning the three people who made a Blizzard stream a cause without permission so they cannot do it again on said streams?
Again, I agree with the sentiment of the guys, I just don't think that was the time and place.
Yes. By taking action beyond future suspension, you generally cross the line into "we're taking a side".
I don't feel they are taking a side, I feel they just don't want this type of speak in their gaming streams. If they allow this, it will just spread and more people will turn a HS stream political for good and bad intentions. It's not the time and place.
Siding with the status quo is taking a side. In a struggle between the oppressed and the oppressor, choosing silence is choosing the side of the oppressor. There is no such thing as a neutral stance.
Also, "it's not the time and place" is language solely used to make oppressed groups shut up and stay quiet in their corner, because it will be universally applied to all situations. You can't gain freedom by only making noise when your oppressor decides it's convenient to hear you.
But here is the thing.
I don't think they would have handled the situation any different if a Chinese player won the tournament and made a statement that HK should just roll over and listen.
And I do agree anyone should be allowed to talk about what is going on in HK. I just don't see the extra value by dragging Hearthstone into this: HK is already in the news and the world is watching.
I agree with the message, and it's good that now even more people talk about it outside of the normal threads about it, but I don't agree how the message was presented, especially because it threw Blizzard in a really akward decisions as if they are against HK being free by banning these three when they just want to keep HS out of these real world problems. All of it.
The whole point of his protest was to increase visibility on this issue. And it clearly has done that, at least within this community, in large part because of how awkward it was for Blizzard. If the politics make someone uncomfortable they can look the other way until it blows over. The cause is important enough that it's worth breaking the rules and causing some fans momentary discomfort.
It stops being pure politics when it's a government that does things like openly harvest organs as part of their ethnic cleansing system, and murdering civilians openly for speaking out against the regime.
You can't support that and hide behind capitalism.
I feel that's unfair. In no way they ever said they support the politics. They are providing a game to play.
They have an open platform suddenly used for politics without their permission, forcing them to lose whatever side of the political side they decide to back.
Again, this isn't core politics. This is fundamental human rights. There does come a time when the line needs to be perceived. General political speech can perhaps be filtered, slippery slope as that is. Opposition to the literal definition of fascism, not the over use of the word, and to mass human rights atrocities is not "politics" though.
I feel my point still stands though. You can't blaim a gameprovider for not wanting either of those popping up in their streams, which are meant for the entertainment of their entire public.
In a perfect world no other business should work together with China because of how they treat their people, but here we are, completely entangled and we all buy stuff from there.
I don't feel you can blaim Blizzard for the solution they had to provide, because outside forces made a stream for entertainment something completely different. And while I agree with the streamers sentiment, I feel this outburst wasn't needed as the streamer and casters weren't saying anything new, and the News is already all over this, and yes it needs to change.
They just unfairly pulled Blizzard into a very hard decision with no good outs and the public seems to blaim the company as if Blizzard is the only company/individual that has business in China.
If they had suspended the player and stated they have no stance - fine. They took his prize money after he won and fired the casters. That's clearly taking a side themselves, so now it's up to people if they agree with Blizzard and China or agree with the player.
Anyone who runs any level of thing with a live component or freeform input knows this is a possibility, people using platforms for other reasons is nothing new.
Is it really supporting China or banning the three people who made a Blizzard stream a cause without permission so they cannot do it again on said streams?
Again, I agree with the sentiment of the guys, I just don't think that was the time and place.
Yes. By taking action beyond future suspension, you generally cross the line into "we're taking a side".
I don't feel they are taking a side, I feel they just don't want this type of speak in their gaming streams. If they allow this, it will just spread and more people will turn a HS stream political for good and bad intentions. It's not the time and place.
Siding with the status quo is taking a side. In a struggle between the oppressed and the oppressor, choosing silence is choosing the side of the oppressor. There is no such thing as a neutral stance.
Also, "it's not the time and place" is language solely used to make oppressed groups shut up and stay quiet in their corner, because it will be universally applied to all situations. You can't gain freedom by only making noise when your oppressor decides it's convenient to hear you.
But here is the thing.
I don't think they would have handled the situation any different if a Chinese player won the tournament and made a statement that HK should just roll over and listen.
And I do agree anyone should be allowed to talk about what is going on in HK. I just don't see the extra value by dragging Hearthstone into this: HK is already in the news and the world is watching.
I agree with the message, and it's good that now even more people talk about it outside of the normal threads about it, but I don't agree how the message was presented, especially because it threw Blizzard in a really akward decisions as if they are against HK being free by banning these three when they just want to keep HS out of these real world problems. All of it.
It's puzzling how you see this on the forum and recognize it as a good thing, but can't see how that's happening elsewhere or what the value of that is.
I was talking in general, so to clarify yes I can see the value in the added exposure..
My point was that while it's a good thing more people talk about it, it's unfair to throw Blizzard under the bus for not wanting to deal with any side of real world problems.
Wanna try my Mario Maker levels?
Shoot m to BITS (hold Y) [hard] C109-0000-014D-4E09 P-POWER Switch Palace 3838-0000-0122-9359 Raiding the Serpents Tomb 1A04-0000-0098-C11E I like to move it, move it FCE2-0000-00D7-9048
It stops being pure politics when it's a government that does things like openly harvest organs as part of their ethnic cleansing system, and murdering civilians openly for speaking out against the regime.
You can't support that and hide behind capitalism.
I feel that's unfair. In no way they ever said they support the politics. They are providing a game to play.
They have an open platform suddenly used for politics without their permission, forcing them to lose whatever side of the political side they decide to back.
Again, this isn't core politics. This is fundamental human rights. There does come a time when the line needs to be perceived. General political speech can perhaps be filtered, slippery slope as that is. Opposition to the literal definition of fascism, not the over use of the word, and to mass human rights atrocities is not "politics" though.
I feel my point still stands though. You can't blaim a gameprovider for not wanting either of those popping up in their streams, which are meant for the entertainment of their entire public.
In a perfect world no other business should work together with China because of how they treat their people, but here we are, completely entangled and we all buy stuff from there.
I don't feel you can blaim Blizzard for the solution they had to provide, because outside forces made a stream for entertainment something completely different. And while I agree with the streamers sentiment, I feel this outburst wasn't needed as the streamer and casters weren't saying anything new, and the News is already all over this, and yes it needs to change.
They just unfairly pulled Blizzard into a very hard decision with no good outs and the public seems to blaim the company as if Blizzard is the only company/individual that has business in China.
If they had suspended the player and stated they have no stance - fine. They took his prize money after he won and fired the casters. That's clearly taking a side themselves, so now it's up to people if they agree with Blizzard and China or agree with the player.
Anyone who runs any level of thing with a live component or freeform input knows this is a possibility, people using platforms for other reasons is nothing new.
Is it really supporting China or banning the three people who made a Blizzard stream a cause without permission so they cannot do it again on said streams?
Again, I agree with the sentiment of the guys, I just don't think that was the time and place.
Yes. By taking action beyond future suspension, you generally cross the line into "we're taking a side".
I don't feel they are taking a side, I feel they just don't want this type of speak in their gaming streams. If they allow this, it will just spread and more people will turn a HS stream political for good and bad intentions. It's not the time and place.
Siding with the status quo is taking a side. In a struggle between the oppressed and the oppressor, choosing silence is choosing the side of the oppressor. There is no such thing as a neutral stance.
Also, "it's not the time and place" is language solely used to make oppressed groups shut up and stay quiet in their corner, because it will be universally applied to all situations. You can't gain freedom by only making noise when your oppressor decides it's convenient to hear you.
But here is the thing.
I don't think they would have handled the situation any different if a Chinese player won the tournament and made a statement that HK should just roll over and listen.
And I do agree anyone should be allowed to talk about what is going on in HK. I just don't see the extra value by dragging Hearthstone into this: HK is already in the news and the world is watching.
I agree with the message, and it's good that now even more people talk about it outside of the normal threads about it, but I don't agree how the message was presented, especially because it threw Blizzard in a really akward decisions as if they are against HK being free by banning these three when they just want to keep HS out of these real world problems. All of it.
It's puzzling how you see this on the forum and recognize it as a good thing, but can't see how that's happening elsewhere or what the value of that is.
I was talking in general, so to clarify yes I can see the value in the added exposure..
My point was that while it's a good thing more people talk about it, it's unfair to throw Blizzard under the bus for not wanting to deal with any side of real world problems.
No, it's unfair to depict this as throwing them under the bus. They had a multitude of ways to handle this. This was not a binary decision, and it did not have binary consequences.
"I don't feel that they are taking a side". Dude, are you real? The level of punishment against blitzchung is taking a side. Blizzard's statements are taking a side:
“After an investigation, we are taking the necessary actions to prevent similar incidents from happening in the future,” Blizzard said in a statement. On Chinese microblogging site Weibo, the official account of Hearthstone reposted Blizzard’s statement in Chinese. “We will, as always, resolutely safeguard the country’s dignity,” it added.
This isn't mere "not the right moment", this is a punitive measure with the intent of making sure that everybody else falls into line.
It stops being pure politics when it's a government that does things like openly harvest organs as part of their ethnic cleansing system, and murdering civilians openly for speaking out against the regime.
You can't support that and hide behind capitalism.
I feel that's unfair. In no way they ever said they support the politics. They are providing a game to play.
They have an open platform suddenly used for politics without their permission, forcing them to lose whatever side of the political side they decide to back.
Again, this isn't core politics. This is fundamental human rights. There does come a time when the line needs to be perceived. General political speech can perhaps be filtered, slippery slope as that is. Opposition to the literal definition of fascism, not the over use of the word, and to mass human rights atrocities is not "politics" though.
I feel my point still stands though. You can't blaim a gameprovider for not wanting either of those popping up in their streams, which are meant for the entertainment of their entire public.
In a perfect world no other business should work together with China because of how they treat their people, but here we are, completely entangled and we all buy stuff from there.
I don't feel you can blaim Blizzard for the solution they had to provide, because outside forces made a stream for entertainment something completely different. And while I agree with the streamers sentiment, I feel this outburst wasn't needed as the streamer and casters weren't saying anything new, and the News is already all over this, and yes it needs to change.
They just unfairly pulled Blizzard into a very hard decision with no good outs and the public seems to blaim the company as if Blizzard is the only company/individual that has business in China.
If they had suspended the player and stated they have no stance - fine. They took his prize money after he won and fired the casters. That's clearly taking a side themselves, so now it's up to people if they agree with Blizzard and China or agree with the player.
Anyone who runs any level of thing with a live component or freeform input knows this is a possibility, people using platforms for other reasons is nothing new.
Is it really supporting China or banning the three people who made a Blizzard stream a cause without permission so they cannot do it again on said streams?
Again, I agree with the sentiment of the guys, I just don't think that was the time and place.
Yes. By taking action beyond future suspension, you generally cross the line into "we're taking a side".
I don't feel they are taking a side, I feel they just don't want this type of speak in their gaming streams. If they allow this, it will just spread and more people will turn a HS stream political for good and bad intentions. It's not the time and place.
Siding with the status quo is taking a side. In a struggle between the oppressed and the oppressor, choosing silence is choosing the side of the oppressor. There is no such thing as a neutral stance.
Also, "it's not the time and place" is language solely used to make oppressed groups shut up and stay quiet in their corner, because it will be universally applied to all situations. You can't gain freedom by only making noise when your oppressor decides it's convenient to hear you.
But here is the thing.
I don't think they would have handled the situation any different if a Chinese player won the tournament and made a statement that HK should just roll over and listen.
And I do agree anyone should be allowed to talk about what is going on in HK. I just don't see the extra value by dragging Hearthstone into this: HK is already in the news and the world is watching.
I agree with the message, and it's good that now even more people talk about it outside of the normal threads about it, but I don't agree how the message was presented, especially because it threw Blizzard in a really akward decisions as if they are against HK being free by banning these three when they just want to keep HS out of these real world problems. All of it.
It's puzzling how you see this on the forum and recognize it as a good thing, but can't see how that's happening elsewhere or what the value of that is.
I was talking in general, so to clarify yes I can see the value in the added exposure..
My point was that while it's a good thing more people talk about it, it's unfair to throw Blizzard under the bus for not wanting to deal with any side of real world problems.
No, it's unfair to depict this as throwing them under the bus. They had a multitude of ways to handle this. This was not a binary decision, and it did not have binary consequences.
How would you have handled the situation and make sure things like this don't happen again?
Wanna try my Mario Maker levels?
Shoot m to BITS (hold Y) [hard] C109-0000-014D-4E09 P-POWER Switch Palace 3838-0000-0122-9359 Raiding the Serpents Tomb 1A04-0000-0098-C11E I like to move it, move it FCE2-0000-00D7-9048
And as your friendly reminder since it's coming up again, "not taking a side" is, in fact, taking a side in support of the status quo. There isn't a neutral position on... most things, to be honest.
How would you have handled the situation and make sure things like this don't happen again?
That question is unfair it's already presuming that a company is a neutral observer and can't or shouldn't take a side. Like, "and make sure things like this don't happen again."
Why SHOULDN'T it happen again? You're already saying with your question to Thawmus that they should side with China.
XBL: Bizazedo
PSN: Bizazedo
CFN: Bizazedo (I don't think I suck, add me).
It stops being pure politics when it's a government that does things like openly harvest organs as part of their ethnic cleansing system, and murdering civilians openly for speaking out against the regime.
You can't support that and hide behind capitalism.
I feel that's unfair. In no way they ever said they support the politics. They are providing a game to play.
They have an open platform suddenly used for politics without their permission, forcing them to lose whatever side of the political side they decide to back.
Again, this isn't core politics. This is fundamental human rights. There does come a time when the line needs to be perceived. General political speech can perhaps be filtered, slippery slope as that is. Opposition to the literal definition of fascism, not the over use of the word, and to mass human rights atrocities is not "politics" though.
I feel my point still stands though. You can't blaim a gameprovider for not wanting either of those popping up in their streams, which are meant for the entertainment of their entire public.
In a perfect world no other business should work together with China because of how they treat their people, but here we are, completely entangled and we all buy stuff from there.
I don't feel you can blaim Blizzard for the solution they had to provide, because outside forces made a stream for entertainment something completely different. And while I agree with the streamers sentiment, I feel this outburst wasn't needed as the streamer and casters weren't saying anything new, and the News is already all over this, and yes it needs to change.
They just unfairly pulled Blizzard into a very hard decision with no good outs and the public seems to blaim the company as if Blizzard is the only company/individual that has business in China.
If they had suspended the player and stated they have no stance - fine. They took his prize money after he won and fired the casters. That's clearly taking a side themselves, so now it's up to people if they agree with Blizzard and China or agree with the player.
Anyone who runs any level of thing with a live component or freeform input knows this is a possibility, people using platforms for other reasons is nothing new.
Is it really supporting China or banning the three people who made a Blizzard stream a cause without permission so they cannot do it again on said streams?
Again, I agree with the sentiment of the guys, I just don't think that was the time and place.
Yes. By taking action beyond future suspension, you generally cross the line into "we're taking a side".
I don't feel they are taking a side, I feel they just don't want this type of speak in their gaming streams. If they allow this, it will just spread and more people will turn a HS stream political for good and bad intentions. It's not the time and place.
Siding with the status quo is taking a side. In a struggle between the oppressed and the oppressor, choosing silence is choosing the side of the oppressor. There is no such thing as a neutral stance.
Also, "it's not the time and place" is language solely used to make oppressed groups shut up and stay quiet in their corner, because it will be universally applied to all situations. You can't gain freedom by only making noise when your oppressor decides it's convenient to hear you.
But here is the thing.
I don't think they would have handled the situation any different if a Chinese player won the tournament and made a statement that HK should just roll over and listen.
And I do agree anyone should be allowed to talk about what is going on in HK. I just don't see the extra value by dragging Hearthstone into this: HK is already in the news and the world is watching.
I agree with the message, and it's good that now even more people talk about it outside of the normal threads about it, but I don't agree how the message was presented, especially because it threw Blizzard in a really akward decisions as if they are against HK being free by banning these three when they just want to keep HS out of these real world problems. All of it.
It's puzzling how you see this on the forum and recognize it as a good thing, but can't see how that's happening elsewhere or what the value of that is.
I was talking in general, so to clarify yes I can see the value in the added exposure..
My point was that while it's a good thing more people talk about it, it's unfair to throw Blizzard under the bus for not wanting to deal with any side of real world problems.
No, it's unfair to depict this as throwing them under the bus. They had a multitude of ways to handle this. This was not a binary decision, and it did not have binary consequences.
There's a whole spectrum of responses to this that would have possibly been either non-eventful, or slightly disappointing, but Blizzard's rapid scorched earth approach to this comes off as desperate to appease China. And when big business keeps giving them those signals, it does have repercussions.
Posts
Siding with the status quo is taking a side. In a struggle between the oppressed and the oppressor, choosing silence is choosing the side of the oppressor. There is no such thing as a neutral stance.
Also, "it's not the time and place" is language solely used to make oppressed groups shut up and stay quiet in their corner, because it will be universally applied to all situations. You can't gain freedom by only making noise when your oppressor decides it's convenient to hear you.
I also think blizzard is not leaning into "no politics" as much as "especially not these kind of politics as they hurt our moneymaking ability"
While I can see the argument about "what if somebody who advocates for some real bad politics wins and uses the platform to advocate for those policies" e.g. somebody winning and then saying they hope all the migrants get shot, or somebody winning and then advocating for donations to their favourite white supremacy org, or somebody winning and then advocating for whatever ethnic cleansing is current happening somewhere, I think stripping them of their winnings after they've won and firing the interviewers is beyond the pale.
The big issue that Hong Kong is currently facing is that they feel that their humanity, and their right to live and exist normally, is being threatened by Chinese interference with their government, and through foreign inaction in the interest of Chinese relations. Entertainment like this has an air of uncertainty to it, and results in a lack of total relaxation and enjoyment. Well, there's no longer uncertainty for Hong Kong citizens.
well people are kind of dying over in Hong Kong, so
Battle.net Tag: Dibby#1582
I can always reinstall if they come to Jesus on this, but it's not like I've been enjoying the game for the past several months anyways.
I'm still playing wow classic, and maybe this will shift my plans on playing it long term, I don't know right now.
Now I gotta find something else to do while I poop.
for most of our lives there's been this pushback on where it's OK to talk about politics based on this sort of chill, blinders-on idea that everything will just sort of work out
and now hong kong's on fire and immigrants are in american concentration camps and people are tired of being told to let things just blow over
Whatever the right way to do it was, this wasn't it. It didn't feel like enforcing neutrality, it just looks directly punitive of the specific person and their views.
Letter from a Birmingham Jail comes to mind.
Suspensions are enough to dissuade. Also taking away winnings/status as winner means it's not really a sport. I never said no punishment, I'm saying the degree of punishment and the casters caught in it meant crossed the line from "you violated one of our speech rules" to "we are taking specific revenge on you for this" which correlates to a stance on the matter. If they had enforced the same as someone dropping f-bombs - no foul.
It is an arbitrary place, but look how effective it was in getting people to perk up. So, while arbitrary, it was good and well-chosen given what the player could realistically do to do something.
PSN: Bizazedo
CFN: Bizazedo (I don't think I suck, add me).
If you buy an AAA video game for $60, they have your money up front. But a microtransaction model requires a steady income stream of purchases. If you can arrange a large-scale boycott of microtransactions, that hurts them more than boycotting a game after it's been released.
And looks like they're unsatisfied with that, based on how they pimped Diablo out last year. Gotta stay the course now and pimp their integrity out too, if they want to tap into that sweet sweet pot of Yuan
But here is the thing.
I don't think they would have handled the situation any different if a Chinese player won the tournament and made a statement that HK should just roll over and listen.
And I do agree anyone should be allowed to talk about what is going on in HK. I just don't see the extra value by dragging Hearthstone into this: HK is already in the news and the world is watching.
I agree with the message, and it's good that now even more people talk about it outside of the normal threads about it, but I don't agree how the message was presented, especially because it threw Blizzard in a really akward decisions as if they are against HK being free by banning these three when they just want to keep HS out of these real world problems. All of it.
Shoot m to BITS (hold Y) [hard] C109-0000-014D-4E09
P-POWER Switch Palace 3838-0000-0122-9359
Raiding the Serpents Tomb 1A04-0000-0098-C11E
I like to move it, move it FCE2-0000-00D7-9048
See my profile here!
It's puzzling how you see this on the forum and recognize it as a good thing, but can't see how that's happening elsewhere or what the value of that is.
The US government can't punish you for your speech, but if you have any financial interests in China, the Communist Party sure can.
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
And i do feel it's not really Blizzards job to give anyone a platform, regardless of the message. Much more so in this case since there is close to zero international pressure on China and what's there gets casually ignored by China.
But all the free market worshipers told me that we're going to export liberty to China through trade! We're importing their oppression instead.
That would appear to be the real trade deficit we have with China.
Sure, Blizzard could come around on this, but i think it might be too late.
Keep in mind Blizzard is currently working with Netease to develop Diablo Immortal for mobile phones which many assume is a move entirely made to capitalize on the lucrative Chinese mobile market.
I honestly assume this is 100% the main reason they took this action (along with Tencent being a large shareholder)
The whole point of his protest was to increase visibility on this issue. And it clearly has done that, at least within this community, in large part because of how awkward it was for Blizzard. If the politics make someone uncomfortable they can look the other way until it blows over. The cause is important enough that it's worth breaking the rules and causing some fans momentary discomfort.
I was talking in general, so to clarify yes I can see the value in the added exposure..
My point was that while it's a good thing more people talk about it, it's unfair to throw Blizzard under the bus for not wanting to deal with any side of real world problems.
Shoot m to BITS (hold Y) [hard] C109-0000-014D-4E09
P-POWER Switch Palace 3838-0000-0122-9359
Raiding the Serpents Tomb 1A04-0000-0098-C11E
I like to move it, move it FCE2-0000-00D7-9048
See my profile here!
Witty signature comment goes here...
wra
No, it's unfair to depict this as throwing them under the bus. They had a multitude of ways to handle this. This was not a binary decision, and it did not have binary consequences.
This isn't mere "not the right moment", this is a punitive measure with the intent of making sure that everybody else falls into line.
I know someone taped over the "All Voices Matter" and "Think Globally" signs on their statues.
How would you have handled the situation and make sure things like this don't happen again?
Shoot m to BITS (hold Y) [hard] C109-0000-014D-4E09
P-POWER Switch Palace 3838-0000-0122-9359
Raiding the Serpents Tomb 1A04-0000-0098-C11E
I like to move it, move it FCE2-0000-00D7-9048
See my profile here!
Manager of the OW Team GZCharge Kevin Hovdestad posted the pic:
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
if you're writing up a post about this situation,
and you start going all "ummm, actually,"
maybe just, don't.
maybe just don't do that.
Battle.net Tag: Dibby#1582
That question is unfair it's already presuming that a company is a neutral observer and can't or shouldn't take a side. Like, "and make sure things like this don't happen again."
Why SHOULDN'T it happen again? You're already saying with your question to Thawmus that they should side with China.
PSN: Bizazedo
CFN: Bizazedo (I don't think I suck, add me).
So this is officially at the NBA level.
VICE said that it now was "officially an international incident". Can't disagree.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
There's a whole spectrum of responses to this that would have possibly been either non-eventful, or slightly disappointing, but Blizzard's rapid scorched earth approach to this comes off as desperate to appease China. And when big business keeps giving them those signals, it does have repercussions.