I think a lot of the problem will solve itself pretty soon, crap games tend to sell poorly and as long as steam weeds out the worst scam games that wont be a big problem. If they wont sell enough there is little reason to make something that crappy.
As for subjects like sex games that really should be up to each person if they want to play that kind of game.
You do want to read the comments a bit before buying anything unknown though but I already do that.
Well, they did ban peanut butter and jelly sandwiches in Washington State Public Schools for being racist. So I'm happy you guys are on top of these things.
Every comment you have made so far has been for thought control. Your concerns over "wrong thoughts and ideas". I'm not sure if you understand this or not, but people have developed beliefs about religions and race, long before the aid of video games.
What is your next step? Hide black people from Whites? lol How are you going to pull that off? Camps? Which group or will it be all of us?
It's all fun and games until you're the one being persecuted.
You make zero sense, history has shown time and again the insurmountable amount of lives lost simply due to hate. Living with one another is actually the only way to accrue the kind of tolerance needed to understand each other. This peanut butter and jelly nonsense, hiding one race from another is some strange misguided attempt at discrediting my underlying point that hate speech is wrong on all counts and shouldn't have a platform.
My point was, groups will always have unpopular thoughts, beliefs, or feelings towards other groups that are different than their own. That is a fact before video games and will be long after.
That is my point. That and one group cannot control those thoughts, beliefs, and feelings without pushback (in whatever form).
Understand?
To that effect you're right. But that doesn't mean that people who mean to do harm should be given the ability to do so.
I believe, in all instances, that given the right circumstances everyone can find common ground. I don't feel that giving credence to those with the agenda for causing someone else harm is ever okay.
I do agree though, it's highly unlikely that it will change anything, in the grand scheme of things, but one could only hope.
You're going to have to define "harm". Do you mean with words, violence, or both?
Both. Words have power, they can incite actions, which is pretty much how ethnic cleansing happened in the first place.
I'm not saying that it will ever go that far. This is not "pro thought control"... I'm not stating unequivocally that we're trying to change someones thoughts, it's Anti-Hate Speech"
Words incite actions, actions have consequences, in the same way an off hand racist comment could potentially end a promising television show, there should be no question as to why.
Freedom of speech does not dissolve freedom from consequence, and whether one wants to spread hate, or fight against it, my point of view, however "wrong" some people want it to be, is that hate speech, and to a greater extension hate groups, shouldn't have a platform to spread and incite their violence to people that may be just impressionable enough to not know that whats being said is wrong.
All hate groups or just straight White males? Because whenever these buzzwords arise, it's a dogwhistle for straight White males. So when you kept mentioning " It's all fun and games until you're the one being persecuted." I have to think, um....affirmative action, racial quotas, media propaganda promoting inter-racial relationships, HUD housing. refugees popping up in small towns over night, diversity training. Say something wrong, you get doxxed, fired, can't pay bills, wife leaves, child support, and on, and on. Look up the UNs definition of genocide. Personally, I'm fine. But look at the lives being destroyed by your people. How is that ok?
You think very little of people. If I saw a naughty meme on /pol/, I'm not going to convulse and grab a rifle. The fact that you think this way about the other side, is unwise. That you have to control others because they cannot control themselves. NAZIs indeed.
You worry about words inciting action while the other group is disproportionately committing violent crimes at a much higher rate and the are only 13% of the population. Anyone can look up the government violent crime statistics by race and see who's really doing what. That's fact. But oh no, you want to focus on little Billy posting a naughty meme.
Look, you are right to be afraid. When the other group gets angry they just burn down their neighborhood gas station. But the group you fear, when they get angry, new nations are formed, borders change, and entire populations disappear.
There is nothing that you can do to stop naughty words or capable people. This is just historical fact. They only thing you are doing is trying to prevent a firecracker from going off by closing your fist around it.
Is it really all that surprising? Given the choice between spending your own money and effort on making a few games that may or may not pay off, or running a digital shopfront to sell thousands other people's games leaving them to make all the effort, and take all the risks, and still cleaning up by offering them a widely traveled shopping arena and bit of DRM, I mean what would you choose?
It's not surprising at all. I just loved Half-Life.
My point was, groups will always have unpopular thoughts, beliefs, or feelings towards other groups that are different than their own. That is a fact before video games and will be long after.
That is my point. That and one group cannot control those thoughts, beliefs, and feelings without pushback (in whatever form).
Understand?
To that effect you're right. But that doesn't mean that people who mean to do harm should be given the ability to do so.
I believe, in all instances, that given the right circumstances everyone can find common ground. I don't feel that giving credence to those with the agenda for causing someone else harm is ever okay.
I do agree though, it's highly unlikely that it will change anything, in the grand scheme of things, but one could only hope.
You're going to have to define "harm". Do you mean with words, violence, or both?
Both. Words have power, they can incite actions, which is pretty much how ethnic cleansing happened in the first place.
I'm not saying that it will ever go that far. This is not "pro thought control"... I'm not stating unequivocally that we're trying to change someones thoughts, it's Anti-Hate Speech"
Words incite actions, actions have consequences, in the same way an off hand racist comment could potentially end a promising television show, there should be no question as to why.
Freedom of speech does not dissolve freedom from consequence, and whether one wants to spread hate, or fight against it, my point of view, however "wrong" some people want it to be, is that hate speech, and to a greater extension hate groups, shouldn't have a platform to spread and incite their violence to people that may be just impressionable enough to not know that whats being said is wrong.
All hate groups or just straight White males? Because whenever these buzzwords arise, it's a dogwhistle for straight White males. So when you kept mentioning " It's all fun and games until you're the one being persecuted." I have to think, um....affirmative action, racial quotas, media propaganda promoting inter-racial relationships, HUD housing. refugees popping up in small towns over night, diversity training. Say something wrong, you get doxxed, fired, can't pay bills, wife leaves, child support, and on, and on. Look up the UNs definition of genocide. Personally, I'm fine. But look at the lives being destroyed by your people. How is that ok?
You think very little of people. If I saw a naughty meme on /pol/, I'm not going to convulse and grab a rifle. The fact that you think this way about the other side, is unwise. That you have to control others because they cannot control themselves. NAZIs indeed.
You worry about words inciting action while the other group is disproportionately committing violent crimes at a much higher rate and the are only 13% of the population. Anyone can look up the government violent crime statistics by race and see who's really doing what. That's fact. But oh no, you want to focus on little Billy posting a naughty meme.
Look, you are right to be afraid. When the other group gets angry they just burn down their neighborhood gas station. But the group you fear, when they get angry, new nations are formed, borders change, and entire populations disappear.
There is nothing that you can do to stop naughty words or capable people. This is just historical fact. They only thing you are doing is trying to prevent a firecracker from going off by closing your fist around it.
You pretty much prove my point as you're trying to argue against it.
You sit here complaining against programs vying for racial inclusion but fail to recognize the purpose of those policies put in by the government in the first place.
Say something wrong, you deal with the consequences. Hiding behind freedom of speech won't work anymore, the cats out of the bag. Show your true colors and you live with the consequences as everyone should. Come out with severely racist views and get fired. Attack someone due to their race and get put in jail or put down yourself.
Don't sit here and pretend that freedom means you can do and say whatever you want at any time. You're not free, and thinking you are so that gives you power over someone else due to their race is unspeakably ignorant.
Saying that "the group I fear" I should be afraid of, on the contrary, in every situation they always lose, and they will this time too, in all honesty its only a matter of time before they go right back in the hole they climbed out of, hiding on the internet, their last refuge, masking themselves as the "freedom fighters" to cover their inferiority complex.
It's highly probably valve didn't even realize what they were posting, and I don't doubt we'll see a correction or at least a clarification as to the content they are talking about specifically.
But until then, if companies go down or jobs are lost over racist views, I hope "freedom of speech" will keep those people warm at night.
That's like saying we should ban government violent crime statistics and scientific studies because in your view, those facts are "racist" and somebody might see those facts and form an opinion.
Look, you cannot control the internet or people. People are going to say and do whatever they please.
According to you, Steam is secretly planning the 4th Reich. Have you used an internet browser before? With you triggered this way, I recommend not. You'll spit out soymilk all over your monitor, trust me.
I never said anything about steam aside from the fact that they are inconsistent and have allowed and do allow hate speech and mixed messages where they shouldn't. Your facetious view of what I'm saying is a joke to say the least.
Just be honest, the reason you're steadfast against banning hate speech from a private company is simply because you want to spread it yourself.
Like I said before, it's all fun and games until you're the one persecuted. Just keep that in mind. When you play the hate or be hated game, you're the first one to lose.
I am honest. You will not ever prevent other people from having mean thoughts or saying mean things (Freedom of Speech). You will never prevent like minded people from getting together (Freedom of Assembly). Furthermore, no, you are not foiling my plans to spread "hate speech" on Steam of all places (I didn't even know that was a thing). If I felt that strongly about it, I would be doing it and it wouldn't be on fucking Steam lol.
I'm against banning any speech, because speech is protected by law. Secondly, you or I couldn't even get enough people together to agree what "hate speech" even is. Finally, I just tired of people like you always interjecting yourselves in every aspect of or lives, as if you have some kind of authority.
The argument that hate speech should be protected merely out of some idea of purity of right is one that should be given deeper thought. There's a rational argument to be had that even merely allowing such dangerous, radical ideas to fester results in bad endings:
"Although arguably different from religious cults, some individuals hold what appear to be odd or idiosyncratic beliefs such as conspiracy theories involving the perceived source of assassinations of leaders, extraterrestrial life, UFOs, etc. In some instances, individuals relish, amplify, and defend these beliefs to the point of harm towards themselves and others. Examples include the moon-landing hoax and vaccine-induced autism conspiracy theories [27]. American astronauts have been stalked by individuals claiming that the moon landing was faked by NASA. Astronaut Buzz Aldrin physically defended himself from a moon-hoax believer that was stalking him and attempting to force him to “swear on the Bible” that he walked on the moon [28]. Parental concerns about perceived vaccine safety issues, such as a purported association between vaccines and autism, though not supported by a credible body of scientific evidence, led increasing numbers of parents to refuse or delay vaccination for their children. Outbreaks of measles have sporadically been reported to be, in part, due to this disinformation. The most frequent reason for non-vaccination stated by 69% of the parents in one study, was concern that the vaccine might cause harm [29,30,31]. Overvalued ideas, many of which are transmitted online, are at the source of these types of socially transmitted behaviors and the consequences of these beliefs can be destructive and life threatening."
EDIT- added first two sentences of quoted paragraph to provide better context for the entire passage.
You can't get much more obvious than the vaccine conspiracies. There's no credible evidence to suggest it is true. But that didn't stop folks from saying it is true, and saying it is true was enough to spur action from certain believers. Likewise, things like Neo-Nazi groups asserting that white folks are genetically superior, or that there's a minority or ethnic group threatening their welfare, creates a situation in which radicalized individuals feel the need to not only espouse that belief, but act on it. The internet allows folks to find other like-minded individuals at a breakneck pace, which only accelerates the radicalization and belief in irrational ideas by otherwise rational humans.
"There's a rational argument to be had that even merely allowing such dangerous, radical ideas to fester results in bad endings" Yeah, like I said, thought control.
When and where did they act on it? Show me something.
Well, they did ban peanut butter and jelly sandwiches in Washington State Public Schools for being racist. So I'm happy you guys are on top of these things.
Every comment you have made so far has been for thought control. Your concerns over "wrong thoughts and ideas". I'm not sure if you understand this or not, but people have developed beliefs about religions and race, long before the aid of video games.
What is your next step? Hide black people from Whites? lol How are you going to pull that off? Camps? Which group or will it be all of us?
It's all fun and games until you're the one being persecuted.
You make zero sense, history has shown time and again the insurmountable amount of lives lost simply due to hate. Living with one another is actually the only way to accrue the kind of tolerance needed to understand each other. This peanut butter and jelly nonsense, hiding one race from another is some strange misguided attempt at discrediting my underlying point that hate speech is wrong on all counts and shouldn't have a platform.
My point was, groups will always have unpopular thoughts, beliefs, or feelings towards other groups that are different than their own. That is a fact before video games and will be long after.
That is my point. That and one group cannot control those thoughts, beliefs, and feelings without pushback (in whatever form).
Understand?
To that effect you're right. But that doesn't mean that people who mean to do harm should be given the ability to do so.
I believe, in all instances, that given the right circumstances everyone can find common ground. I don't feel that giving credence to those with the agenda for causing someone else harm is ever okay.
I do agree though, it's highly unlikely that it will change anything, in the grand scheme of things, but one could only hope.
You're going to have to define "harm". Do you mean with words, violence, or both?
Both. Words have power, they can incite actions, which is pretty much how ethnic cleansing happened in the first place.
I'm not saying that it will ever go that far. This is not "pro thought control"... I'm not stating unequivocally that we're trying to change someones thoughts, it's Anti-Hate Speech"
Words incite actions, actions have consequences, in the same way an off hand racist comment could potentially end a promising television show, there should be no question as to why.
Freedom of speech does not dissolve freedom from consequence, and whether one wants to spread hate, or fight against it, my point of view, however "wrong" some people want it to be, is that hate speech, and to a greater extension hate groups, shouldn't have a platform to spread and incite their violence to people that may be just impressionable enough to not know that whats being said is wrong.
All hate groups or just straight White males? Because whenever these buzzwords arise, it's a dogwhistle for straight White males. So when you kept mentioning " It's all fun and games until you're the one being persecuted." I have to think, um....affirmative action, racial quotas, media propaganda promoting inter-racial relationships, HUD housing. refugees popping up in small towns over night, diversity training. Say something wrong, you get doxxed, fired, can't pay bills, wife leaves, child support, and on, and on. Look up the UNs definition of genocide. Personally, I'm fine. But look at the lives being destroyed by your people. How is that ok?
You think very little of people. If I saw a naughty meme on /pol/, I'm not going to convulse and grab a rifle. The fact that you think this way about the other side, is unwise. That you have to control others because they cannot control themselves. NAZIs indeed.
You worry about words inciting action while the other group is disproportionately committing violent crimes at a much higher rate and the are only 13% of the population. Anyone can look up the government violent crime statistics by race and see who's really doing what. That's fact. But oh no, you want to focus on little Billy posting a naughty meme.
Look, you are right to be afraid. When the other group gets angry they just burn down their neighborhood gas station. But the group you fear, when they get angry, new nations are formed, borders change, and entire populations disappear.
There is nothing that you can do to stop naughty words or capable people. This is just historical fact. They only thing you are doing is trying to prevent a firecracker from going off by closing your fist around it.
As a straight white male, spare me the pity party for our "persecution." The bit about diversity training being persecution did make me laugh, though.
And I would imagine weasel meant all hate groups, as that's what he said.
EDIT- where were you going with the UN definition of genocide? And who are weasel's "people," anyway?
And he makes some great points, sadly though when I can buy the GTA series and of all games Fucking Postal, a game which is nothing but a mass murder simulator, on Steam as well, I can't help but wonder why some appalling violence laced games are given a free pass, while others are rightfully demonized.
You're right on that point, there are a lot of violent games out there, and part of why the steam curator system was abused by those groups mentioned before.
It goes deeper than just violent games though. Who knows where this new "controversy" will lead. Violent video games specifically have been in the media a lot lately simply due to so many mass shootings by children, and more and more we're seeing regulations related to them crop up.
Strangely enough it isn't the violent video games that are looking to be regulated first but LOOT BOXES. Very interesting how that played out.
Well, they did ban peanut butter and jelly sandwiches in Washington State Public Schools for being racist. So I'm happy you guys are on top of these things.
Every comment you have made so far has been for thought control. Your concerns over "wrong thoughts and ideas". I'm not sure if you understand this or not, but people have developed beliefs about religions and race, long before the aid of video games.
What is your next step? Hide black people from Whites? lol How are you going to pull that off? Camps? Which group or will it be all of us?
It's all fun and games until you're the one being persecuted.
You make zero sense, history has shown time and again the insurmountable amount of lives lost simply due to hate. Living with one another is actually the only way to accrue the kind of tolerance needed to understand each other. This peanut butter and jelly nonsense, hiding one race from another is some strange misguided attempt at discrediting my underlying point that hate speech is wrong on all counts and shouldn't have a platform.
My point was, groups will always have unpopular thoughts, beliefs, or feelings towards other groups that are different than their own. That is a fact before video games and will be long after.
That is my point. That and one group cannot control those thoughts, beliefs, and feelings without pushback (in whatever form).
Understand?
To that effect you're right. But that doesn't mean that people who mean to do harm should be given the ability to do so.
I believe, in all instances, that given the right circumstances everyone can find common ground. I don't feel that giving credence to those with the agenda for causing someone else harm is ever okay.
I do agree though, it's highly unlikely that it will change anything, in the grand scheme of things, but one could only hope.
You're going to have to define "harm". Do you mean with words, violence, or both?
Both. Words have power, they can incite actions, which is pretty much how ethnic cleansing happened in the first place.
I'm not saying that it will ever go that far. This is not "pro thought control"... I'm not stating unequivocally that we're trying to change someones thoughts, it's Anti-Hate Speech"
Words incite actions, actions have consequences, in the same way an off hand racist comment could potentially end a promising television show, there should be no question as to why.
Freedom of speech does not dissolve freedom from consequence, and whether one wants to spread hate, or fight against it, my point of view, however "wrong" some people want it to be, is that hate speech, and to a greater extension hate groups, shouldn't have a platform to spread and incite their violence to people that may be just impressionable enough to not know that whats being said is wrong.
All hate groups or just straight White males? Because whenever these buzzwords arise, it's a dogwhistle for straight White males. So when you kept mentioning " It's all fun and games until you're the one being persecuted." I have to think, um....affirmative action, racial quotas, media propaganda promoting inter-racial relationships, HUD housing. refugees popping up in small towns over night, diversity training. Say something wrong, you get doxxed, fired, can't pay bills, wife leaves, child support, and on, and on. Look up the UNs definition of genocide. Personally, I'm fine. But look at the lives being destroyed by your people. How is that ok?
You think very little of people. If I saw a naughty meme on /pol/, I'm not going to convulse and grab a rifle. The fact that you think this way about the other side, is unwise. That you have to control others because they cannot control themselves. NAZIs indeed.
You worry about words inciting action while the other group is disproportionately committing violent crimes at a much higher rate and the are only 13% of the population. Anyone can look up the government violent crime statistics by race and see who's really doing what. That's fact. But oh no, you want to focus on little Billy posting a naughty meme.
Look, you are right to be afraid. When the other group gets angry they just burn down their neighborhood gas station. But the group you fear, when they get angry, new nations are formed, borders change, and entire populations disappear.
There is nothing that you can do to stop naughty words or capable people. This is just historical fact. They only thing you are doing is trying to prevent a firecracker from going off by closing your fist around it.
As a straight white male, spare me the pity party for our "persecution." The bit about diversity training being persecution did make me laugh, though.
And I would imagine weasel meant all hate groups, as that's what he said.
EDIT- where were you going with the UN definition of genocide? And who are weasel's "people," anyway?
And he makes some great points, sadly though when I can buy the GTA series and of all games Fucking Postal, a game which is nothing but a mass murder simulator, on Steam as well, I can't help but wonder why some appalling violence laced games are given a free pass, while others are rightfully demonized.
You're right on that point, there are a lot of violent games out there, and part of why the steam curator system was abused by those groups mentioned before.
It goes deeper than just violent games though. Who knows where this new "controversy" will lead. Violent video games specifically have been in the media a lot lately simply due to so many mass shootings by children, and more and more we're seeing regulations related to them crop up.
Strangely enough it isn't the violent video games that are looking to be regulated first but LOOT BOXES. Very interesting how that played out.
As far as violent games. I dunno why people target ONLY games though.
I've personally seen people take their really young (elementary school and younger) children to movies with heads being blown off, arms and limbs chopped and blood exploding everywhere. Extremely violent movies.
Yet no one pays attention to those movies. In fact its barely talked about. Its only games.
Wonder why...
My personal guess is cause hollywood has heavy hitters, despite the game industry making a lot more than even the porn industry which makes more than hollywood
On that note...some of those movies have nudity and as soon as a boob pops out the adults (not always, but sometimes) gasp and remove their kids from the theater lol. But guess all the violence and exploding heads is okay :P
Still...funny all the media ignores the intense violence of movies and always blames video games lol
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
That's like saying we should ban government violent crime statistics and scientific studies because in your view, those facts are "racist" and somebody might see those facts and form an opinion.
Look, you cannot control the internet or people. People are going to say and do whatever they please.
According to you, Steam is secretly planning the 4th Reich. Have you used an internet browser before? With you triggered this way, I recommend not. You'll spit out soymilk all over your monitor, trust me.
I never said anything about steam aside from the fact that they are inconsistent and have allowed and do allow hate speech and mixed messages where they shouldn't. Your facetious view of what I'm saying is a joke to say the least.
Just be honest, the reason you're steadfast against banning hate speech from a private company is simply because you want to spread it yourself.
Like I said before, it's all fun and games until you're the one persecuted. Just keep that in mind. When you play the hate or be hated game, you're the first one to lose.
I am honest. You will not ever prevent other people from having mean thoughts or saying mean things (Freedom of Speech). You will never prevent like minded people from getting together (Freedom of Assembly). Furthermore, no, you are not foiling my plans to spread "hate speech" on Steam of all places (I didn't even know that was a thing). If I felt that strongly about it, I would be doing it and it wouldn't be on fucking Steam lol.
I'm against banning any speech, because speech is protected by law. Secondly, you or I couldn't even get enough people together to agree what "hate speech" even is. Finally, I just tired of people like you always interjecting yourselves in every aspect of or lives, as if you have some kind of authority.
The argument that hate speech should be protected merely out of some idea of purity of right is one that should be given deeper thought. There's a rational argument to be had that even merely allowing such dangerous, radical ideas to fester results in bad endings:
"Although arguably different from religious cults, some individuals hold what appear to be odd or idiosyncratic beliefs such as conspiracy theories involving the perceived source of assassinations of leaders, extraterrestrial life, UFOs, etc. In some instances, individuals relish, amplify, and defend these beliefs to the point of harm towards themselves and others. Examples include the moon-landing hoax and vaccine-induced autism conspiracy theories [27]. American astronauts have been stalked by individuals claiming that the moon landing was faked by NASA. Astronaut Buzz Aldrin physically defended himself from a moon-hoax believer that was stalking him and attempting to force him to “swear on the Bible” that he walked on the moon [28]. Parental concerns about perceived vaccine safety issues, such as a purported association between vaccines and autism, though not supported by a credible body of scientific evidence, led increasing numbers of parents to refuse or delay vaccination for their children. Outbreaks of measles have sporadically been reported to be, in part, due to this disinformation. The most frequent reason for non-vaccination stated by 69% of the parents in one study, was concern that the vaccine might cause harm [29,30,31]. Overvalued ideas, many of which are transmitted online, are at the source of these types of socially transmitted behaviors and the consequences of these beliefs can be destructive and life threatening."
EDIT- added first two sentences of quoted paragraph to provide better context for the entire passage.
You can't get much more obvious than the vaccine conspiracies. There's no credible evidence to suggest it is true. But that didn't stop folks from saying it is true, and saying it is true was enough to spur action from certain believers. Likewise, things like Neo-Nazi groups asserting that white folks are genetically superior, or that there's a minority or ethnic group threatening their welfare, creates a situation in which radicalized individuals feel the need to not only espouse that belief, but act on it. The internet allows folks to find other like-minded individuals at a breakneck pace, which only accelerates the radicalization and belief in irrational ideas by otherwise rational humans.
"There's a rational argument to be had that even merely allowing such dangerous, radical ideas to fester results in bad endings" Yeah, like I said, thought control.
When and where did they act on it? Show me something.
Sorry bud, if you thought that all ideas are created equal. They aren't.
As for your last bit, what the fuck are you even asking there? Show you what, exactly?
Well, they did ban peanut butter and jelly sandwiches in Washington State Public Schools for being racist. So I'm happy you guys are on top of these things.
Every comment you have made so far has been for thought control. Your concerns over "wrong thoughts and ideas". I'm not sure if you understand this or not, but people have developed beliefs about religions and race, long before the aid of video games.
What is your next step? Hide black people from Whites? lol How are you going to pull that off? Camps? Which group or will it be all of us?
It's all fun and games until you're the one being persecuted.
You make zero sense, history has shown time and again the insurmountable amount of lives lost simply due to hate. Living with one another is actually the only way to accrue the kind of tolerance needed to understand each other. This peanut butter and jelly nonsense, hiding one race from another is some strange misguided attempt at discrediting my underlying point that hate speech is wrong on all counts and shouldn't have a platform.
My point was, groups will always have unpopular thoughts, beliefs, or feelings towards other groups that are different than their own. That is a fact before video games and will be long after.
That is my point. That and one group cannot control those thoughts, beliefs, and feelings without pushback (in whatever form).
Understand?
To that effect you're right. But that doesn't mean that people who mean to do harm should be given the ability to do so.
I believe, in all instances, that given the right circumstances everyone can find common ground. I don't feel that giving credence to those with the agenda for causing someone else harm is ever okay.
I do agree though, it's highly unlikely that it will change anything, in the grand scheme of things, but one could only hope.
You're going to have to define "harm". Do you mean with words, violence, or both?
Both. Words have power, they can incite actions, which is pretty much how ethnic cleansing happened in the first place.
I'm not saying that it will ever go that far. This is not "pro thought control"... I'm not stating unequivocally that we're trying to change someones thoughts, it's Anti-Hate Speech"
Words incite actions, actions have consequences, in the same way an off hand racist comment could potentially end a promising television show, there should be no question as to why.
Freedom of speech does not dissolve freedom from consequence, and whether one wants to spread hate, or fight against it, my point of view, however "wrong" some people want it to be, is that hate speech, and to a greater extension hate groups, shouldn't have a platform to spread and incite their violence to people that may be just impressionable enough to not know that whats being said is wrong.
All hate groups or just straight White males? Because whenever these buzzwords arise, it's a dogwhistle for straight White males. So when you kept mentioning " It's all fun and games until you're the one being persecuted." I have to think, um....affirmative action, racial quotas, media propaganda promoting inter-racial relationships, HUD housing. refugees popping up in small towns over night, diversity training. Say something wrong, you get doxxed, fired, can't pay bills, wife leaves, child support, and on, and on. Look up the UNs definition of genocide. Personally, I'm fine. But look at the lives being destroyed by your people. How is that ok?
You think very little of people. If I saw a naughty meme on /pol/, I'm not going to convulse and grab a rifle. The fact that you think this way about the other side, is unwise. That you have to control others because they cannot control themselves. NAZIs indeed.
You worry about words inciting action while the other group is disproportionately committing violent crimes at a much higher rate and the are only 13% of the population. Anyone can look up the government violent crime statistics by race and see who's really doing what. That's fact. But oh no, you want to focus on little Billy posting a naughty meme.
Look, you are right to be afraid. When the other group gets angry they just burn down their neighborhood gas station. But the group you fear, when they get angry, new nations are formed, borders change, and entire populations disappear.
There is nothing that you can do to stop naughty words or capable people. This is just historical fact. They only thing you are doing is trying to prevent a firecracker from going off by closing your fist around it.
As a straight white male, spare me the pity party for our "persecution." The bit about diversity training being persecution did make me laugh, though.
And I would imagine weasel meant all hate groups, as that's what he said.
EDIT- where were you going with the UN definition of genocide? And who are weasel's "people," anyway?
Answer mine first.
I answered the only question you asked in the post I quoted if I'm not mistaken......
And he makes some great points, sadly though when I can buy the GTA series and of all games Fucking Postal, a game which is nothing but a mass murder simulator, on Steam as well, I can't help but wonder why some appalling violence laced games are given a free pass, while others are rightfully demonized.
You're right on that point, there are a lot of violent games out there, and part of why the steam curator system was abused by those groups mentioned before.
It goes deeper than just violent games though. Who knows where this new "controversy" will lead. Violent video games specifically have been in the media a lot lately simply due to so many mass shootings by children, and more and more we're seeing regulations related to them crop up.
Strangely enough it isn't the violent video games that are looking to be regulated first but LOOT BOXES. Very interesting how that played out.
As far as violent games. I dunno why people target ONLY games though.
I've personally seen people take their really young (elementary school and younger) children to movies with heads being blown off, arms and limbs chopped and blood exploding everywhere. Extremely violent movies.
Yet no one pays attention to those movies. In fact its barely talked about. Its only games.
Wonder why...
My personal guess is cause hollywood has heavy hitters, despite the game industry making a lot more than even the porn industry which makes more than hollywood
On that note...some of those movies have nudity and as soon as a boob pops out the adults (not always, but sometimes) gasp and remove their kids from the theater lol. But guess all the violence and exploding heads is okay :P
Still...funny all the media ignores the intense violence of movies and always blames video games lol
I agree that America seems to have some kind of phobia regarding sexuality, despite it not intending anyone harm and is completely consensual between the involved parties, yet a fascination with violence, which possesses neither trait (well, I guess there's always the masochists that do ask for it). It's puzzling.
Stop trying to be authoritarians. Let freedom of speech, expression, and thought rein free. Allow the free market to decide. If it's a brutal product, it'll hold no value, and they'll tumble. If it's good quality, people will buy. There is no reason virtue signaling needs to even be considered. Because once you cross that line, it's hard to go back. Look at the rest of the world. Don't let it happen here.
So, I can either sell assets on Steam now or look for good games on Galaxy.
GoG is actually really decent if that is what you mean "Galaxy". I know they have a galaxy client.
But GoG should get more noticed, they are a great game store. I love steam and all despite its flaws, but I have a special fondness for GoG.
Though to be honest. I really only use steam so I can sell junk and get cents back lol. If you get a rare card drop can sell for a lot potentially. One card (not a booster pack, an actual card) I sold for 9.99 USD into my steam wallet which I only paid 5 USD (since it was on sale) for the game. So I actually "made" money on what I spent on the game :P But mostly the cards are like 6 cents or 4 cents. But hey when you are pretty poor it helps a bit.
That and my best friend uses steam, so I'm always talking to him, so there is that as well.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
You pretty much prove my point as you're trying to argue against it.
You sit here complaining against programs vying for racial inclusion but fail to recognize the purpose of those policies put in by the government in the first place.
Say something wrong, you deal with the consequences. Hiding behind freedom of speech won't work anymore, the cats out of the bag. Show your true colors and you live with the consequences as everyone should. Come out with severely racist views and get fired. Attack someone due to their race and get put in jail or put down yourself.
Don't sit here and pretend that freedom means you can do and say whatever you want at any time. You're not free, and thinking you are so that gives you power over someone else due to their race is unspeakably ignorant.
Saying that "the group I fear" I should be afraid of, on the contrary, in every situation they always lose, and they will this time too, in all honesty its only a matter of time before they go right back in the hole they climbed out of, hiding on the internet, their last refuge, masking themselves as the "freedom fighters" to cover their inferiority complex.
It's highly probably valve didn't even realize what they were posting, and I don't doubt we'll see a correction or at least a clarification as to the content they are talking about specifically.
But until then, if companies go down or jobs are lost over racist views, I hope "freedom of speech" will keep those people warm at night.
You're having a hard time.
I don't like people that try to control other people. Just because I'm not on your side, doesn't mean I'm on the other side. What you are trying to do is control people's thoughts and beliefs.
There are no consequences for saying anything wrong. lol Not from the US government at least. If you meant some random soyboi walking up my road to take something away from me or harm me for words I may have said, well, luckily, I purposely live where I can exercise another right that I have. Nothing you can do about that one either.
I just think it's shitty that you guys destroy peoples lives for a stupid comment on Facebook, or whatever.
Just because I stand up for somebody's rights doesn't mean that I take on their beliefs. Supporting Valves rights is just that. This fear that there might be a game called Day of the Rope and somebody might see it and lose control, therefore we have to control everybody, is batshit crazy talk. You realize that right? This isn't Nazis, La Raza, Black Panthers, KKK. This is YOU. YOU are trying to control and demonize people. You're the bad guy here.
Let Valve fail if they do something stupid, they have a right to fail too.
The argument that hate speech should be protected merely out of some idea of purity of right is one that should be given deeper thought. There's a rational argument to be had that even merely allowing such dangerous, radical ideas to fester results in bad endings:
"Although arguably different from religious cults, some individuals hold what appear to be odd or idiosyncratic beliefs such as conspiracy theories involving the perceived source of assassinations of leaders, extraterrestrial life, UFOs, etc. In some instances, individuals relish, amplify, and defend these beliefs to the point of harm towards themselves and others. Examples include the moon-landing hoax and vaccine-induced autism conspiracy theories [27]. American astronauts have been stalked by individuals claiming that the moon landing was faked by NASA. Astronaut Buzz Aldrin physically defended himself from a moon-hoax believer that was stalking him and attempting to force him to “swear on the Bible” that he walked on the moon [28]. Parental concerns about perceived vaccine safety issues, such as a purported association between vaccines and autism, though not supported by a credible body of scientific evidence, led increasing numbers of parents to refuse or delay vaccination for their children. Outbreaks of measles have sporadically been reported to be, in part, due to this disinformation. The most frequent reason for non-vaccination stated by 69% of the parents in one study, was concern that the vaccine might cause harm [29,30,31]. Overvalued ideas, many of which are transmitted online, are at the source of these types of socially transmitted behaviors and the consequences of these beliefs can be destructive and life threatening."
EDIT- added first two sentences of quoted paragraph to provide better context for the entire passage.
You can't get much more obvious than the vaccine conspiracies. There's no credible evidence to suggest it is true. But that didn't stop folks from saying it is true, and saying it is true was enough to spur action from certain believers. Likewise, things like Neo-Nazi groups asserting that white folks are genetically superior, or that there's a minority or ethnic group threatening their welfare, creates a situation in which radicalized individuals feel the need to not only espouse that belief, but act on it. The internet allows folks to find other like-minded individuals at a breakneck pace, which only accelerates the radicalization and belief in irrational ideas by otherwise rational humans.
"There's a rational argument to be had that even merely allowing such dangerous, radical ideas to fester results in bad endings" Yeah, like I said, thought control.
When and where did they act on it? Show me something.
Sorry bud, if you thought that all ideas are created equal. They aren't.
As for your last bit, what the fuck are you even asking there? Show you what, exactly?
"Neo-Nazi groups asserting that white folks are genetically superior, or that there's a minority or ethnic group threatening their welfare, creates a situation in which radicalized individuals feel the need to not only espouse that belief, but act on it."
When and where is this happening? Show me something more than guys waving stupid flags and drinking beer in the park.
Seems like a positive move honestly, let the players decide what they want rather than have their decisions made for them, as always good games will sell and bad games won't, we get to decide for ourselves which game is which and to hell with all the SJW's out there in the process what is not to like about that and with that my faith in Steam is restored
You pretty much prove my point as you're trying to argue against it.
You sit here complaining against programs vying for racial inclusion but fail to recognize the purpose of those policies put in by the government in the first place.
Say something wrong, you deal with the consequences. Hiding behind freedom of speech won't work anymore, the cats out of the bag. Show your true colors and you live with the consequences as everyone should. Come out with severely racist views and get fired. Attack someone due to their race and get put in jail or put down yourself.
Don't sit here and pretend that freedom means you can do and say whatever you want at any time. You're not free, and thinking you are so that gives you power over someone else due to their race is unspeakably ignorant.
Saying that "the group I fear" I should be afraid of, on the contrary, in every situation they always lose, and they will this time too, in all honesty its only a matter of time before they go right back in the hole they climbed out of, hiding on the internet, their last refuge, masking themselves as the "freedom fighters" to cover their inferiority complex.
It's highly probably valve didn't even realize what they were posting, and I don't doubt we'll see a correction or at least a clarification as to the content they are talking about specifically.
But until then, if companies go down or jobs are lost over racist views, I hope "freedom of speech" will keep those people warm at night.
You're having a hard time.
I don't like people that try to control other people. Just because I'm not on your side, doesn't mean I'm on the other side. What you are trying to do is control people's thoughts and beliefs.
There are no consequences for saying anything wrong. lol Not from the US government at least. If you meant some random soyboi walking up my road to take something away from me or harm me for words I may have said, well, luckily, I purposely live where I can exercise another right that I have. Nothing you can do about that one either.
I just think it's shitty that you guys destroy peoples lives for a stupid comment on Facebook, or whatever.
Just because I stand up for somebody's rights doesn't mean that I take on their beliefs. Supporting Valves rights is just that. This fear that there might be a game called Day of the Rope and somebody might see it and lose control, therefore we have to control everybody, is batshit crazy talk. You realize that right? This isn't Nazis, La Raza, Black Panthers, KKK. This is YOU. YOU are trying to control and demonize people. You're the bad guy here.
Let Valve fail if they do something stupid, they have a right to fail too.
On the contrary, I'm not trying to force anyone to think any kind of way, I'm against inciting violence and allowing hate speech to be levied against others. You think you can't be touched by the government because of what you say LOL. Walk into any establishment and threaten someone, do it on public property, do it in a government building if you feel like you'll be able to just walk away unscathed.
That's the thing, your freedom of speech isn't freedom from consequence. Lucky you that you won't get shot on sight for saying something you shouldn't, but the consequences still ring true whether you lose your job or not.
You can play the "there are good people on both sides" game, but, see, there aren't. Take on the ideals of hate groups and say "but we're good people" it's the same as revisionist history. Blame me for "demonizing" people that live their lives on the disdain for others. History shows that sitting by and letting these groups *actually* act on the real disdain they spread doesn't end well for them.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke
Silencing those that try to silence others, thats what you're doing, you don't want me to say what I'm saying, you want to be able to say whatever you want, but in doing so you're actually trying to silence my view that discriminatory communities meant to hurt, silence, or demean others should have no place on a game service. So welcome to the club, Mr. SIlencer of Silencing, the only difference is, you rather support discriminatory practices while I am against it.
When broken down into reality, you'd rather silence the people encouraging others to be one big community, to support each other and be kind to one another rather than silence those that wish to divide everyone and harm others either through words or actions. Good job.
On the contrary, I'm not trying to force anyone to think any kind of way, I'm against inciting violence and allowing hate speech to be levied against others. You think you can't be touched by the government because of what you say LOL. Walk into any establishment and threaten someone, do it on public property, do it in a government building if you feel like you'll be able to just walk away unscathed.
That's the thing, your freedom of speech isn't freedom from consequence. Lucky you that you won't get shot on sight for saying something you shouldn't, but the consequences still ring true whether you lose your job or not.
You can play the "there are good people on both sides" game, but, see, there aren't. Take on the ideals of hate groups and say "but we're good people" it's the same as revisionist history. Blame me for "demonizing" people that live their lives on the disdain for others. History shows that sitting by and letting these groups *actually* act on the real disdain they spread doesn't end well for them.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke
Silencing those that try to silence others, thats what you're doing, you don't want me to say what I'm saying, you want to be able to say whatever you want, but in doing so you're actually trying to silence my view that discriminatory communities meant to hurt, silence, or demean others should have no place on a game service. So welcome to the club, Mr. SIlencer of Silencing, the only difference is, you rather support discriminatory practices while I am against it.
When broken down into reality, you'd rather silence the people encouraging others to be one big community, to support each other and be kind to one another rather than silence those that wish to divide everyone and harm others either through words or actions. Good job.
LOL
>I'm not trying to force anyone to think any kind of way
then you said
>[against] allowing hate speech to be levied against others
FFS, Pick One.
>Walk into any establishment and threaten someone, do it on public property, do it in a government building if you feel like you'll be able to just walk away unscathed.
You're comparing consequences between committing actual crimes to stating "I prefer to avoid black people because statistically, they are 700x more likely to kill me than a White person would".
>Lucky you that you won't get shot on sight for saying something you shouldn't
Not a concern of mine LOL
>the consequences still ring true whether you lose your job or not.
Not a concern of mine, personally. But you're a dick for getting somebody fired for using the wrong pronoun on Facebook, for example.
>You can play the "there are good people on both sides" game
The real issue here is that you are forcing me and others to choose a side by your actions without presenting any kind of argument beyond, "you're a White male" and "racist".
>try to silence others >silence others
>you rather support discriminatory practices while I am against it.
Such as?
>the people encouraging others to be one big community
Nobody is stopping you. In fact, I hope you get that community. Just don't force me or other people to live there.
Silencing those that try to silence others, thats what you're doing, you don't want me to say what I'm saying, you want to be able to say whatever you want, but in doing so you're actually trying to silence my view that discriminatory communities meant to hurt, silence, or demean others should have no place on a game service. So welcome to the club, Mr. SIlencer of Silencing, the only difference is, you rather support discriminatory practices while I am against it.
When broken down into reality, you'd rather silence the people encouraging others to be one big community, to support each other and be kind to one another rather than silence those that wish to divide everyone and harm others either through words or actions. Good job.
LOL
>I'm not trying to force anyone to think any kind of way
then you said
>[against] allowing hate speech to be levied against others
FFS, Pick One.
>Walk into any establishment and threaten someone, do it on public property, do it in a government building if you feel like you'll be able to just walk away unscathed.
You're comparing consequences between committing actual crimes to stating "I prefer to avoid black people because statistically, they are 700x more likely to kill me than a White person would".
>Lucky you that you won't get shot on sight for saying something you shouldn't
Not a concern of mine LOL
>the consequences still ring true whether you lose your job or not.
Not a concern of mine, personally. But you're a dick for getting somebody fired for using the wrong pronoun on Facebook, for example.
>You can play the "there are good people on both sides" game
The real issue here is that you are forcing me and others to choose a side by your actions without presenting any kind of argument beyond, "you're a White male" and "racist".
>try to silence others >silence others
>you rather support discriminatory practices while I am against it.
Such as?
>the people encouraging others to be one big community
Nobody is stopping you. In fact, I hope you get that community. Just don't force me or other people to live there.
Again, I'm not forcing anyone to think any kind of way. Thinking and doing are two different things, yes or no?
You support discriminatory practices, for example, steam allowing steam groups that curate and incite violence against races and religions they don't agree with. True of False?
The argument boils down to one turning point, either
1. you are in favor of the possibility of valve allowing any types of games even if that includes reinforcing discriminatory practices AGAINST other gamers, such as communities that demean or threaten not just minorities but people of all faiths and ethnicities.
or
2. You are against communities on gaming platforms designed for all ages that discriminates against others either threatening through words or actions, or promoting and inciting that violence to others.
Is it number 1, or number 2? You certainly can't be in both camps, but you can be in neither camp, but that would mean most of what you've written up to this point had no conviction which is an issue in itself.
Plus, "actual" crimes are discriminatory practices too. You don't think that online communities that talk about hurting others is illegal? "Oh but its on the internet" isn't an excuse anymore. More people are being prosecuted for what they say online. You could find plenty of cases for people threatening others online, bullying people online, inciting violence against them or inciting them to commit violence against themselves where they were absolutely prosecuted, lost their jobs, or lost more than that.
Cry for them if you want, the poor people that aimed to hurt others and were punished themselves, but it falls on deaf ears. Freedom of speech does not equal freedom of consequences. I can't say that enough because you don't seem to understand.
That in mind, I think I've said all I can say on the topic. You can keep trying to pin me as a "bad guy" but I haven't tried to "control anyones thinking" all I've done is stated my point of view, that regardless of HOW THEY THINK, pain and violence that they wish to inflict should be mitigated, not given a platform.
YOU want to change how I think, in that you want me to be okay with harm being done either real or virtual, and that there should be no consequences. That is completely misguided, and in fact is against what you say you really want. But you choose not to see it that way.
Being dispassionate about politics, sexuality, racism, gender, violence, identity, and so on is the best policy imo. And that's what valve is doing imo.
Talking about games where thousands of players exist simultaneously in a single instance and mechanics related to such games.
Again, I'm not forcing anyone to think any kind of way. Thinking and doing are two different things, yes or no?
You support discriminatory practices, for example, steam allowing steam groups that curate and incite violence against races and religions they don't agree with. True of False?
The argument boils down to one turning point, either
1. you are in favor of the possibility of valve allowing any types of games even if that includes reinforcing discriminatory practices AGAINST other gamers, such as communities that demean or threaten not just minorities but people of all faiths and ethnicities.
or
2. You are against communities on gaming platforms designed for all ages that discriminates against others either threatening through words or actions, or promoting and inciting that violence to others.
Is it number 1, or number 2? You certainly can't be in both camps, but you can be in neither camp, but that would mean most of what you've written up to this point had no conviction which is an issue in itself.
Plus, "actual" crimes are discriminatory practices too. You don't think that online communities that talk about hurting others is illegal? "Oh but its on the internet" isn't an excuse anymore. More people are being prosecuted for what they say online. You could find plenty of cases for people threatening others online, bullying people online, inciting violence against them or inciting them to commit violence against themselves where they were absolutely prosecuted, lost their jobs, or lost more than that.
Cry for them if you want, the poor people that aimed to hurt others and were punished themselves, but it falls on deaf ears. Freedom of speech does not equal freedom of consequences. I can't say that enough because you don't seem to understand.
That in mind, I think I've said all I can say on the topic. You can keep trying to pin me as a "bad guy" but I haven't tried to "control anyones thinking" all I've done is stated my point of view, that regardless of HOW THEY THINK, pain and violence that they wish to inflict should be mitigated, not given a platform.
YOU want to change how I think, in that you want me to be okay with harm being done either real or virtual, and that there should be no consequences. That is completely misguided, and in fact is against what you say you really want. But you choose not to see it that way.
Yes. Additionally, censoring what others can and cannot hear or see so that they don't, what you deem, "get the wrong idea", is still thought control.
You have not proven that they have incited violence. Otherwise, true. Free market.
You have not proven that they have incited violence. Otherwise, 1. Free market.
>Plus, "actual" crimes are discriminatory practices too. You don't think that online communities that talk about hurting others is illegal? "Oh but its on the internet" isn't an excuse anymore. More people are being prosecuted for what they say online. You could find plenty of cases for people threatening others online, bullying people online, inciting violence against them or inciting them to commit violence against themselves where they were absolutely prosecuted, lost their jobs, or lost more than that.
Depends on which country. Are all of these cyberbullies, NAZIs or just random dickheads? Did they break an actual law? If so, burn'em.
>Cry for them if you want, the poor people that aimed to hurt others and were punished themselves, but it falls on deaf ears. Freedom of speech does not equal freedom of consequences. I can't say that enough because you don't seem to understand
If I'm within the law and my rights, then I have nothing to worry about and neither should anybody else. If other people are in a shitty position in life that their Facebook comments, or video games can get them fired, etc. That's their choice that they made. I'm in a different situation. Nobody has that kind of power over me.
>That in mind, I think I've said all I can say on the topic. You can keep trying to pin me as a "bad guy" but I haven't tried to "control anyones thinking" all I've done is stated my point of view, that regardless of HOW THEY THINK, pain and violence that they wish to inflict should be mitigated, not given a platform.
You keep bringing up violence. Yet, there is none.
>YOU want to change how I think, in that you want me to be okay with harm being done either real or virtual, and that there should be no consequences. That is completely misguided, and in fact is against what you say you really want. But you choose not to see it that way.
LOL, no. YOU keep bring up this boogeyman that is committing violence on others. I don't see NAZIs when I check the evening news. But do you know who I DO see?
Take a guess. Go ahead. Pick a city pick any night you want. Tell me, who is on the TV arrested for murder, rape, assault, home invasion, etc etc. You know, actual violence. Actual crimes. Not words on the internet. You have nothing to prove what you fear would come true. Just like Valve, you can't prove a damn thing. I can.
Also, communists killed over 100 million people last century. Do you speak out against all forms of Marxism to make sure they never gain power again?
Being dispassionate about politics, sexuality, racism, gender, violence, identity, and so on is the best policy imo. And that's what valve is doing imo.
That "dispassion" is implicit consent. Don't take Jim Sterling's word for it, take Plato's. That's the dictionary definition of cop out.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Comments
As for subjects like sex games that really should be up to each person if they want to play that kind of game.
You do want to read the comments a bit before buying anything unknown though but I already do that.
#FreetheFreeman
You think very little of people. If I saw a naughty meme on /pol/, I'm not going to convulse and grab a rifle. The fact that you think this way about the other side, is unwise. That you have to control others because they cannot control themselves. NAZIs indeed.
You worry about words inciting action while the other group is disproportionately committing violent crimes at a much higher rate and the are only 13% of the population. Anyone can look up the government violent crime statistics by race and see who's really doing what. That's fact. But oh no, you want to focus on little Billy posting a naughty meme.
Look, you are right to be afraid. When the other group gets angry they just burn down their neighborhood gas station. But the group you fear, when they get angry, new nations are formed, borders change, and entire populations disappear.
There is nothing that you can do to stop naughty words or capable people. This is just historical fact. They only thing you are doing is trying to prevent a firecracker from going off by closing your fist around it.
You sit here complaining against programs vying for racial inclusion but fail to recognize the purpose of those policies put in by the government in the first place.
Say something wrong, you deal with the consequences. Hiding behind freedom of speech won't work anymore, the cats out of the bag. Show your true colors and you live with the consequences as everyone should. Come out with severely racist views and get fired. Attack someone due to their race and get put in jail or put down yourself.
Don't sit here and pretend that freedom means you can do and say whatever you want at any time. You're not free, and thinking you are so that gives you power over someone else due to their race is unspeakably ignorant.
Saying that "the group I fear" I should be afraid of, on the contrary, in every situation they always lose, and they will this time too, in all honesty its only a matter of time before they go right back in the hole they climbed out of, hiding on the internet, their last refuge, masking themselves as the "freedom fighters" to cover their inferiority complex.
It's highly probably valve didn't even realize what they were posting, and I don't doubt we'll see a correction or at least a clarification as to the content they are talking about specifically.
But until then, if companies go down or jobs are lost over racist views, I hope "freedom of speech" will keep those people warm at night.
When and where did they act on it? Show me something.
And I would imagine weasel meant all hate groups, as that's what he said.
EDIT- where were you going with the UN definition of genocide? And who are weasel's "people," anyway?
It goes deeper than just violent games though. Who knows where this new "controversy" will lead. Violent video games specifically have been in the media a lot lately simply due to so many mass shootings by children, and more and more we're seeing regulations related to them crop up.
Strangely enough it isn't the violent video games that are looking to be regulated first but LOOT BOXES. Very interesting how that played out.
I've personally seen people take their really young (elementary school and younger) children to movies with heads being blown off, arms and limbs chopped and blood exploding everywhere. Extremely violent movies.
Yet no one pays attention to those movies. In fact its barely talked about. Its only games.
Wonder why...
My personal guess is cause hollywood has heavy hitters, despite the game industry making a lot more than even the porn industry which makes more than hollywood
On that note...some of those movies have nudity and as soon as a boob pops out the adults (not always, but sometimes) gasp and remove their kids from the theater lol. But guess all the violence and exploding heads is okay :P
Still...funny all the media ignores the intense violence of movies and always blames video games lol
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
As for your last bit, what the fuck are you even asking there? Show you what, exactly?
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.
But GoG should get more noticed, they are a great game store. I love steam and all despite its flaws, but I have a special fondness for GoG.
Though to be honest. I really only use steam so I can sell junk and get cents back lol. If you get a rare card drop can sell for a lot potentially. One card (not a booster pack, an actual card) I sold for 9.99 USD into my steam wallet which I only paid 5 USD (since it was on sale) for the game. So I actually "made" money on what I spent on the game :P But mostly the cards are like 6 cents or 4 cents. But hey when you are pretty poor it helps a bit.
That and my best friend uses steam, so I'm always talking to him, so there is that as well.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
I don't like people that try to control other people. Just because I'm not on your side, doesn't mean I'm on the other side. What you are trying to do is control people's thoughts and beliefs.
There are no consequences for saying anything wrong. lol Not from the US government at least. If you meant some random soyboi walking up my road to take something away from me or harm me for words I may have said, well, luckily, I purposely live where I can exercise another right that I have. Nothing you can do about that one either.
I just think it's shitty that you guys destroy peoples lives for a stupid comment on Facebook, or whatever.
Just because I stand up for somebody's rights doesn't mean that I take on their beliefs. Supporting Valves rights is just that. This fear that there might be a game called Day of the Rope and somebody might see it and lose control, therefore we have to control everybody, is batshit crazy talk. You realize that right? This isn't Nazis, La Raza, Black Panthers, KKK. This is YOU. YOU are trying to control and demonize people. You're the bad guy here.
Let Valve fail if they do something stupid, they have a right to fail too.
When and where is this happening? Show me something more than guys waving stupid flags and drinking beer in the park.
That's the thing, your freedom of speech isn't freedom from consequence. Lucky you that you won't get shot on sight for saying something you shouldn't, but the consequences still ring true whether you lose your job or not.
You can play the "there are good people on both sides" game, but, see, there aren't. Take on the ideals of hate groups and say "but we're good people" it's the same as revisionist history. Blame me for "demonizing" people that live their lives on the disdain for others. History shows that sitting by and letting these groups *actually* act on the real disdain they spread doesn't end well for them.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke
Silencing those that try to silence others, thats what you're doing, you don't want me to say what I'm saying, you want to be able to say whatever you want, but in doing so you're actually trying to silence my view that discriminatory communities meant to hurt, silence, or demean others should have no place on a game service. So welcome to the club, Mr. SIlencer of Silencing, the only difference is, you rather support discriminatory practices while I am against it.
When broken down into reality, you'd rather silence the people encouraging others to be one big community, to support each other and be kind to one another rather than silence those that wish to divide everyone and harm others either through words or actions. Good job.
>I'm not trying to force anyone to think any kind of way
then you said
>[against] allowing hate speech to be levied against others
FFS, Pick One.
>Walk into any establishment and threaten someone, do it on public property, do it in a government building if you feel like you'll be able to just walk away unscathed.
You're comparing consequences between committing actual crimes to stating "I prefer to avoid black people because statistically, they are 700x more likely to kill me than a White person would".
>Lucky you that you won't get shot on sight for saying something you shouldn't
Not a concern of mine LOL
>the consequences still ring true whether you lose your job or not.
Not a concern of mine, personally. But you're a dick for getting somebody fired for using the wrong pronoun on Facebook, for example.
>You can play the "there are good people on both sides" game
The real issue here is that you are forcing me and others to choose a side by your actions without presenting any kind of argument beyond, "you're a White male" and "racist".
>try to silence others
>silence others
>you rather support discriminatory practices while I am against it.
Such as?
>the people encouraging others to be one big community
Nobody is stopping you. In fact, I hope you get that community. Just don't force me or other people to live there.
You support discriminatory practices, for example, steam allowing steam groups that curate and incite violence against races and religions they don't agree with. True of False?
The argument boils down to one turning point, either
1. you are in favor of the possibility of valve allowing any types of games even if that includes reinforcing discriminatory practices AGAINST other gamers, such as communities that demean or threaten not just minorities but people of all faiths and ethnicities.
or
2. You are against communities on gaming platforms designed for all ages that discriminates against others either threatening through words or actions, or promoting and inciting that violence to others.
Is it number 1, or number 2? You certainly can't be in both camps, but you can be in neither camp, but that would mean most of what you've written up to this point had no conviction which is an issue in itself.
Plus, "actual" crimes are discriminatory practices too. You don't think that online communities that talk about hurting others is illegal? "Oh but its on the internet" isn't an excuse anymore. More people are being prosecuted for what they say online. You could find plenty of cases for people threatening others online, bullying people online, inciting violence against them or inciting them to commit violence against themselves where they were absolutely prosecuted, lost their jobs, or lost more than that.
Cry for them if you want, the poor people that aimed to hurt others and were punished themselves, but it falls on deaf ears. Freedom of speech does not equal freedom of consequences. I can't say that enough because you don't seem to understand.
That in mind, I think I've said all I can say on the topic. You can keep trying to pin me as a "bad guy" but I haven't tried to "control anyones thinking" all I've done is stated my point of view, that regardless of HOW THEY THINK, pain and violence that they wish to inflict should be mitigated, not given a platform.
YOU want to change how I think, in that you want me to be okay with harm being done either real or virtual, and that there should be no consequences. That is completely misguided, and in fact is against what you say you really want. But you choose not to see it that way.
Being dispassionate about politics, sexuality, racism, gender, violence, identity, and so on is the best policy imo. And that's what valve is doing imo.
You have not proven that they have incited violence. Otherwise, true. Free market.
You have not proven that they have incited violence. Otherwise, 1. Free market.
>Plus, "actual" crimes are discriminatory practices too. You don't think that online communities that talk about hurting others is illegal? "Oh but its on the internet" isn't an excuse anymore. More people are being prosecuted for what they say online. You could find plenty of cases for people threatening others online, bullying people online, inciting violence against them or inciting them to commit violence against themselves where they were absolutely prosecuted, lost their jobs, or lost more than that.
Depends on which country. Are all of these cyberbullies, NAZIs or just random dickheads? Did they break an actual law? If so, burn'em.
>Cry for them if you want, the poor people that aimed to hurt others and were punished themselves, but it falls on deaf ears. Freedom of speech does not equal freedom of consequences. I can't say that enough because you don't seem to understand
If I'm within the law and my rights, then I have nothing to worry about and neither should anybody else. If other people are in a shitty position in life that their Facebook comments, or video games can get them fired, etc. That's their choice that they made. I'm in a different situation. Nobody has that kind of power over me.
>That in mind, I think I've said all I can say on the topic. You can keep trying to pin me as a "bad guy" but I haven't tried to "control anyones thinking" all I've done is stated my point of view, that regardless of HOW THEY THINK, pain and violence that they wish to inflict should be mitigated, not given a platform.
You keep bringing up violence. Yet, there is none.
>YOU want to change how I think, in that you want me to be okay with harm being done either real or virtual, and that there should be no consequences. That is completely misguided, and in fact is against what you say you really want. But you choose not to see it that way.
LOL, no. YOU keep bring up this boogeyman that is committing violence on others. I don't see NAZIs when I check the evening news. But do you know who I DO see?
Take a guess. Go ahead. Pick a city pick any night you want. Tell me, who is on the TV arrested for murder, rape, assault, home invasion, etc etc. You know, actual violence. Actual crimes. Not words on the internet. You have nothing to prove what you fear would come true. Just like Valve, you can't prove a damn thing. I can.
Also, communists killed over 100 million people last century. Do you speak out against all forms of Marxism to make sure they never gain power again?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED