Author Topic: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet  (Read 86416 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Svata

  • Doesn't even fucking know anymore
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1540
  • Gender: Male
  • No, seriously, fuck astrology.
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1500 on: July 10, 2018, 01:57:04 am »
Hey Lana KFC Australia once had an ad of a white bloke soothing a rowdy West Indies crowd with buckets of fried chicken which was pulled after it caused the internets to asplode. Are KFC Australia being oppressed?

Or does the company just want to keep selling buckets of salted grease and not be forever branded KKKFC. Could impact sales.

No. A business choosing to pull a commercial due to poor general reception is not being oppressed.
But a seller wanting to pull a product from their shelves is? I thought you were at least sympathetic to libertarians, who are you to tell someone what to do with their shelf?

Left-libertarians. I believe in preserving the rights of individuals, whether it be from the government, big business, or their fellow citizens.
Is it left anything to demand a left wing bookseller stock copies of Mein Kampf just because you want to leaf through it?

And big business never stopped anybody buying the Hatred game. It just meant briefly that you had to order through the publishers website instead of the curators. Any inconvenience is not automatically a breach of your fundamental rights!

Also a science fiction scenario of one book behemoth  is not a threat to you any more than a Dalek or a Xenomorph!

This is a thought experiment.


Lana, I am going to indulge in a hyperbolic example here, and use it to ask you a few direct questions. It's not necessarily realistic, and I'm not saying that your argument invariably leads to this, so it's not a slippery slope. It might be a bit reductio ad absurdum, but I'm also not saying that you are necessarily supporting this.


So. A man owns a clothing store. Among other things, they sell T-shirts. Note, please, this is not a secondhand store. One day, a person comes in, wants to sell a shirt emblazoned with an black eagle holding a black wreath. Encircled in the wreath is a black swastika on a white background. Above this is the word Sieg. Below is Heil. On the back is an image of Hitler and a bunch of silhouettes saluting him, in the manner that is their custom. Is the man obligated to order a hundred of these shirts and sell them? What if he's black? Jewish? Roma? Gay? Any combination of these? Is he still obligated to do it?


Now, say the shirts aren't full of hate. Say, instead, that they're ratty, with holes worn or chewed in them. Is he obligated to sell them in his store? What if the shirts are obviously stolen? What if they're none of these, but the images of them aren't hateful, just... not his? (For example, what if the image is Mickey Mouse, and this man is not at all a representative of the Disney corporation. He's Joe Blow from the trailer park with 2 DUIs and who got busted for meth a while back. He don't work for Disney.) When, if ever, can someone refuse to carry a product?

...You actually make good points. Maybe I should re-evaluate my stance on free speech as it pertains to consumer goods.




Know what's neat? I picked those particular examples for reasons. One of them being that ALL of those have direct analogues on Steam. Games that spread hate. Games with no QA and where you can fall through the levels, or where there's no .exe. Asset flips. Games stolen whole cloth. Games with IP that they most certainly did NOT get the lisences for.


Though admittedly, that last is the least of these to me, but probably the greatest to Valve, and maybe to the clothing store owner, because selling that could probably get you sued by the Mouse and his army of lawyers. Though in that situation, the bigger concern might be the shirts that, uh, fell off the back of a truck. Fines are one thing. Prison's another. But I digress.
"Politician" is the occupational equivalent of "Florida".

Offline Kanzenkankaku

  • Pope
  • ****
  • Posts: 499
  • Gender: Female
    • Mastadon Account
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1501 on: July 10, 2018, 06:04:21 am »
Isn't the valve controversy more about offensive games like "Active Shooter"? I know they need to be tighter about quality control but they still have policies against asset flips that they sometimes still act on and nobody is really opposed to.

Offline Tolpuddle Martyr

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3454
  • Have you got thumbs? SHOW ME YOUR FUCKING THUMBS!
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1502 on: July 10, 2018, 06:09:30 am »
Isn't the valve controversy more about offensive games like "Active Shooter"? I know they need to be tighter about quality control but they still have policies against asset flips that they sometimes still act on and nobody is really opposed to.
They pulled it, unfortunately they seem to have the Reddit/Facebook school of moderation. EG they'll remove something if it becomes a PR shitstorm. Quality and/or good taste don't seem to be the primary drivers here.

Online RavynousHunter

  • Master Thief
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 7753
  • Gender: Male
  • What's All This Tangly Rainbow Shit Mean?
    • My Twitter
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1503 on: July 10, 2018, 09:13:53 am »
Yeah, that's why they pulled a bunch of their raunchier visual novels; some fambly valyoos fuckos decided games like HuniePop were bayud fer da yoof and threw a tantrum until Steam caved.
Quote from: Bra'tac
Life for the sake of life means nothing.

Offline Lana Reverse

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 978
  • Gender: Female
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1504 on: July 10, 2018, 06:23:02 pm »
...Yes?  Just like I wouldn't sell Bibles in my bookstore.  Or serve store brand coffee at my restaurant.  A private entity is entitled to the determination as to what products it sells.  Just because Chick-fil-A doesn't sell tacos doesn't mean you can't go to Pancho Villa and down all the Tex-Mex you can handle.

What if we're talking not talking about a single community bookstore? Imagine a bookstore chain that holds a near-monopoly nationwide. Would it be okay for them to not carry Harry Potter books?


Then... you... go to another chain? Where they're laughing and rolling in the dough because one of their biggest competitors decided to not sell one of the best-selling book series of all time?

Again, "near-monopoly nationwide." We're assuming that it's impractical to go somewhere else.

Dude.

You can buy games in stores all over the world. You can even buy games online. In fact, since you seem too lazy to use google: https://store.destructivecreations.pl/ Tadah! The company has a webstore of their own. You literally don't have to get off from your computer if you want to buy your violence-porn nihilist-fantasy game.

Same goes with a lot of other products today. Even if Wallmart doesn't sell something it doesn't mean that it is impossible for people to get it.

Heck, you seem to think that the tragedy of making it harder to buy edgy videogames is as big as Texas shutting down every abortion clinic in the state. And that my little Neo-Nazi is the difference between one store refusing (for a while) to sell a videogame and people being denied service and rights.

In fact, similar cases can be seen in other instances as well. A Republican politician who is thrown out of a restaurant will still find another restaurant that is willing to serve them and they can easily afford to go elsewhere. Depending on where you live in USA the nearest open abortion clinic could just be so far away that you can't afford to go there or will be greatly inconvenienced by the cost. The gay couple who won't get a marriage certificate likewise can't just go to a competitor to get one and them being denied service is a problem.

Someone being denied a platform to call people cucks or nigger-whores on Youtube or Reddit is still able to do so on other sites and that's not a major inconvenience for them.

I can see where you're coming from for the most part, but there are some things in your response I disagree with. For now, I'm going to focus on the "go to alternative websites" thing. What other websites? How many people use MySpace anymore? How many people are on Voat right now? I think Scott Alexander pointed out the flaws in this argument better than I ever could.

Yeah, that's why they pulled a bunch of their raunchier visual novels; some fambly valyoos fuckos decided games like HuniePop were bayud fer da yoof and threw a tantrum until Steam caved.

To be more precise, it was Morality in Media, aka the National Center on Sexual Exploitation.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2018, 06:50:38 pm by Lana Reverse »
Beware those who hate the rich more than they love the poor.

Offline Sigmaleph

  • Ungodlike
  • Administrator
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3515
    • sigmaleph on tumblr
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1505 on: July 10, 2018, 06:26:28 pm »
Isn't the valve controversy more about offensive games like "Active Shooter"? I know they need to be tighter about quality control but they still have policies against asset flips that they sometimes still act on and nobody is really opposed to.
They pulled it, unfortunately they seem to have the Reddit/Facebook school of moderation. EG they'll remove something if it becomes a PR shitstorm. Quality and/or good taste don't seem to be the primary drivers here.

Well, yes, obviously. Moderation for companies at that scale exists exclusively for the purpose of preventing PR issues. Why on Earth would they let taste of all things stop them from selling something, if someone is buying?
Σא

Offline Tolpuddle Martyr

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3454
  • Have you got thumbs? SHOW ME YOUR FUCKING THUMBS!
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1506 on: July 10, 2018, 08:03:32 pm »
Isn't the valve controversy more about offensive games like "Active Shooter"? I know they need to be tighter about quality control but they still have policies against asset flips that they sometimes still act on and nobody is really opposed to.
They pulled it, unfortunately they seem to have the Reddit/Facebook school of moderation. EG they'll remove something if it becomes a PR shitstorm. Quality and/or good taste don't seem to be the primary drivers here.
Well, yes, obviously. Moderation for companies at that scale exists exclusively for the purpose of preventing PR issues. Why on Earth would they let taste of all things stop them from selling something, if someone is buying?
Eh, I'm not under any delusions that their primary driver isn't the profit motive. If there's money to be made off of weirdos living out their mass shooting fantasies they'll go for the money every time and if it costs them more in other sales or legal hassles they'll back off. That was my point.

Offline Askold

  • Definitely not hiding a dark secret.
  • Global Moderator
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 7992
  • Gender: Male
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1507 on: July 16, 2018, 02:15:20 am »


...She is so close to understanding.
No matter what happens, no matter what my last words may end up being, I want everyone to claim that they were:
"If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine."
Aww, you guys rock. :)  I feel the love... and the pitchforks and torches.  Tingly!

Offline Lana Reverse

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 978
  • Gender: Female
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1508 on: July 19, 2018, 09:46:58 pm »
A bit of stupidity from the New York City DSA:

https://twitter.com/nycDSA/status/1012808259818926080

These people are supposed to be democratic socialists, right? Because this sounds like something anarcho-communists would advocate.
Beware those who hate the rich more than they love the poor.

Offline dpareja

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4816
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1509 on: July 20, 2018, 12:07:16 am »
A bit of stupidity from the New York City DSA:

https://twitter.com/nycDSA/status/1012808259818926080

These people are supposed to be democratic socialists, right? Because this sounds like something anarcho-communists would advocate.

There's social democrats and democratic socialists--the main difference being that the latter are post-capitalist and the former are not--and unfortunately the two terms are becoming conflated in the US. (It didn't help that Sanders called himself a democratic socialist when his policies are clearly social democratic.) Whoever posted that is on the post-capitalist side, at least.
Quote from: Jordan Duram
It doesn't concern you, Sister, that kind of absolutist view of the universe? Right and wrong determined solely by a single all-knowing, all powerful being whose judgment cannot be questioned and in whose name the most horrendous acts can be sanctioned without appeal?

Quote from: Supreme Court of Canada
Being required by someone else’s religious beliefs to behave contrary to one’s sexual identity is degrading and disrespectful.

Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3039
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1510 on: July 20, 2018, 12:53:24 am »
Well for profit prisons (and all private prisons) should be abolished.

Offline dpareja

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4816
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1511 on: July 20, 2018, 01:23:33 am »
Well for profit prisons (and all private prisons) should be abolished.

Well yes, but they're not saying that; they said "abolish prisons".

(I don't mind the notion of abolishing cash bail either, it's basically a way of keeping poor people in jail--likely costing them their jobs even if they're completely innocent and acquitted at trial--while letting rich people--and whatever middle-class people remain--go about their regular business.)
Quote from: Jordan Duram
It doesn't concern you, Sister, that kind of absolutist view of the universe? Right and wrong determined solely by a single all-knowing, all powerful being whose judgment cannot be questioned and in whose name the most horrendous acts can be sanctioned without appeal?

Quote from: Supreme Court of Canada
Being required by someone else’s religious beliefs to behave contrary to one’s sexual identity is degrading and disrespectful.

Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3039
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1512 on: July 20, 2018, 01:37:27 am »
I wouldn't read too much into how nuanced the opinion is by way of banner.

Offline Skybison

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1005
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1513 on: July 20, 2018, 01:41:50 am »
^I wonder if it would work to have a cash bail that adjusts based on the individuals level of wealth, like how we don't ask rich and poor people to pay the same amount of taxes. 


Offline Lana Reverse

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 978
  • Gender: Female
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1514 on: July 20, 2018, 06:15:57 pm »
A bit of stupidity from the New York City DSA:

https://twitter.com/nycDSA/status/1012808259818926080

These people are supposed to be democratic socialists, right? Because this sounds like something anarcho-communists would advocate.

There's social democrats and democratic socialists--the main difference being that the latter are post-capitalist and the former are not--and unfortunately the two terms are becoming conflated in the US. (It didn't help that Sanders called himself a democratic socialist when his policies are clearly social democratic.) Whoever posted that is on the post-capitalist side, at least.

Thanks for clarifying the difference, but this seems radical even by post-capitalist standards.
Beware those who hate the rich more than they love the poor.