|
On November 21 2013 06:54 Conti wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2013 06:52 LuckoftheIrish wrote:On November 21 2013 06:47 SKC wrote:
Most channels should be unbanned soon, probally all of them. It's just an extremelly poor attempt of damage control.
It's absurd that people are still attached to the emote and it's "connection to porn". May as well bandwagon against Tara Babcock emotes. So many people can't argue about the real issue or just want to hate on the guy because of what he likes. The significant and clear difference is that Tara Babcock, for better or for worse, is a person who streams regularly on Twitch. The NightLight emoticon is entirely unconnected to anything other than one guy (who just happens to be the person who approves emotes). What's the deal with that emoticon, anyhow? I mean, people could just.. ignore it? It one of a gazillion of emoticons on twitch, and I'm pretty sure nobody ever asked why twitch has a dog-face emoticon, either. At first I thought it was because it was some pseudo-porn furry picture or something, but I just saw the NightLight emoticon and.. nope. Just a random emoticon. Why did people get mad over it?
It's taken from a picture of the former boyfriend of the guy in charge of approving emoticons. So people got mad because this thing showed up at the same time a pretty popular Quake streamer had all of his emoticons removed by the same guy. Then another popular streamer, one of the admins from AGDQ, joked about it and was IP banned from Twitch.
That's my understanding from the research I've done.
|
On November 21 2013 06:50 Dubzex wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2013 06:46 Sn0_Man wrote:On November 21 2013 06:42 Dubzex wrote:
All of the streams I watch are getting banned by some furry on a power trip. GG twitch The fact that you call him "some furry" is disgusting. I'm not commenting on what he's doing (it seems wrong to me but I can't say I'm well enough informed to judge) but the fact that he isn't a human being to you but rather "some furry" is absolutely not acceptable. Anybody who would sink low enough to refer to him like that ought to examine themselves closely before they accuse others. On November 21 2013 06:44 LuckoftheIrish wrote:
I don't know what happened or who was originally at fault but holy balls is Twitch handling this as poorly as possible. This, on the other hand, is spot on. Would you prefer that I refer to him as the furry named Horror? or Horrorthecat as his twitter handle states? I'm not sure what you are getting at here.
So it would be fine to complain when your favourite player loses to Scarlett that they lost to "some Tranny playing zerg"?
No...
The fact that it matters to you that Horror identifies himself as a furry isn't reasonable. Judge him on his actions (which you are doing and is fine) and leave his sexuality out of it.
|
On November 21 2013 06:56 Dubzex wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2013 06:54 Conti wrote:On November 21 2013 06:52 LuckoftheIrish wrote:On November 21 2013 06:47 SKC wrote:
Most channels should be unbanned soon, probally all of them. It's just an extremelly poor attempt of damage control.
It's absurd that people are still attached to the emote and it's "connection to porn". May as well bandwagon against Tara Babcock emotes. So many people can't argue about the real issue or just want to hate on the guy because of what he likes. The significant and clear difference is that Tara Babcock, for better or for worse, is a person who streams regularly on Twitch. The NightLight emoticon is entirely unconnected to anything other than one guy (who just happens to be the person who approves emotes). What's the deal with that emoticon, anyhow? I mean, people could just.. ignore it? It one of a gazillion of emoticons on twitch, and I'm pretty sure nobody ever asked why twitch has a dog-face emoticon, either. At first I thought it was because it was some pseudo-porn furry picture or something, but I just saw the NightLight emoticon and.. nope. Just a random emoticon. Why did people get mad over it? If you were to look up the origins of that emote, you would find furry porn which isn't really acceptable for the twitch site as they tend to ban you for having anything suggestive in your channel.
That is exactly what I was saying. By that logic, google Tara Babcock.
|
United Kingdom31255 Posts
Happy 100 pages guys even if its gonna be full of pitch forks 
|
On November 21 2013 06:55 SKC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2013 06:52 LuckoftheIrish wrote:On November 21 2013 06:47 SKC wrote:
Most channels should be unbanned soon, probally all of them. It's just an extremelly poor attempt of damage control.
It's absurd that people are still attached to the emote and it's "connection to porn". May as well bandwagon against Tara Babcock emotes. So many people can't argue about the real issue or just want to hate on the guy because of what he likes. The significant and clear difference is that Tara Babcock, for better or for worse, is a person who streams regularly on Twitch. The NightLight emoticon is entirely unconnected to anything other than one guy (who just happens to be the person who approves emotes). This is not what a lot of people are saying though, it's just that a cats face is suddenly "not appropriate". As if they are trying to protect the internet from dangerous influences. That angle makes more sense, but it's not such a good reason for Twitch to take it down, which is probally why not as much people go for it. Emote were always kinda arbitrary.
Well, the other thing is that it's directly taken from a nsfw picture.
|
All this bullshit just because of some fucking pixels on a website. Grow up already. Harassing someone, for as little as marginal bullshit as this ,is disgusting
|
On November 21 2013 06:56 Sn0_Man wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2013 06:50 Dubzex wrote:On November 21 2013 06:46 Sn0_Man wrote:On November 21 2013 06:42 Dubzex wrote:
All of the streams I watch are getting banned by some furry on a power trip. GG twitch The fact that you call him "some furry" is disgusting. I'm not commenting on what he's doing (it seems wrong to me but I can't say I'm well enough informed to judge) but the fact that he isn't a human being to you but rather "some furry" is absolutely not acceptable. Anybody who would sink low enough to refer to him like that ought to examine themselves closely before they accuse others. On November 21 2013 06:44 LuckoftheIrish wrote:
I don't know what happened or who was originally at fault but holy balls is Twitch handling this as poorly as possible. This, on the other hand, is spot on. Would you prefer that I refer to him as the furry named Horror? or Horrorthecat as his twitter handle states? I'm not sure what you are getting at here. So it would be fine to complain when your favourite player loses to Scarlett that they lost to "some Tranny playing zerg"? No... The fact that it matters to you that Horror identifies himself as a furry isn't reasonable. Judge him on his actions (which you are doing and is fine) and leave his sexuality out of it.
If someone identifies as something, isn't that the correct way to refer to them? Your comparison to scarlett is grossly off-base and is quite rude.
|
On November 21 2013 06:57 LuckoftheIrish wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2013 06:55 SKC wrote:On November 21 2013 06:52 LuckoftheIrish wrote:On November 21 2013 06:47 SKC wrote:
Most channels should be unbanned soon, probally all of them. It's just an extremelly poor attempt of damage control.
It's absurd that people are still attached to the emote and it's "connection to porn". May as well bandwagon against Tara Babcock emotes. So many people can't argue about the real issue or just want to hate on the guy because of what he likes. The significant and clear difference is that Tara Babcock, for better or for worse, is a person who streams regularly on Twitch. The NightLight emoticon is entirely unconnected to anything other than one guy (who just happens to be the person who approves emotes). This is not what a lot of people are saying though, it's just that a cats face is suddenly "not appropriate". As if they are trying to protect the internet from dangerous influences. That angle makes more sense, but it's not such a good reason for Twitch to take it down, which is probally why not as much people go for it. Emote were always kinda arbitrary. Well, the other thing is that it's directly taken from a nsfw picture.
The origin of the emote wasnt porn btw, the character is just a furry. There was some images created about the character, but created at a later point. Like you can find porn about any character.
I don't know if it was the creator of the character that did the porn images, but that's is not particularly relevant. The character itself isn't intrinsically connected to porn.
|
On November 21 2013 06:58 NovaMB wrote:
All this bullshit just because of some fucking pixels on a website. Grow up already. Harassing someone for marginal bullshit as this is disgusting
What if the guy in question banned someone who makes his living through Twitch subscriptions? Is it a reasonable thing to discuss then?
|
On November 21 2013 06:58 SKC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2013 06:57 LuckoftheIrish wrote:On November 21 2013 06:55 SKC wrote:On November 21 2013 06:52 LuckoftheIrish wrote:On November 21 2013 06:47 SKC wrote:
Most channels should be unbanned soon, probally all of them. It's just an extremelly poor attempt of damage control.
It's absurd that people are still attached to the emote and it's "connection to porn". May as well bandwagon against Tara Babcock emotes. So many people can't argue about the real issue or just want to hate on the guy because of what he likes. The significant and clear difference is that Tara Babcock, for better or for worse, is a person who streams regularly on Twitch. The NightLight emoticon is entirely unconnected to anything other than one guy (who just happens to be the person who approves emotes). This is not what a lot of people are saying though, it's just that a cats face is suddenly "not appropriate". As if they are trying to protect the internet from dangerous influences. That angle makes more sense, but it's not such a good reason for Twitch to take it down, which is probally why not as much people go for it. Emote were always kinda arbitrary. Well, the other thing is that it's directly taken from a nsfw picture. The origin of the emote wasnt porn btw, the character is just a furry. There was some images created about the character, but created at a later point. Like you can find porn about any character.
/shrug
I mean, I agree with you insofar as I think it's dumb as balls to be upset about the actual emoticon. It's another thing to talk about its origin. And more importantly the fallout.
|
On November 21 2013 06:56 Dubzex wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2013 06:54 Conti wrote:On November 21 2013 06:52 LuckoftheIrish wrote:On November 21 2013 06:47 SKC wrote:
Most channels should be unbanned soon, probally all of them. It's just an extremelly poor attempt of damage control.
It's absurd that people are still attached to the emote and it's "connection to porn". May as well bandwagon against Tara Babcock emotes. So many people can't argue about the real issue or just want to hate on the guy because of what he likes. The significant and clear difference is that Tara Babcock, for better or for worse, is a person who streams regularly on Twitch. The NightLight emoticon is entirely unconnected to anything other than one guy (who just happens to be the person who approves emotes). What's the deal with that emoticon, anyhow? I mean, people could just.. ignore it? It one of a gazillion of emoticons on twitch, and I'm pretty sure nobody ever asked why twitch has a dog-face emoticon, either. At first I thought it was because it was some pseudo-porn furry picture or something, but I just saw the NightLight emoticon and.. nope. Just a random emoticon. Why did people get mad over it? If you were to look up the origins of that emote, you would find furry porn which isn't really acceptable for the twitch site as they tend to ban you for having anything suggestive in your channel.
They haven't banned Tara Babcock yet..
The emoticon I've seen was a pixelated furry face that could've come from any source and certainly didn't look like it came from any kind of artwork.
|
On November 21 2013 06:59 LuckoftheIrish wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2013 06:58 NovaMB wrote:
All this bullshit just because of some fucking pixels on a website. Grow up already. Harassing someone for marginal bullshit as this is disgusting What if the guy in question banned someone who makes his living through Twitch subscriptions? Is it a reasonable thing to discuss then?
That still doesnt rectify all the shit Horror is getting. I know Wersters job was streaming, but he should know better than to piss off someone that can "fire" you.
Is it reasonable to ban? Maybe,but not permanent, but if you look at all of 4chans jimmies this unrustled, I dont know really. But discussing it like its done right now is awful and doesnt help anyone
|
|
|
On November 21 2013 07:04 Mid or Feed wrote:
wrong account hue
On November 21 2013 06:46 Sn0_Man wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2013 06:42 Dubzex wrote:
All of the streams I watch are getting banned by some furry on a power trip. GG twitch The fact that you call him "some furry" is disgusting. I'm not commenting on what he's doing (it seems wrong to me but I can't say I'm well enough informed to judge) but the fact that he isn't a human being to you but rather "some furry" is absolutely not acceptable. Anybody who would sink low enough to refer to him like that ought to examine themselves closely before they accuse others. Show nested quote +On November 21 2013 06:44 LuckoftheIrish wrote:
I don't know what happened or who was originally at fault but holy balls is Twitch handling this as poorly as possible. This, on the other hand, is spot on.
I was under the impression that those furry people prefer being considered animals.
So it's silly to complain about them not being regarded as humans.
|
On November 21 2013 06:32 Conti wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2013 06:16 Raelcun wrote:
If putting "Remove Horror" in your title causing /vg/ to raid you leads to harassment, then yes.
Encouraging harassment, and having a title that causes people to flock to your channel are two different things. I disagree. Everyone involved here is smart enough to know that putting up a title like that will encourage harassment and - depending on the size of your channel - will inevitably lead to harassment.
There is a difference between wearing an animal rights ribbon, and telling everyone you know to bomb animal testing facilities.
You cannot automatically hold people responsible for the actions of others. Once you reach a sizable audience, almost anything negative you say about persons or projects can make a minority of your listeners do something rash and stupid that you do not condone. TotalBiscuit has been the catalyst for harassment and internet brigading even while he repeatedly and forcefully states that he is against that kind of behavior.
In this case, I believe it falls on the "ribbon" side of the spectrum. Issuing site-wide bans of content creators over inoffensive titles - their only form of protest available - is the wrong way to handle the aftermath.
|
United Kingdom31255 Posts
|
Twitch has nothing to do on whether you live off your channel or it's just something you do on the side. The rules apply to everyone. The question is whether their rulings are fair, which is often quite a big question. But that shouldn't change if you make money off Twitch.
|
On November 21 2013 07:03 NovaMB wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2013 06:59 LuckoftheIrish wrote:On November 21 2013 06:58 NovaMB wrote:
All this bullshit just because of some fucking pixels on a website. Grow up already. Harassing someone for marginal bullshit as this is disgusting What if the guy in question banned someone who makes his living through Twitch subscriptions? Is it a reasonable thing to discuss then? That still doesnt rectify all the shit Horror is getting. I know Wersters job was streaming, but he should know better than to piss off someone that can "fire" you. Is it reasonable to ban? Maybe,but not permanent, but if you look at all of 4chans jimmies this unrustled, I dont know really. But discussing it like its done right now is awful and doesnt help anyone
Chicken or the egg, I suppose. The shitstorm really started when people got banned. The emoticon started people making jokes on Twitter. So I don't think it's oh man so sorry for Horror, Twitch has kinda started this by overreacting to something that happened on Twitter.
|
On November 21 2013 07:05 SKC wrote:
Twitch has nothing to do on whether you live off your channel or it's just something you do on the side. The rules apply to everyone. The question is whether their rulings are fair, which is often quite a big question. But that shouldn't change if you make money off Twitch.
In theory, sure. I agree with the principle. But in practice I think there's a difference between IP banning someone with two viewers and IP banning a major stream.
|
On November 21 2013 07:05 Dandel Ion wrote:wrong account hue Show nested quote +On November 21 2013 06:46 Sn0_Man wrote:On November 21 2013 06:42 Dubzex wrote:
All of the streams I watch are getting banned by some furry on a power trip. GG twitch The fact that you call him "some furry" is disgusting. I'm not commenting on what he's doing (it seems wrong to me but I can't say I'm well enough informed to judge) but the fact that he isn't a human being to you but rather "some furry" is absolutely not acceptable. Anybody who would sink low enough to refer to him like that ought to examine themselves closely before they accuse others. On November 21 2013 06:44 LuckoftheIrish wrote:
I don't know what happened or who was originally at fault but holy balls is Twitch handling this as poorly as possible. This, on the other hand, is spot on. + Show Spoiler +I was under the impression that those furry people prefer being considered animals.
So it's silly to complain about them not being regarded as humans .
What in the actual fuck
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
