|
On December 05 2018 02:16 clusen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2018 16:33 chipmonklord17 wrote:
According to Valve what occurred is that they told TNC there would be no penalty for playing without Kuku, but didn't imply to them there would be anything wrong with playing with him. Its like the fucking shocked pikachu meme, you mean to tell me TNC wanted to play with their real roster when they had no reason to play with a stand in? Color me surprised. Maybe Valve should have told them the offer they were giving was a one time deal (like a plea deal), and that if they didn't accept the offer to play with a stand in at no reduction, there was no guarantee it was going to be okay in the end if that was their real intention.
EDIT: The more I think about it the more Valve should have set it up like a plea deal if TNC's cover up was the real problem. Just (as Valve) tell them that they know they (TNC) covered the story up, so if they just play without Kuku this one tournament without a penalty, to let this whole thing blow over, we'll call it square. That way as Valve you can further distance yourself from the outcome, and say if TNC chose to say no it was TNC's fault this was occurring, not China's, not Valve's
It's not Valve's job to take actions on TNC's part. They are not responsible for TNC or any of their members. Valve and the TO/ChongQuing government whoever gave them pointer in the direction they are supposed to go and salvage the situation by their own accord (pretty important if you consider how they handled the situation before) and TNC didn't want any of that good shit. They went full "lets be selfish WEEEE" instead of showing some respect - so Valve bitchslapped them. Also in your edit you are forgetting that the story didn't happen between TNC and Valve, there is nothing both could call square.
It is Valve's job to correctly and FULLY inform the teams playing their game of the 'rules' of their game. They can't omit information to TNC (that they'd ban Kuku if TNC chose to play with him), and then be mad at TNC when they chose to play with him. Either you do what I suggested and say "Either take the offer to play without him now or risk us changing our minds later" or tell them from the get go that they don't want Kuku there. You can't not tell someone the rules and then be mad when they broke them.
And in a plea deal, you take a lesser punishment offered to you in exchange for definitely not having the more harsh punishment. What they have to "call square" is the entire situation. Valve would be saying to TNC that at the current moment they feel like TNC should play without him, but will offer them no DPC point penalty for playing without him. Its a lesser punishment (compared to the ban and point reduction they got), but still a punishment. Valve still gets to punish TNC by making them field a roster with a stand in, but TNC doesn't get punished too harshly for a situation they've already apologized for. In addition, like I said in my previous post, if they don't go along with the deal and then Valve decides to ban Kuku, Valve can then say the ball was in TNC's court and they botched it.
|
I don't agree with the idea that Valve shouldn't be allowed to act without a team breaking explicit rules. Requiring explicit rules causes people to take a minimalistic approach to decency: they will only do as much as they need to. It's actually better to allow a certain vagueness in the ruleset, as this forces people to err on the side of safety. It also gives some flexibility in case of an unforseen but clearly undesirable outcome.
|
On December 05 2018 05:34 Sr18 wrote:
I don't agree with the idea that Valve shouldn't be allowed to act without a team breaking explicit rules. Requiring explicit rules causes people to take a minimalistic approach to decency: they will only do as much as they need to. It's actually better to allow a certain vagueness in the ruleset, as this forces people to err on the side of safety. It also gives some flexibility in case of an unforseen but clearly undesirable outcome.
That can be built into the rule set. Having clear lines that result in instant bans such as match fixing ot violence at an event. Then have that racist, bullying or other similar harmful language will result in actions on a case by case basis with a minimum punishment of a fine or removal from the next Valve event.
|
At least with the Chinese being happy now, the Steam launch in China is off to a pretty good start :D
|
On December 05 2018 04:54 TRAP[yoo] wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2018 03:31 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:On December 05 2018 03:01 Aisengamer666 wrote:On December 05 2018 02:36 Sigh Koala wrote:
Banning someone for a joke! Damn! For those that keeps on insisting that it is a joke... If i call you something that you hate the uttermost and do not apologize right away. After you got so mad then i come out and say oops i didnt know what it means so it was a joke. does that change what had happen? NO. If you don't know what it means, dont ****** say it?! If nothing gets done here, everytime this happens in the future, the same excuse will be used over and over again. so stop crying about it. different words have different meanings to different people. Stop acting so goddamn righteous. if you would be so kind to answer my questions. thanks!
TBH I don't think there is a point, since you will insinst on your POV and I will insist on mine, but since you're asking:
To me it's quite obvious that what he meant was: "WTF, I can't understand a word you're saying." just like thousands of players type: "wtf russky" in pubs every single day. The fact that it was used twice within a week has no relevance whatsoever.
Why do you insist that he meant: "I hate chinese people"? What is your evidence that kuku is racist? Would you agree that there is a certain tension between black and white Americans? Doesn't mean that every american is a racist.
And lastly: Not only does "mimicking the chinese language" not even remotely equal racism, the fact that you quote wiktionary as a source makes the value of your post mostly a comic one.
|
On December 04 2018 23:10 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:
In any case, it is entirely possible to offend without meaning to. In some places in the world dog, donkey, monkey or goat are bad insults, in others they are a joke. Using a word that some people view as racist does not automatically make you a racist.
Exactly.
These days if you ask a girl out you can be sexual harasser. If you state "I am a man" someone that doesn't feel the same way may get offended and so on.
The world is going in to the wrong direction these days, things are going way too liberal and that will bite us some day. Being tolerant is one thing but there have to boundaries.
I won't be surprised some day random dog owner suing David Caero for choosing his nickname.
|
United States15275 Posts
On December 05 2018 05:34 Sr18 wrote:
I don't agree with the idea that Valve shouldn't be allowed to act without a team breaking explicit rules. Requiring explicit rules causes people to take a minimalistic approach to decency: they will only do as much as they need to. It's actually better to allow a certain vagueness in the ruleset, as this forces people to err on the side of safety. It also gives some flexibility in case of an unforseen but clearly undesirable outcome.
A) People "do as much as they need to" when the parameters of any code of conduct are vague. The worst outcome is if the lack of specificity gives the company enough leverage to act in arbitrary ways that fall under the penumbra of the original phrasing.
B) Your justification for why the ruleset ought to be nebulous to an extent is completely self-serving for the company and morally indefensible. The distinction between the "letter of the law" and "spirit of the law" is unrelated to training its constituents to be risk-averse and shrink away from possible exposure to externalities.
On December 05 2018 05:42 Yurie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2018 05:34 Sr18 wrote:
I don't agree with the idea that Valve shouldn't be allowed to act without a team breaking explicit rules. Requiring explicit rules causes people to take a minimalistic approach to decency: they will only do as much as they need to. It's actually better to allow a certain vagueness in the ruleset, as this forces people to err on the side of safety. It also gives some flexibility in case of an unforseen but clearly undesirable outcome. That can be built into the rule set. Having clear lines that result in instant bans such as match fixing ot violence at an event. Then have that racist, bullying or other similar harmful language will result in actions on a case by case basis with a minimum punishment of a fine or removal from the next Valve event.
You'll simply create another #MeToo situation where the prospect of ruin is so high, no one will engage in any behavior that could be misinterpreted as violating the ruleset. This will also promote new types of uncouth behavior that are indistinguishable from normal play (e.g. groups of players coincidentally matching up to farm MMR in other regions).
The minimum punishment has to be Valve doing nothing for this to work.
|
On December 05 2018 06:01 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2018 04:54 TRAP[yoo] wrote:On December 05 2018 03:31 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:On December 05 2018 03:01 Aisengamer666 wrote:On December 05 2018 02:36 Sigh Koala wrote:
Banning someone for a joke! Damn! For those that keeps on insisting that it is a joke... If i call you something that you hate the uttermost and do not apologize right away. After you got so mad then i come out and say oops i didnt know what it means so it was a joke. does that change what had happen? NO. If you don't know what it means, dont ****** say it?! If nothing gets done here, everytime this happens in the future, the same excuse will be used over and over again. so stop crying about it. different words have different meanings to different people. Stop acting so goddamn righteous. if you would be so kind to answer my questions. thanks! TBH I don't think there is a point, since you will insinst on your POV and I will insist on mine, but since you're asking: To me it's quite obvious that what he meant was: "WTF, I can't understand a word you're saying." just like thousands of players type: "wtf russky" in pubs every single day. The fact that it was used twice within a week has no relevance whatsoever. Why do you insist that he meant: "I hate chinese people"? What is your evidence that kuku is racist? Would you agree that there is a certain tension between black and white Americans? Doesn't mean that every american is a racist. And lastly: Not only does "mimicking the chinese language" not even remotely equal racism, the fact that you quote wiktionary as a source makes the value of your post mostly a comic one.
it doesnt matter if kuku is racist or not. he used an ethnic slur, has basically shown no remorse and could actually have influence on people who really are racists and think less of chinese people in general. the same goes for the problems in america. would you (im gonna assume you are white) call a black guy in the united states that you dont know the n-word? probably not.
sure lets disregard wiktionary as a source. what about the article that was linked? what about the history you were so quick to disregard? what about all the other incidents where people took real offense after somebody said "ching-chong"?
i probably wont be able to change your mind but dont you think its a bit ridiculous to disregard all this additional information and kukus demeanor in favor of "he just doesnt understand chinese"?
|
back to dotes i guess
agree on that dude that said some of em "think" theyre figting racism, but instead just shown emself being questionable n stuff
edit: @belowme
zz dude you dont go and blame people once its over whats the purpose
|
Kuku and TnC have really done everything wrong in this situation, I have little to no sympathy for them
|
On December 05 2018 01:04 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2018 00:14 ahswtini wrote:On December 05 2018 00:02 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:On December 04 2018 23:50 ahswtini wrote:On December 04 2018 23:10 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:On December 04 2018 20:40 TRAP[yoo] wrote:On December 04 2018 20:27 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:On December 04 2018 19:51 ahswtini wrote:On December 04 2018 19:17 RaigiCS wrote:
Boycotting dota until political correctness is banned from the scene. there's overreaching political correctness, and there's outright racism. That's the whole crux of what started the debate though. Perceiving a word as racist is not the same if it wasn't meant in a racist way. the phrase is racist as per definition. regarding the context it was used in its pretty obvious what was meant by it. Is that so? In this case, you should have no trouble quoting this definition for us to end the debate? In any case, it is entirely possible to offend without meaning to. In some places in the world dog, donkey, monkey or goat are bad insults, in others they are a joke. Using a word that some people view as racist does not automatically make you a racist. perhaps a look at the historical way in which it was used https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2014/07/14/330769890/how-ching-chong-became-the-go-to-slur-for-mocking-east-asians You miss the point. The origin of the expression has been mentioned a bunch of times now. This obviously eplains why chinese are so offended by the phrase, but this is completely unrelated to my argument. First of all, historical context does not equal current usage of a phrase. And secondly, the historical way in which the expression was used does not matter unless you actually know of it and also mean it in the way in which it was used back then. i agree that intent matters a lot, but the fact remains, that he made a remark that you acknowledge can reasonably be interpreted to be racist, in a pub that can be viewed by thousands of people. it's a farcry from a un-PC joke shared between a few friends in a private setting. that said, if he had simply apologised and acknowledged what he did was offensive, i think that would have been the end of the matter. instead, his team tried to cover it up, and from his now-deleted tweets, he's shown no signs that he's truly remorseful and feels he's the victim here. I mostly agree. I still believe it was not meant to be offensive by him and was blown out of proportion. Not manning up was a definite mistake however.
While he might have meant it as a bad joke, it was RIGHT AFTER the skem case, so that throws any lack of knowledge out of the window. Malicious in intent imo. There are jokes and there is just stupidity
|
The punishment should fit the crime. If you say racist/overly offensive things you should be muted. Your livelihood and ability to provide for your family should simply be out of the argument. Another disgusting display by valve but at least they punished racism. Only thing I can think of that would be worse would be doing nothing. O wait they already did that... Its all just MindControl
|
On December 05 2018 06:55 TRAP[yoo] wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2018 06:01 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:On December 05 2018 04:54 TRAP[yoo] wrote:On December 05 2018 03:31 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:On December 05 2018 03:01 Aisengamer666 wrote:On December 05 2018 02:36 Sigh Koala wrote:
Banning someone for a joke! Damn! For those that keeps on insisting that it is a joke... If i call you something that you hate the uttermost and do not apologize right away. After you got so mad then i come out and say oops i didnt know what it means so it was a joke. does that change what had happen? NO. If you don't know what it means, dont ****** say it?! If nothing gets done here, everytime this happens in the future, the same excuse will be used over and over again. so stop crying about it. different words have different meanings to different people. Stop acting so goddamn righteous. if you would be so kind to answer my questions. thanks! TBH I don't think there is a point, since you will insinst on your POV and I will insist on mine, but since you're asking: To me it's quite obvious that what he meant was: "WTF, I can't understand a word you're saying." just like thousands of players type: "wtf russky" in pubs every single day. The fact that it was used twice within a week has no relevance whatsoever. Why do you insist that he meant: "I hate chinese people"? What is your evidence that kuku is racist? Would you agree that there is a certain tension between black and white Americans? Doesn't mean that every american is a racist. And lastly: Not only does "mimicking the chinese language" not even remotely equal racism, the fact that you quote wiktionary as a source makes the value of your post mostly a comic one. it doesnt matter if kuku is racist or not. he used an ethnic slur, has basically shown no remorse and could actually have influence on people who really are racists and think less of chinese people in general. the same goes for the problems in america. would you (im gonna assume you are white) call a black guy in the united states that you dont know the n-word? probably not. sure lets disregard wiktionary as a source. what about the article that was linked? what about the history you were so quick to disregard? what about all the other incidents where people took real offense after somebody said "ching-chong"? i probably wont be able to change your mind but dont you think its a bit ridiculous to disregard all this additional information and kukus demeanor in favor of "he just doesnt understand chinese"?
I think we were having a bit of a misunderstanding. I am not denying the nature and/or history associated with the phrase nor am I defending what he did.
I also believe that Kuku was definitely in the wrong, first for not apologizing and obviously for that brainless cover-up attempt.
But what I do believe is that his intent was not to offend the Chinese people and also that he did not realize how strongly the Chinese feel about the phrase.
In the end I don't like the way Valve handled this situation at all. True it was the only option they had left to not lose the Chinese market and appease the mob, mostly because they refused to step in while there was still time to do so. I don't believe Valve are happy with the decision, because it could set a dangerous precedent, but it was the only logical way out without risking the tournament.
When they told TNC: you can play with a standin without losing DPC in my opinion it was quite clearly implied that this is what Valve wanted them to do to avoid more drama.
|
In the end I don't like the way Valve handled this situation at all. True it was the only option they had left to not lose the Chinese market and appease the mob, mostly because they refused to step in while there was still time to do so. I don't believe Valve are happy with the decision, because it could set a dangerous precedent, but it was the only logical way out without risking the tournament.
When they told TNC: you can play with a standin without losing DPC in my opinion it was quite clearly implied that this is what Valve wanted them to do to avoid more drama.
I think most people misunderstood Valve's statement. To me, Valve was never going to allow Kuku to attend the CQ major. TNC contacted them and asked if they'd get penalised for replacing Kuku, naturally one would think this is what TNC is attempting to do. But no, they went ahead and threw out a heap of false rumors to try and stir up the public to give them a hand. Valve sees this and have no option but to come out and close the case by officially announcing Kuku's ban. Kuku's ban is not entirely because of what TNC did, but collectively of what he did + the team's handling of the entire situation.
Valve has given TNC enough time to fix this issue themselves but they have on multiple occasions refuse to do so. Their public relation team is just horrendous imo. So do not put the blame to Valve, there should be fair bit of communication going around involving TNC, the organisers and Valve. But Valve's statement to me is the one with most authority and integrity. I would not believe what TNC nor the organiser said is 100% true. At least Valve is closer to that 100%.
A slap in the face for a lot of public figures (streamers/caster) tho.
|
I'm not sure what to make of this, I have Chinese blood in me and have lots of Chinese friends. However I can't speak Mandarin, and have said "ching chong" as a way to imitate what they're saying sometimes, when describing it and speaking with other people I know, whether they be chinese or non-chinese, it was never a racial slur in my part of the world. It very well may be the same for where Kuku is, and there may never have been that intent of it as a racial slur for him as well.
That said, now that they do know it is a racial slur to some people, they shouldn't try to cover it up, and just man up and apologise. What they did just further exacerbate the issue.
|
I agree with valve's ban and they should have done that to begin with but no matter what is said and done inside a video game, government should not have anything to do with it and specially a communism government and regardless off what propaganda they use, we all know what communism actually does so would prefer a community without a government interference cause u know this is not China.
|
On December 04 2018 09:53 SpeaKEaSY wrote:
Seems to me like valve punted the football and was hoping TNC would fall on their sword and take the pressure of the situation for everyone's sake, and when that didn't happen they decided to throw TNC back under the bus which they had crawled under rather than drawing the ire of China.
Not going to defend TNC too hard when they were without a doubt unprofessional throughout, but so were valve and the tournament organizers. Still bothered by the fact that the thinly veiled threat of "we can't guarantee his safety" hasn't been addressed. And Valve took way too long to publicly address this. Valve and the TO should accept partial responsibility for this poorly handled mess.
We share the same sentiments. It's just so fishy that they (Valve) released a blog post regarding Pain X's disqualification from the CQ regional qualifiers but can't even make a full announcement regarding Kuku's situation. The racism incident happened way before that blog post and TNC already qualified for the main event.
I don't know, maybe they just baited TNC to make wrong decisions and desperately look for any clear answers. If there was never a ban, why not Valve didn't made an official statement.
I may be wrong, but I'm just confused.
I always argue with my friends to wait for the official announcement, but here it goes, too late.
|
Poland3748 Posts
While the TNS/Kuku behaviour with sloppy cover up begs for some slapping, the underlying situation in which a player in non tournament environment uses "ching chong" and suddenly, apparently, there's a lot of pressure from China to not let the player into the tournament is absolutely ridiculous. And the end result is that Chinese officials can feel good about their approach because it "worked" even though it's horrible.
|
On December 05 2018 23:06 nimdil wrote:
While the TNS/Kuku behaviour with sloppy cover up begs for some slapping, the underlying situation in which a player in non tournament environment uses "ching chong" and suddenly, apparently, there's a lot of pressure from China to not let the player into the tournament is absolutely ridiculous. And the end result is that Chinese officials can feel good about their approach because it "worked" even though it's horrible.
Exactly.
|
On December 05 2018 17:03 Aisengamer666 wrote:Show nested quote +
In the end I don't like the way Valve handled this situation at all. True it was the only option they had left to not lose the Chinese market and appease the mob, mostly because they refused to step in while there was still time to do so. I don't believe Valve are happy with the decision, because it could set a dangerous precedent, but it was the only logical way out without risking the tournament.
When they told TNC: you can play with a standin without losing DPC in my opinion it was quite clearly implied that this is what Valve wanted them to do to avoid more drama.
I think most people misunderstood Valve's statement. To me, Valve was never going to allow Kuku to attend the CQ major. TNC contacted them and asked if they'd get penalised for replacing Kuku, naturally one would think this is what TNC is attempting to do. But no, they went ahead and threw out a heap of false rumors to try and stir up the public to give them a hand. Valve sees this and have no option but to come out and close the case by officially announcing Kuku's ban. Kuku's ban is not entirely because of what TNC did, but collectively of what he did + the team's handling of the entire situation. Valve has given TNC enough time to fix this issue themselves but they have on multiple occasions refuse to do so. Their public relation team is just horrendous imo. So do not put the blame to Valve, there should be fair bit of communication going around involving TNC, the organisers and Valve. But Valve's statement to me is the one with most authority and integrity. I would not believe what TNC nor the organiser said is 100% true. At least Valve is closer to that 100%. A slap in the face for a lot of public figures (streamers/caster) tho.
That's the part that's fucked up and why people are mad, and the entire crux of the argument myself and a few others were making. Valve, more than likely, NEVER was going to let Kuku play in the major, but instead of explicitly saying that to TNC they just told them they could play with a sub for no reduction. Playing with a sub without a point reduction is not the same as "please don't play with that player" and I in no way blame TNC for wanting to field their full roster to an event. To do anything but ruins the competitive integrity of the tournament.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
