Re:Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs...
by adzzzz on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @04:08PM
(#26730473)
Yes they are entitled and we are allowed to disagree with it. That's the point everyone is trying to make. These legalistic arguments are silly and distracting.
Re:Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs...
by coldpie on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @05:16PM
(#26731434)
Apparently Twitch's employees like these policies for ethical reasons, and/or their businesspeople and advertisers think these policies will bring in more money. Personally, I like these policies and I'd like to see more of this kind of proactive action. I like Twitch more knowing that they have this policy. It shows that they understand their role in shaping public discourse and are taking responsibility for it. It's a difficult balancing act, and there's plenty of ways it could be done badly, but pretending that platforms and their algorithms don't play a role in public discourse is silly.
I do feel most of this whole issue could be sidestepped with some long overdue antitrust enforcement.
Re:Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs...
by adzzzz on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @07:44PM
(#26733109)
>and/or their businesspeople and advertisers think these policies will bring in more money
Yes this is the reason. They will continue to stifle speech so its more palatable for corporations to run ads on their platform. Censoring art and dissent is working well for the people you agree with right now. 60 years ago the current culture would have been unfathomable. In 60 years it may be unfathomable to you again, but now you've taken the stand that it's right and just that they stifle dissent. Hope that never bites you.
Re:Twitch will ban users for 'severe misconduct' that occurs...
by coldpie on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @09:11PM
(#26733866)
I think money is a reason, but I don't think that's the only reason. If I was in a position of power there, I would endorse the same policy purely on ethical grounds, even if it for some reason harmed our relationship with advertisers. I suspect some of the employees there feel the same way.
However, people are completely entitled to decide to shun someone or not do business with them based on mere suspicion or some arbitrary subjective standards (with certain narrow exceptions e.g. discrimination of protected classes) - "freedom of association" is the default condition and a key freedom, people and companies are free to choose with whom they want to (not) associate.
Freedom of association is not absolute, some limitations can be justified (the discrimination laws are a good example) but there does need to be a solid justification and specific serious harm prevented if you want to argue that someone or some organization needs to be denied that freedom of association.