|
Keep this civil, guys |
On May 05 2012 02:35 Leth0 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 02:31 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:28 adrenaLinG wrote:On May 05 2012 02:23 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:20 partisan wrote:On May 05 2012 02:17 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:15 partisan wrote:On May 05 2012 02:10 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:08 partisan wrote:On May 05 2012 02:05 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
I don't think it's acceptable to fire those people. I'm not sure where you got the idea that I think so. Society punishes people who used racial slurs towards people in a public arena, that doesn't always mean getting fired, although it often does. There are tons of examples just over the last few years. Yes...and I'm saying I disagree with that, too, unless it happens on the job or when the speaker is officially acting in some capacity as the voice of the company. Athletes calling each other 'niggers' on the field is obviously problematic given its televised to an international audience. But if some paparazzo catches them saying 'nigger' on their home practice court? Don't care at all. Hell, Destiny's stream even had a content advisory warning at the bottom. Then you don't care about people using racial slurs, noted. Some of us think they're completely inappropriate because there is no reason to use them unless you are a trying to a denigrate a person based on race. Depends, actually. If the President got up tomorrow and called Mexican immigrants "beaners," you can bet I'd have a problem with it. Similarly, if I were working and my boss told someone they were a "nigger," I'd have a problem with it. None of this, however, has anything to do with Destiny, and it's beginning to annoy me how people keep trying to label me as some sort of closet racist. You're making a distinction without a difference. How does the hatred behind the word change based on the position of the person using it? Because people acting in public capacity represent by proxy a group of voters i.e. they sacrifice their autonomy to participate in public office. What they do off the job is of no concern of mine. Furthermore, it's disingenuous to call the use of words hatred per se. Hatred refers to a psychological attitude of active disregard for a particular thing. You cannot establish that from someone usually racially insensitively language in certain contexts (e.g. comedians, music artists). You could, however, establish that from someone who refers to, say, black people as niggers, in a completely regular, everyday, spiteful fashion on the sole merit of their being black. It's also begging the question to ask the question you did, but I'm going to overlook it. There is a blurring of the public and private spheres of life. While you consider things like your Facebook page to be private, it is actually public. If you send out racist Facebook updates, that is considered a public statement and not a private conversation. People have lost jobs for things they have said on Facebook, and these cases have routinely been upheld. The difference between your Facebook and Destiny streaming is that he is held to a higher standard given his numbers of audience and the fact that he is representing esports. People will cry that this is a double standard, but it is a double standard. We hold different people to different expectations. It's why we expect a lot more professionalism from our athletes and our politicians. You seem to be missing my point. We hold people to double standards not because there's anything terribly meritorious about the double standard, but because it makes company X more money to just sack the poor fool than do PR damage control. It's literally that simple. While, as I said, I understand Quantic's decision to sack Destiny, on a purely moral level I see nothing particularly offensive about his behaviour beyond the immorality that accompanies all malicious insulting (which virtually every Sc2 player is guilty of) because I don't think the use of a racial slur represents any serious racial prejudice in Destiny's character. When you insult someone, you aim to hurt them. That's the sin, right there. It's not how you say it or how successfully you hurt them; it's what you mean to do. And in that regard, all people who insult other people are equally guilty. I'd like to see a world in which people react to behaviour that offends them not by throwing a tantrum until it's removed from their sight (provided this behaviour doesn't actually infringe upon anyone's rights) but rather by simply voting with their wallet and not contributing to the offensive person. Speak for yourself. It's about respect, decency , and little common sense. If you see nothing 'offensive' about the way destiny acts then you are blind. He says the shit he does PURELY to offend somebody (because he lost a game of starcraft) as if that merit's his behavior.
That's why I said "virtually." If I lose 20 games straight and someone cheeses me, it's not impossible that I'll call them "a piece of shit."
|
On May 05 2012 02:29 OmiDeLta wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 02:27 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2012 02:19 OmiDeLta wrote:On May 05 2012 02:13 adrenaLinG wrote:On May 05 2012 02:12 OmiDeLta wrote:On May 05 2012 02:08 adrenaLinG wrote:On May 05 2012 02:06 OmiDeLta wrote:
Honestly...I don't see what's wrong with people saying what they want on their own streams. I may not agree with it, but their stream is their own stream - it's not in a professional environment. Now people who act unprofessionally during TOURNAMENTS (Idra swearing at Mana during IPL3 and Naniwa's infamous probe rush immediately come to mind)...that's bad and they're the ones who should be punished. What people do on their own streams is their business. I feel like this is Orb all over again. Why are so many people out to get players who do what they want on the privacy (ha!) of their own streams? It's not like you're forced to watch their stream. A player's stream is like his home - you are a guest there. Who are you to come barging in telling him what to say and how to act? It's HIS stream, not YOURS. So some guys are jerks on their streams - what's the big deal?? As long as they're professional in public, who cares?! What they do on their own time is none of anyone's business...well, that's my two cents anyway. A player's stream is not their home, it is public, viewed by thousands of people, and attracts as many people as television from time to time. There is already case law on this and you have no privacy protections for streaming and content you share over the internet is not considered a part of your private physical home. That was supposed to be a metaphor. ...Similie technically, since I used "like". The point is, nobody is forced to watch it, so why is everyone getting so hot and bothered? Yeah and nobody forces you to watch professional sports either, so why does everyone in society get bothered when athletes start saying racist things? Because that's a professional environment. A stream is not. Though I suppose that could be a matter of opinion. Actually, athletes and anyone in any professional competition can and often do lose sponsorships because of things they say in their personal lives. Someone earlier gave the example of Tiger Woods cheating on his wife, and extremely personal affair, but it still affected his professional image. If a sponsor doesn't think a certain player upholds the image they want, it's entirely up to them to put pressure on that individual or drop their support. It's their money, just like with any other job you generally play by their rules. Yeah...point made, that's how it works, but I still don't think that's fair.
I genuinely don't understand how that's not fair.
They have money. You want their money. You do things and follow their instructions and they give you money.
What is the sensible alternative? Razor forgoes their values for the person they are paying? Considering the large number of teams and players Razor supports, having Destiny's name removed is not a major loss, why would they risk a liability like that?
I don't see how there's anything unfair here.
|
On May 05 2012 02:32 Probasaur wrote:
Just because you're offended by something that anyone says.... that doesn't make it offensive. If your world is one in which you are offended by a word, any string of words, then that is YOUR PROBLEM.
This whole mentality of people taking something that is their problem and pushing it onto the majority is everything that is wrong with this world. People think they're entitled to live in this pitch perfect fantasy paradise utopia where everything around them is clean and perfect. And when I started typing this I hadn't already made the connection but now as I do its pretty clear who else in history wanted to live in a pure clean and perfect society no matter who he took down on the way to get there.
It really is all the same thing. When we say how dangerous this "lynch mob" mentality is I'm not sure everyone understands how dangerously similar to the actual metaphor it is. Like I said before when you feel as tho you have the right to dictate what lives and what dies in this community how is that any different from an old KKK meeting where they decided to burn a church because they thought the blacks were hurting the community.
What? So, the people who are offended by racial slurs are the Nazis and KKK in this analogy? And the person who shouts racial slurs at minorities when he loses at a video game, he is...MLK Jr.? Civil rights lawyer?
I am so confused.
|
Destiny sounds arrogant. Some might say he is being utterly honest, but it seems like arrogance to me.
Basically he is saying, fuck off if you don't like my attitude (which includes being a racist).
I don't think being good at playing SC is the ONLY requirement to being a professional gamer sponsored by big companies.
Manners and sportsmanship is all part of maintaining professionalism which any sponsoring company expects out of their players.
Why would companies sponsor players? Because the players give good image to the companies. If the sponsored player starts to go berzerk mode spitting racist comments in all directions, what would the company have to gain from such player? Absolutely nothing.
Tiger Woods lost most of his endorsements/contracts when the scandal broke out. Top designer of Chanel was fired for saying racist comments. Quantic's reaction to Destiny is not a suprise to me at all.
The SC community was not founded by players of poor character such as Destiny, so I think it is more beneficial that the community is weeding him out. There are plenty of talent and the community is not dependent on Destiny to prosper.
|
On May 05 2012 02:36 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 02:35 Leth0 wrote:On May 05 2012 02:31 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:28 adrenaLinG wrote:On May 05 2012 02:23 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:20 partisan wrote:On May 05 2012 02:17 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:15 partisan wrote:On May 05 2012 02:10 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:08 partisan wrote:
[quote]
Society punishes people who used racial slurs towards people in a public arena, that doesn't always mean getting fired, although it often does.
There are tons of examples just over the last few years.
Yes...and I'm saying I disagree with that, too, unless it happens on the job or when the speaker is officially acting in some capacity as the voice of the company. Athletes calling each other 'niggers' on the field is obviously problematic given its televised to an international audience. But if some paparazzo catches them saying 'nigger' on their home practice court? Don't care at all. Hell, Destiny's stream even had a content advisory warning at the bottom. Then you don't care about people using racial slurs, noted. Some of us think they're completely inappropriate because there is no reason to use them unless you are a trying to a denigrate a person based on race. Depends, actually. If the President got up tomorrow and called Mexican immigrants "beaners," you can bet I'd have a problem with it. Similarly, if I were working and my boss told someone they were a "nigger," I'd have a problem with it. None of this, however, has anything to do with Destiny, and it's beginning to annoy me how people keep trying to label me as some sort of closet racist. You're making a distinction without a difference. How does the hatred behind the word change based on the position of the person using it? Because people acting in public capacity represent by proxy a group of voters i.e. they sacrifice their autonomy to participate in public office. What they do off the job is of no concern of mine. Furthermore, it's disingenuous to call the use of words hatred per se. Hatred refers to a psychological attitude of active disregard for a particular thing. You cannot establish that from someone usually racially insensitively language in certain contexts (e.g. comedians, music artists). You could, however, establish that from someone who refers to, say, black people as niggers, in a completely regular, everyday, spiteful fashion on the sole merit of their being black. It's also begging the question to ask the question you did, but I'm going to overlook it. There is a blurring of the public and private spheres of life. While you consider things like your Facebook page to be private, it is actually public. If you send out racist Facebook updates, that is considered a public statement and not a private conversation. People have lost jobs for things they have said on Facebook, and these cases have routinely been upheld. The difference between your Facebook and Destiny streaming is that he is held to a higher standard given his numbers of audience and the fact that he is representing esports. People will cry that this is a double standard, but it is a double standard. We hold different people to different expectations. It's why we expect a lot more professionalism from our athletes and our politicians. You seem to be missing my point. We hold people to double standards not because there's anything terribly meritorious about the double standard, but because it makes company X more money to just sack the poor fool than do PR damage control. It's literally that simple. While, as I said, I understand Quantic's decision to sack Destiny, on a purely moral level I see nothing particularly offensive about his behaviour beyond the immorality that accompanies all malicious insulting (which virtually every Sc2 player is guilty of) because I don't think the use of a racial slur represents any serious racial prejudice in Destiny's character. When you insult someone, you aim to hurt them. That's the sin, right there. It's not how you say it or how successfully you hurt them; it's what you mean to do. And in that regard, all people who insult other people are equally guilty. I'd like to see a world in which people react to behaviour that offends them not by throwing a tantrum until it's removed from their sight (provided this behaviour doesn't actually infringe upon anyone's rights) but rather by simply voting with their wallet and not contributing to the offensive person. Speak for yourself. It's about respect, decency , and little common sense. If you see nothing 'offensive' about the way destiny acts then you are blind. He says the shit he does PURELY to offend somebody (because he lost a game of starcraft) as if that merit's his behavior. That's why I said "virtually." If I lose 20 games straight and someone cheeses me, it's not impossible that I'll call them "a piece of shit."
You need to learn the distinction between calling someone a 'piece of shit' and crossing the line into hate filled racist attacks.
If you don't want people to think you are a racist then don't call someone a nigger every time you get upset. Simple.
|
On May 05 2012 02:35 Leth0 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 02:31 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:28 adrenaLinG wrote:On May 05 2012 02:23 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:20 partisan wrote:On May 05 2012 02:17 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:15 partisan wrote:On May 05 2012 02:10 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:08 partisan wrote:On May 05 2012 02:05 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
I don't think it's acceptable to fire those people. I'm not sure where you got the idea that I think so. Society punishes people who used racial slurs towards people in a public arena, that doesn't always mean getting fired, although it often does. There are tons of examples just over the last few years. Yes...and I'm saying I disagree with that, too, unless it happens on the job or when the speaker is officially acting in some capacity as the voice of the company. Athletes calling each other 'niggers' on the field is obviously problematic given its televised to an international audience. But if some paparazzo catches them saying 'nigger' on their home practice court? Don't care at all. Hell, Destiny's stream even had a content advisory warning at the bottom. Then you don't care about people using racial slurs, noted. Some of us think they're completely inappropriate because there is no reason to use them unless you are a trying to a denigrate a person based on race. Depends, actually. If the President got up tomorrow and called Mexican immigrants "beaners," you can bet I'd have a problem with it. Similarly, if I were working and my boss told someone they were a "nigger," I'd have a problem with it. None of this, however, has anything to do with Destiny, and it's beginning to annoy me how people keep trying to label me as some sort of closet racist. You're making a distinction without a difference. How does the hatred behind the word change based on the position of the person using it? Because people acting in public capacity represent by proxy a group of voters i.e. they sacrifice their autonomy to participate in public office. What they do off the job is of no concern of mine. Furthermore, it's disingenuous to call the use of words hatred per se. Hatred refers to a psychological attitude of active disregard for a particular thing. You cannot establish that from someone usually racially insensitively language in certain contexts (e.g. comedians, music artists). You could, however, establish that from someone who refers to, say, black people as niggers, in a completely regular, everyday, spiteful fashion on the sole merit of their being black. It's also begging the question to ask the question you did, but I'm going to overlook it. There is a blurring of the public and private spheres of life. While you consider things like your Facebook page to be private, it is actually public. If you send out racist Facebook updates, that is considered a public statement and not a private conversation. People have lost jobs for things they have said on Facebook, and these cases have routinely been upheld. The difference between your Facebook and Destiny streaming is that he is held to a higher standard given his numbers of audience and the fact that he is representing esports. People will cry that this is a double standard, but it is a double standard. We hold different people to different expectations. It's why we expect a lot more professionalism from our athletes and our politicians. You seem to be missing my point. We hold people to double standards not because there's anything terribly meritorious about the double standard, but because it makes company X more money to just sack the poor fool than do PR damage control. It's literally that simple. While, as I said, I understand Quantic's decision to sack Destiny, on a purely moral level I see nothing particularly offensive about his behaviour beyond the immorality that accompanies all malicious insulting (which virtually every Sc2 player is guilty of) because I don't think the use of a racial slur represents any serious racial prejudice in Destiny's character. When you insult someone, you aim to hurt them. That's the sin, right there. It's not how you say it or how successfully you hurt them; it's what you mean to do. And in that regard, all people who insult other people are equally guilty. I'd like to see a world in which people react to behaviour that offends them not by throwing a tantrum until it's removed from their sight (provided this behaviour doesn't actually infringe upon anyone's rights) but rather by simply voting with their wallet and not contributing to the offensive person. Speak for yourself. It's about respect, decency , and little common sense. If you see nothing 'offensive' about the way destiny acts then you are blind. He says the shit he does PURELY to offend somebody (because he lost a game of starcraft) as if that merit's his behavior.
That's exactly why Destiny is a big troll. He says these things to offend people, then defends his actions by saying these words should not offend people! That to stop using words like nigger and faggot is "censorship" and only makes racism worse -- and that he is part of the solution, not the problem, to racism.
That's bullshit. If the racist things he said didn't offend people, he would find other ways to offend people. Which he can still do, but he chooses not to.
|
With what happened today, I don't think that we're deserving as a commuity to be the home of a respectable ''e-sports''. A community should be united, not divided like I see in this thread and during this whole drama. Yes, let's go lynch a professionnal because what he says is against our personnal beliefs... In my personnal and humble opinion :
DEAD THREAD, DEAD GAME.
|
On May 05 2012 02:36 Rebel_lion wrote:
I think it would be better for pro's to not stream or post on TL at all. It is obviously opening yourself up too a mob action that will result in hurting your professional carreer. There are just too many random people that will take the chance to jab a pro, or if they can actually harm him/her, do so.
I bet this is why Korean pro's and pro's in general always have cookie-cutter answers, and are boring to interview and such.
This is really really dumb...
There are hundreds of players with tons of fans and likable personalities who don't get into shit because they stream or post on TL. It's only opening yourself up to criticism if you say bigoted things or are an asshole in some other way.
|
Stop fucking E-mailing sponsors!
|
On May 05 2012 02:38 Leth0 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 02:36 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:35 Leth0 wrote:On May 05 2012 02:31 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:28 adrenaLinG wrote:On May 05 2012 02:23 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:20 partisan wrote:On May 05 2012 02:17 Shiori wrote:On May 05 2012 02:15 partisan wrote:On May 05 2012 02:10 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
Yes...and I'm saying I disagree with that, too, unless it happens on the job or when the speaker is officially acting in some capacity as the voice of the company. Athletes calling each other 'niggers' on the field is obviously problematic given its televised to an international audience. But if some paparazzo catches them saying 'nigger' on their home practice court? Don't care at all. Hell, Destiny's stream even had a content advisory warning at the bottom. Then you don't care about people using racial slurs, noted. Some of us think they're completely inappropriate because there is no reason to use them unless you are a trying to a denigrate a person based on race. Depends, actually. If the President got up tomorrow and called Mexican immigrants "beaners," you can bet I'd have a problem with it. Similarly, if I were working and my boss told someone they were a "nigger," I'd have a problem with it. None of this, however, has anything to do with Destiny, and it's beginning to annoy me how people keep trying to label me as some sort of closet racist. You're making a distinction without a difference. How does the hatred behind the word change based on the position of the person using it? Because people acting in public capacity represent by proxy a group of voters i.e. they sacrifice their autonomy to participate in public office. What they do off the job is of no concern of mine. Furthermore, it's disingenuous to call the use of words hatred per se. Hatred refers to a psychological attitude of active disregard for a particular thing. You cannot establish that from someone usually racially insensitively language in certain contexts (e.g. comedians, music artists). You could, however, establish that from someone who refers to, say, black people as niggers, in a completely regular, everyday, spiteful fashion on the sole merit of their being black. It's also begging the question to ask the question you did, but I'm going to overlook it. There is a blurring of the public and private spheres of life. While you consider things like your Facebook page to be private, it is actually public. If you send out racist Facebook updates, that is considered a public statement and not a private conversation. People have lost jobs for things they have said on Facebook, and these cases have routinely been upheld. The difference between your Facebook and Destiny streaming is that he is held to a higher standard given his numbers of audience and the fact that he is representing esports. People will cry that this is a double standard, but it is a double standard. We hold different people to different expectations. It's why we expect a lot more professionalism from our athletes and our politicians. You seem to be missing my point. We hold people to double standards not because there's anything terribly meritorious about the double standard, but because it makes company X more money to just sack the poor fool than do PR damage control. It's literally that simple. While, as I said, I understand Quantic's decision to sack Destiny, on a purely moral level I see nothing particularly offensive about his behaviour beyond the immorality that accompanies all malicious insulting (which virtually every Sc2 player is guilty of) because I don't think the use of a racial slur represents any serious racial prejudice in Destiny's character. When you insult someone, you aim to hurt them. That's the sin, right there. It's not how you say it or how successfully you hurt them; it's what you mean to do. And in that regard, all people who insult other people are equally guilty. I'd like to see a world in which people react to behaviour that offends them not by throwing a tantrum until it's removed from their sight (provided this behaviour doesn't actually infringe upon anyone's rights) but rather by simply voting with their wallet and not contributing to the offensive person. Speak for yourself. It's about respect, decency , and little common sense. If you see nothing 'offensive' about the way destiny acts then you are blind. He says the shit he does PURELY to offend somebody (because he lost a game of starcraft) as if that merit's his behavior. That's why I said "virtually." If I lose 20 games straight and someone cheeses me, it's not impossible that I'll call them "a piece of shit." You need to learn the distinction between calling someone a 'piece of shit' and crossing the line into hate filled racist attacks. If you don't want people to think you are a racist then don't call someone a nigger every time you get upset. Simple.
Whether someone thinks you are a racist is outside of your control. What matters is whether you actually are one, and most people, if they thought about it for awhile, would realize that calling people 'niggers' when one is upset does not a racist make.
And for the record, the level of hate behind "you're a piece of shit" and "you're a nigger" is probably exactly equivalent in all cases of Sc2 rage, unless you stumble across someone who somehow knows their opponent is black and actually does hate black people.
|
A lot people are trying to paint streams as some sort of island where players can do and say whatever they want without any repercussions, and I certainly disagree. As soon as you start throwing up your team and sponsorship logos on your stream it is immediately a professional environment, because you are putting yourself in direct association with your employers. I don't know if this was the case with Destiny, because I don't watch his stream, but even if you don't directly associate yourself through logos you're still at least indirectly associated by playing Starcraft 2 publicly as a professional Starcraft 2 player.
|
You seem to be missing my point. We hold people to double standards not because there's anything terribly meritorious about the double standard, but because it makes company X more money to just sack the poor fool than do PR damage control. It's literally that simple. While, as I said, I understand Quantic's decision to sack Destiny, on a purely moral level I see nothing particularly offensive about his behaviour beyond the immorality that accompanies all malicious insulting (which virtually every Sc2 player is guilty of) because I don't think the use of a racial slur represents any serious racial prejudice in Destiny's character. When you insult someone, you aim to hurt them. That's the sin, right there. It's not how you say it or how successfully you hurt them; it's what you mean to do. And in that regard, all people who insult other people are equally guilty.
"you're stupid" is morally equivalent to "you're a fucking nigger" or some other slur?
that's an untenable position to take but to each his own
|
Any company with PR smarts would drop someone accused of racism (especially when there's tangible proof) unless they thought that his/her value as their representative outweighs the potential damage to their image and goodwill. At the end of the day, it's about keeping the sponsor's name clean, so they can keep on sponsoring the scene. If the sponsor believes that any particular action will damage them beyond a certain level of exposure and advertisement, then they will act.
Which is why, one way or another, Destiny would have had it coming. This particular form of "emailing sponsors" is just the shortest route to the inevitable parting of ways. The image of Quantic's sponsors =/= the form of Destiny's popularity. This is the same thing that's happening in the UFC where Dana White is taking down fighters who post racist or insulting things on their twitter. He's not really saying the fights are racist: he's just trying to protect the image of the UFC and mixed-martial arts from being ruined by crassness. Dana himself is a walking cussball. But he knows there's a certain line that he cannot cross (racism, bigotry, etc), else he'll lose the support of the big businesses and corporations that help keep the UFC a thriving company.
It's all about the money.
|
Glad to see he is no longer sponsored and will hopefully drop off the map of the SC2 community. Don't get me wrong, it is sad what the community did, all the sponsor bullshit, they need to realize it hurts the WHOLE team, like Naniwa and SaSe. I may not have liked Destiny but I like the way the community acted even less.
|
I think the thing people confuse a lot in these types of discussions is the free market vs legality. A lot of people think that since you want a caster gone, it means that people can't do whatever that caster was doing (racist words, etc.). On the other hand if you say someone should be able to say those words, you're talking legally, and it should have no impact on the choice of whether to watch or not. You can, as I am, be against someone like Destiny and want him out of the community/streaming while at the same time defend his ability to put up a stream and say anything he wants to. It's this thin line of reason that matters so much, that people gloss over with rage. Simply put, let the people decide via popularity, the free market.
|
Another bright side to this is now that teams realize the length's that viewer's will go to (and the effects it can have) they won't just blindly let anyone join their team. There will be a vetting process. What team now will risk this type of behavior?
Say what you want about e-mailing sponsors but if people see that a team is just ignoring a situation as volatile as this then the people are going to do something about it.
|
This destiny guy continues to own all of you again and again.
Im gonna insult you the only way I know i wont get banned:
quote: You are stupid and you know nothing about sc2
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On May 05 2012 02:41 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +You seem to be missing my point. We hold people to double standards not because there's anything terribly meritorious about the double standard, but because it makes company X more money to just sack the poor fool than do PR damage control. It's literally that simple. While, as I said, I understand Quantic's decision to sack Destiny, on a purely moral level I see nothing particularly offensive about his behaviour beyond the immorality that accompanies all malicious insulting (which virtually every Sc2 player is guilty of) because I don't think the use of a racial slur represents any serious racial prejudice in Destiny's character. When you insult someone, you aim to hurt them. That's the sin, right there. It's not how you say it or how successfully you hurt them; it's what you mean to do. And in that regard, all people who insult other people are equally guilty. "you're stupid" is morally equivalent to "you're a fucking nigger" or some other slur? that's an untenable position to take but to each his own
In the context of "I just lost a game therefore I'm going to insult this guy cause he made me lose," yes, the emotion behind the insult is identical. People just have favourite insults.
|
As much as I like Destiny, I think it's become pretty apparent that his attitude just isn't going to work with any SC2 team that cares about maintaining a professional image. I don't think he's racist, I don't interpret his speech as racist, but you still can't get away with just saying whatever. No matter how he justifies it, in the end he's just feeding ammunition to a community that's all too willing to use it against him.
Like it or not, it seems like that's the way the community is. There's a lot of high schoolers here with very extreme opinions. They love having influence, and now they've discovered the pressure they can exert on organizations, and you're just going to see this happen more and more often now.
|
On May 05 2012 02:41 Caladbolg wrote:
Any company with PR smarts would drop someone accused of racism (especially when there's tangible proof) unless they thought that his/her value as their representative outweighs the potential damage to their image and goodwill. At the end of the day, it's about keeping the sponsor's name clean, so they can keep on sponsoring the scene. If the sponsor believes that any particular action will damage them beyond a certain level of exposure and advertisement, then they will act.
Which is why, one way or another, Destiny would have had it coming. This particular form of "emailing sponsors" is just the shortest route to the inevitable parting of ways. The image of Quantic's sponsors =/= the form of Destiny's popularity. This is the same thing that's happening in the UFC where Dana White is taking down fighters who post racist or insulting things on their twitter. He's not really saying the fights are racist: he's just trying to protect the image of the UFC and mixed-martial arts from being ruined by crassness. Dana himself is a walking cussball. But he knows there's a certain line that he cannot cross (racism, bigotry, etc), else he'll lose the support of the big businesses and corporations that help keep the UFC a thriving company.
It's all about the money.
In other words, not being racist and not alienating large segments of the population is profitable. Money is colour-blind and that's a good thing.
No one should think companies are pulling these sponsorships because they are moral. No, they are doing so because they are rational.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
