|
Keep this civil, guys |
On May 05 2012 18:35 DN.rSquar3d wrote:
@RageBot, we can never know for sure. But if such racial slurs are used, and if the usage was found out, we don't see the football community raising pitchforks, now do we?
What happens, instead, is the FIFA suspends, fines, and (in appropriate cases) bans players using such slurs. But the banning part is rare; its more of suspension and fining. And that's what we should aim for, not this whole lynching and witch hunting debacle.
I think this is a good point. It would be much better for it to be handled in that fashion than the current one. However, there is no organization with authority over all the players to enforce rules like that. As such it currently falls on the teams to handle things, and I think right now a lot of teams either don't take the issue seriously, or they are afraid to drive their players to other teams by implementing penalties for bad behavior. I suppose its just one of the growing pains that that competitive gaming is going to have to overcome.
|
Off all people i did hope destiny wouldnt fall victem to the process of monetising esports and sc becomming mainstream and politically correct.
The mainstream sc universe is definatly getting more boring
We need a few controversial and interesting people, even if they have a few (verrry) bad habbits .
Hope a good team picks him up.
He deserves it, in the end he has done alot for sc.
|
On May 05 2012 18:35 DN.rSquar3d wrote:
@RageBot, we can never know for sure. But if such racial slurs are used, and if the usage was found out, we don't see the football community raising pitchforks, now do we?
What happens, instead, is the FIFA suspends, fines, and (in appropriate cases) bans players using such slurs. But the banning part is rare; its more of suspension and fining. And that's what we should aim for, not this whole lynching and witch hunting debacle.
Well, I do think that there should be no slurs during real matches (and I don't care if it's racial or not, it's the same in my eyes).
But who cares what they do during practice? I don't know if there's a law about using slurs during practice.
|
On May 05 2012 18:41 Rassy wrote:Off all people i did hope destiny wouldnt fall victem to the process of monetising esports and sc becomming mainstream and politically correct. The mainstream sc universe is definatly getting more boring We need a few controversial and interesting people, even if they have a few bad habbits. Hope a good team picks him up. He deserves it, in the end he has done alot for sc.
I really don't see why players not using racial slurs makes them uninteresting. There has been plenty of drama and whatnot between players that was interesting in the Korean scene, but you never see any of them spouting off racist insults.
|
On May 05 2012 08:48 Leth0 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 08:44 FlamingForce wrote:On May 05 2012 08:40 Leth0 wrote:On May 05 2012 08:37 FlamingForce wrote:On May 05 2012 08:34 Leth0 wrote:On May 05 2012 08:32 Xlancer wrote:On May 05 2012 05:19 Leth0 wrote:On May 05 2012 05:17 Xlancer wrote:
And here I thought everyone wanted to help e-sports grow, but it seems that all we really want to do is harass sponsors and make them wish they'd never gotten involved with SC2 in the first place >.< way to go. If you want a certain play off a team please DON'T harass the sponsors, but rather take it up with the team itself. We need to stop shooting ourselves in the foot. It's more akin to chopping off a foot before the rot that has set in spreads to the rest of the body. so you think that it's okay to harass sponsors away from sc2? The proper way to deal with players is through the management of the team. To be frank with you. If we are the kind of community that supports that sort of disrespectful bigotry then we don't deserve any of the attention that the sponsors have been so kind to give us. Implying that getting a player fired from his team means that we "Support" him No...I'm implying that by people sitting back and letting that sort of behavior continue you support it, and that if that's the kind of community we want to be, then "ESPORTS" would be better off without us. Well than maybe you should go back and read the post you responded to, he said the proper way to handle issues like these is through team management and he is absolutely right, IncontroL also mentioned in the original thread that actually contacting sponsors is something that should not be happening and that teams should be contacted if there is a problem with one of their players, this is not sitting back and supporting behaviour, this is weeding out the problems, going for the sponsors is like torching the entire garden. And where in my post did I ever say that wasnt? My posts are about what happened , not about what "should of happened" or "how it could of been handled better".
*facepalm*
|
On May 05 2012 18:35 DN.rSquar3d wrote:
@RageBot, we can never know for sure. But if such racial slurs are used, and if the usage was found out, we don't see the football community raising pitchforks, now do we?
What happens, instead, is the FIFA suspends, fines, and (in appropriate cases) bans players using such slurs. But the banning part is rare; its more of suspension and fining. And that's what we should aim for, not this whole lynching and witch hunting debacle.
You do see a fair amount of outrage in the newspapers if football players use racist slurs in most countries in Europe at least. The only reason people don't complain en-masse to the sponsors is because they know the established system will deal with their complaints without them needing to. We will continue to have pitchforks until there is a well-established system that people feel comfortable with to deal with these kinds of complaints and actions by players and teams.
|
I dont say other players are uninteresting,its just that diversity is declining with the extremes beeing taken out.
Personally i have never been a fan of destiny and his casting style, on the contrary lol.
Still i think he makes the scene more interesting,and he did contribute alot to the popularity of sc.
|
On May 05 2012 18:41 Darkedge wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 18:36 Grend wrote:On May 05 2012 18:23 Darkedge wrote:On May 05 2012 18:10 Grend wrote:On May 05 2012 17:34 Darkedge wrote:On May 05 2012 17:17 Grend wrote:On May 05 2012 16:31 Darkedge wrote:On May 05 2012 16:18 Grend wrote:On May 05 2012 15:35 Darkedge wrote:
The fact that this is such a polorising and splitting issue is very disturbing, either half of society has no morals whatsoever and simply adheres to social decency due to potential ostracisation from their peers and can conveniently ignore this barrier when posting with the anonymity of an online environment or the SC community simply attracts terrible people.
For the good of my sanity, dear god I hope it's the latter but I fear the former is true. Yes, you have no morals if you think there is a difference between ladder rage and actual racism. It`s not like there is any context here that makes it a tad bit different. What has moral and social decency got to do with each other anyway? If I do not speak nice to you I`m automatically a person who makes terrible moral decisions? That makes no sense. I'm assuming you believe one can say and act however they like so long as they do so under the guise of ladder rage? I'm also assuming you believe you can then later show no remorse, actually state it can, will and should happen again, then retroactively attibute the entire thing as championing the cause of anti-censorship and free speech, free speech being an entirely different concept than most actually think it is. Then comment that if you don't like it, don't watch the stream, conveniently forgetting those on the ladder that are the targets of such abuse. The context is very much understood. I do believe a person is truly revealed for what they are in an environment where they can act and speak without percieved consequences, the worst thing that can happen to the people in this thread is a ban, no real lasting consequence at all that would affect their real lives, quite different to what would happen if they were to act this way in a real situation amongst their peers, where what they say have lasting consequences. I was just pointing out how much of a ridiculous and overblown statement it was of you to say that half of this community has no morals based on them agreeing/defending Destiny. Of course you chose not to respond to that, maybe because it was a stupid remark and made no sense. You can point out what you like, also you weren't merely pointing that out at all, you were attempting to point out the difference between ladder rage and racism along with the need to bear in mind context, you may want to read what you type. I think my post stated exactly what I wanted it to state. It really isn't my job to educate you on respect, morality or anything of the like, to be frank. Attempting to use a play on semantics to obfuscate the actual point of my post is silly and trite, but of course you know that. The internet slowly destroys a person's faith in humanity. I have been playing online games for almost 15 years and I became a very cynical person because of it. The internet is an interesting creation, in that in the last 15-20 years we are able to really delve into the beliefs and psyche of people like never before, due to the anonymity it provides, it really reveals the darker side to humanity. I was actually just annoyed at you judging people so harshly. I know there are no good excuses for racial slurs and homophobic and language that demeans mentally challenged people or people of lower height or people with glasses and so on. But deciding that people are lacking any morale because they use it on the internet is too much. It's a good thing then that you are a reasonable and respectful person, so in the spirit of that would you not agree playing a game of 'gotchya' in regards to the semantics of "social decency" and "morality" instead of addressing the actual point of the post brings nothing to the discussion? The definition of morality is such:
The term “morality” can be used either
1. descriptively to refer to some codes of conduct put forward by a society or,
1. some other group, such as a religion, or
2. accepted by an individual for her own behavior or
2. normatively to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational persons.
So by this definition, saying they had no morals isn't accurate as much as to say they have a warped sense of morality that would not be accepted in reasonable society, is this agreeable? Did this really add anything to the debate? I'm really not sure that it did. If I were to argue that starting a sentence with the word "but" isn't grammatically correct it would seem petty and wouldn't be addressing the point and spirit of your post right? But I guess you could argue that whether someone thinks racial slurs on the internet is not a big deal is not the moral value most people value the most. But I could be wrong I guess. Your point seemed to be just to show how indignant you are at people in this community, or that people in general are terrible. Interesting point. I'm sorry but your post reeks of passive aggression, it really isn't needed, if you are going to debate, if that is indeed what you are attempting, please do so like a mature adult. You are making yourself look rather silly.
But some people would argue that pointing out grammatical mistakes is a kind of passive aggressive thing to do, even in the guise of not doing it, just merely exemplifying bad behavior as you so furtively did. But yeah, I was not really intending for this to be an argument anyway, But I felt that your outburst deserved some kind of reply since it had a certain dramatical flair and was quite self righteous 
This discussion is not very interesting anyway it´s just the same arguments back and forth over and over and I think we all can see that it is going nowhere as for persuading the other part So for us to have a debate about this would be a waste of time for both of us.
|
On May 05 2012 18:54 Grend wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 18:41 Darkedge wrote:On May 05 2012 18:36 Grend wrote:On May 05 2012 18:23 Darkedge wrote:On May 05 2012 18:10 Grend wrote:On May 05 2012 17:34 Darkedge wrote:On May 05 2012 17:17 Grend wrote:On May 05 2012 16:31 Darkedge wrote:On May 05 2012 16:18 Grend wrote:On May 05 2012 15:35 Darkedge wrote:
The fact that this is such a polorising and splitting issue is very disturbing, either half of society has no morals whatsoever and simply adheres to social decency due to potential ostracisation from their peers and can conveniently ignore this barrier when posting with the anonymity of an online environment or the SC community simply attracts terrible people.
For the good of my sanity, dear god I hope it's the latter but I fear the former is true. Yes, you have no morals if you think there is a difference between ladder rage and actual racism. It`s not like there is any context here that makes it a tad bit different. What has moral and social decency got to do with each other anyway? If I do not speak nice to you I`m automatically a person who makes terrible moral decisions? That makes no sense. I'm assuming you believe one can say and act however they like so long as they do so under the guise of ladder rage? I'm also assuming you believe you can then later show no remorse, actually state it can, will and should happen again, then retroactively attibute the entire thing as championing the cause of anti-censorship and free speech, free speech being an entirely different concept than most actually think it is. Then comment that if you don't like it, don't watch the stream, conveniently forgetting those on the ladder that are the targets of such abuse. The context is very much understood. I do believe a person is truly revealed for what they are in an environment where they can act and speak without percieved consequences, the worst thing that can happen to the people in this thread is a ban, no real lasting consequence at all that would affect their real lives, quite different to what would happen if they were to act this way in a real situation amongst their peers, where what they say have lasting consequences. I was just pointing out how much of a ridiculous and overblown statement it was of you to say that half of this community has no morals based on them agreeing/defending Destiny. Of course you chose not to respond to that, maybe because it was a stupid remark and made no sense. You can point out what you like, also you weren't merely pointing that out at all, you were attempting to point out the difference between ladder rage and racism along with the need to bear in mind context, you may want to read what you type. I think my post stated exactly what I wanted it to state. It really isn't my job to educate you on respect, morality or anything of the like, to be frank. Attempting to use a play on semantics to obfuscate the actual point of my post is silly and trite, but of course you know that. The internet slowly destroys a person's faith in humanity. I have been playing online games for almost 15 years and I became a very cynical person because of it. The internet is an interesting creation, in that in the last 15-20 years we are able to really delve into the beliefs and psyche of people like never before, due to the anonymity it provides, it really reveals the darker side to humanity. I was actually just annoyed at you judging people so harshly. I know there are no good excuses for racial slurs and homophobic and language that demeans mentally challenged people or people of lower height or people with glasses and so on. But deciding that people are lacking any morale because they use it on the internet is too much. It's a good thing then that you are a reasonable and respectful person, so in the spirit of that would you not agree playing a game of 'gotchya' in regards to the semantics of "social decency" and "morality" instead of addressing the actual point of the post brings nothing to the discussion? The definition of morality is such:
The term “morality” can be used either
1. descriptively to refer to some codes of conduct put forward by a society or,
1. some other group, such as a religion, or
2. accepted by an individual for her own behavior or
2. normatively to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational persons.
So by this definition, saying they had no morals isn't accurate as much as to say they have a warped sense of morality that would not be accepted in reasonable society, is this agreeable? Did this really add anything to the debate? I'm really not sure that it did. If I were to argue that starting a sentence with the word "but" isn't grammatically correct it would seem petty and wouldn't be addressing the point and spirit of your post right? But I guess you could argue that whether someone thinks racial slurs on the internet is not a big deal is not the moral value most people value the most. But I could be wrong I guess. Your point seemed to be just to show how indignant you are at people in this community, or that people in general are terrible. Interesting point. I'm sorry but your post reeks of passive aggression, it really isn't needed, if you are going to debate, if that is indeed what you are attempting, please do so like a mature adult. You are making yourself look rather silly. But some people would argue that pointing out grammatical mistakes is a kind of passive aggressive thing to do, even in the guise of not doing it, just merely exemplifying bad behavior as you so furtively did. But yeah, I was not really intending for this to be an argument anyway, But I felt that your outburst deserved some kind of reply since it had a certain dramatical flair and was quite self righteous This discussion is not very interesting anyway it´s just the same arguments back and forth over and over and I think we all can see that it is going nowhere as for persuading the other part So for us to have a debate about this would be a waste of time for both of us.
I'm sorry but it wasn't an outburst or intended to offend you, I was making a point that nitpicking semantics can make you miss the forest for the trees, if you believed I was trying to accuse you of having bad grammar that was not the intention and would only make me guilty of the very thing I am accusing you of.
As for the debate going nowhere, I agree. The thread seems pretty much done anyway.
|
how to message razer about this issue
not like my first message
(telling them i was disgusted with what they did and would stop buying razer. stupid message.)
I apologized for my earlier message, and I said that while their decisions in the destiny/quantic/razer situation were things that i personally disagree with, the company as a whole still has my continued support for their constant sponsorship of esports teams throughout the history of esports.
-- let them know that you dislike[or like, if that is your opinion] what they did with destiny, but don't be a prick about it. they're a very good company and they sponsor a lot of teams.
|
On May 05 2012 18:41 Thingdo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 18:35 DN.rSquar3d wrote:
@RageBot, we can never know for sure. But if such racial slurs are used, and if the usage was found out, we don't see the football community raising pitchforks, now do we?
What happens, instead, is the FIFA suspends, fines, and (in appropriate cases) bans players using such slurs. But the banning part is rare; its more of suspension and fining. And that's what we should aim for, not this whole lynching and witch hunting debacle. I think this is a good point. It would be much better for it to be handled in that fashion than the current one. However, there is no organization with authority over all the players to enforce rules like that. As such it currently falls on the teams to handle things, and I think right now a lot of teams either don't take the issue seriously, or they are afraid to drive their players to other teams by implementing penalties for bad behavior. I suppose its just one of the growing pains that that competitive gaming is going to have to overcome.
I agree lynching and with hunting is what we should do!
|
On May 05 2012 19:18 Humposaurus wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 18:41 Thingdo wrote:On May 05 2012 18:35 DN.rSquar3d wrote:
@RageBot, we can never know for sure. But if such racial slurs are used, and if the usage was found out, we don't see the football community raising pitchforks, now do we?
What happens, instead, is the FIFA suspends, fines, and (in appropriate cases) bans players using such slurs. But the banning part is rare; its more of suspension and fining. And that's what we should aim for, not this whole lynching and witch hunting debacle. I think this is a good point. It would be much better for it to be handled in that fashion than the current one. However, there is no organization with authority over all the players to enforce rules like that. As such it currently falls on the teams to handle things, and I think right now a lot of teams either don't take the issue seriously, or they are afraid to drive their players to other teams by implementing penalties for bad behavior. I suppose its just one of the growing pains that that competitive gaming is going to have to overcome. I agree lynching and with hunting is what we should do!
I never said that is what everyone should do. I was just making a point that I think that will probably continue until a better way of handling the issue is worked out.
|
I am happy about thism hope he finds somewhere he wbelongs
|
@Steven_Bonnell I appreciate the support to those who've been supportive, I really do, but this issue isn't worth fighting over, no more racial slurs for me https://twitter.com/#!/Steven_Bonnell
LOLZ. Welcome to the world of grown-ups Destiny, where refusing not to say gook/nigger/whatever when you're losing a video game is the STUPIDEST reason to quit/get fired from one of the cushiest jobs in the world.
|
On May 05 2012 19:22 John Madden wrote:
I am happy about thism hope he finds somewhere he wbelongs
Well he'll just stay right where he is, without a clantag on his name.
|
Now Mr. Destiny is bitching about his issues... I'll be sincere, I'm so glad...
|
On May 05 2012 18:11 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 17:48 Orracle wrote:On May 05 2012 14:35 hzflank wrote:
I would love to be able to see the age of posters in this thread. I don't see how anyone who has had a few jobs can can defend racism. If you are caught being racist in your workplace then you will lose your job. You cannot argue against that. If I was overheard saying the word Gook at work then I would find myself immediately unemployed. How often are you put in this situation in a work place? You understand, NA/EU players despise 1 base all-in play? Player in the GSL does it? Spectators complain. Hell, look at the BM thread, you have people threatening to kill people, wishing death on their family, etc. As I gave in an earlier example, they treat it as if someone spit in their face. Someone spits in your face at work? Of course it's going to erupt into a problem. It's not like Destiny randomly joined a game and said,"Fuck you gook." His opponent 1 based him, offensive GGed him, and taunted him. One base plays are as bad as spitting in someone's face? It is quite a bit off-topic to go into why westerners dislike one base play, but to be honest a large part of that goes back to the Destiny's of brood war anyway. If the top non-korean players did not start using 'cheese' to excuse their losses then people would use some sense and perhaps even understand why one base plays are so good. You mentioned the recent GSL and that is a great example. IM_MVP did not cheese Naniwa, rather Naniwa tried to cheese and MVP called his bluff. Keeping opponents honest is essential in starcraft, and without it none of us would enjoy the game. We cannot do anything about random players using bad manners of ladder (and it really does hurt the elephant, you dont have to be a genius to work out why!). But teams absolutely should stop their professional players from using bad manners, let alone racism.
On the contrary, IM_MVP did "cheese", but he did so on the assumption that Naniwa would be eco-cheesing in return.
There's nothing intrinsically wrong with 1-base play, but it's generally easier to execute than the alternative and its looked down upon on the ladders of NA / EU as examples of substandard play.
I like cheese, but I recognize that its offensive, and you're going to get hate for it.
|
On May 05 2012 19:37 Defacer wrote:LOLZ. Welcome to the world of grown-ups Destiny, where refusing not to say gook/nigger/whatever when you're losing a video game is the STUPIDEST reason to quit/get fired from one of the cushiest jobs in the world.
nvm misread
|
Wodner if Hollywood contacted Destiny yet, they could make something similar to American History X from this event.
Edward Norton as Destiny while at it.
|
I know teamliquid forums are heavy moderated, but cant leave it to just say:
sorry, but this is f***ng ret***ded. Are you people some kind of medieval lynch mob?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
