|
On July 20 2011 08:45 Ocedic wrote:
Except you ignored the question: so where do you draw the line? Somewhere arbitrary and based on your own personal sense of morality? Exactly, your view of where freedom of speech (and all freedom) begins and ends is an OPINION.
There's clear legal limitations where it begins and ends in America, and I presume in Korea as well. So the point is that it doesn't matter what the fuck you think the limits SHOULD be, the law decides that.
oh, so you're just arguing irrelevant points then. gotcha.
do tell, if moral relativism is the order of the day with laws of the land as the ultimate arbiter of right and wrong, why exactly does this thread exist? I mean, it's open and shut, right, since the person in question can litigate?
you're trying to dismiss this entire avenue of discussion based on laws alone. supporting a concrete reliance on written law assumes that all laws and customs are always right in their own context and that no one outside of that national/cultural context can criticize or really has the right or point to criticize, which is simply absurd. if I missed something important in your analysis, please feel free to point it out because as of right now you're not much more than someone with their fingers in their ears muttering "this isn't happening...".
|
On July 20 2011 08:49 s4life wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2011 08:41 Blasterion wrote:On July 20 2011 08:37 TheExile19 wrote:On July 20 2011 08:29 Ocedic wrote:
Yes, people who commit suicide over cyber bullying and bullying in general do have self esteem issues. But that's blaming the victim. You're acting as if bullying serves a purpose to humanity and that people committing suicide are just unfortunate incidental damage to something that otherwise betters society as a whole.
Maybe you'll feel differently if you ever have a kid who gets bullied at school. If he or she commits suicide, would you feel the same way? bullying is something that, no matter the number of awareness groups and good faith, is never going to simply fade away. similarly, people willing to snipe away at the reputations of public figures from behind the anonymous veil of a computer with internet won't, either. in the case of the latter, those public figures have to have thick skins to enter professions and fields that require exposure. I happen to think this sort of reaction showcases the sort of self-esteem that simply isn't adequate to fill the position that jessica currently occupies, and that she should consider talking to a counselor before something like this - a perfectly normal process, especially with an issue as loaded as females in professional gaming - has the chance to get to her in such a way again. Shakespeare say best, Reputation is immortal part of person. No reputation, person bestial left. Good Public image very important. And for Eve she get bad image first time on scene, Not good for esport career Sometimes you lose more of your reputation by being petty and vengeful rather than just let the minor nuisances of life play themselves out. That seems to be the case here.
Yes is true, but Person has duty to defend their reputation. The result is good or bad that's for them to gauge
|
The thing is... she is a former entertainer lol. You would think she would've had a better handle on all the netizen hate but wow...
|
Anyone has any updates on the situation? I can't seem to find any and I don't surf DCInside.
|
Once again, I just don't see anything that really gets my blood boiling, maybe that's a problem on my end but honestly, I don't feel bad for Eve, she's a gold league player who is on SlayerS, who got to wear the uniform and sit next to Cella at the GSTL. People are probably jealous as fuck because of that.
Here's a comparison, Justin Beiber probably gets a thousand or more times more attention, publicity and money, he also gets a thousand times more negative attention and hate. You can go look at a video of something completely unrelated to the guy and the top comment will likely be, "Dislike bar is almost as small as Justin Beiber's dick" with a hundred likes, there's probably hundreds of picture of him blowing some dude, getting it up the butt or whatever the fuck people photoshop these days. Do I feel bad for him? Not really, he's famous as fuck, gets tons of opportunities and money that others don't and has tons of fans.
Similarly, Eve is in an industry where people get attention and people get anti-fans along with fans, she has an opportunity and access to resources that more than half of the users on this site would likely sell their left leg for, I don't feel bad for her. If someone in such a position really gets hit hard by all these things, then I feel they need an adjustment in terms of their outlook on being in the spotlight, it can't be that difficult to get past and ignore, and once you look past it, it's not hard to see that you have it better than most.
So yeah, Jessica is over-reacting in my opinion... There's no reason to respond to every single post, single out everyone that says anything remotely negative. She seems to have largely gone off the reservation and we're getting to the point where I may begin to lose a bit of respect for her, sure it's cultural but what she's doing in regards to her responses seems excessive and ridiculous.
|
She's a whiny little girl. She's on a professional team and should honor that. With that comes hate. We have a few girls that play with us and we give them cra all day and they just kid around
She over reacted
|
On July 20 2011 08:58 Mordiford wrote:
Once again, I just don't see anything that really gets my blood boiling, maybe that's a problem on my end but honestly, I don't feel bad for Eve, she's a gold league player who is on SlayerS, who got to wear the uniform and sit next to Cella at the GSTL. People are probably jealous as fuck because of that.
Here's a comparison, Justin Beiber probably gets a thousand or more times more attention, publicity and money, he also gets a thousand times more negative attention and hate. You can go look at a video of something completely unrelated to the guy and the top comment will likely be, "Dislike bar is almost as small as Justin Beiber's dick" with a hundred likes, there's probably hundreds of picture of him blowing some dude, getting it up the butt or whatever the fuck people photoshop these days. Do I feel bad for him? Not really, he's famous as fuck, gets tons of opportunities and money that others don't and has tons of fans.
Similarly, Eve is in an industry where people get attention and people get anti-fans along with fans, she has an opportunity and access to resources that more than half of the users on this site would likely sell their left leg for, I don't feel bad for her. If someone in such a position really gets hit hard by all these things, then I feel they need an adjustment in terms of their outlook on being in the spotlight, it can't be that difficult to get past and ignore, and once you look past it, it's not hard to see that you have it better than most.
So yeah, Jessica is over-reacting in my opinion... There's no reason to respond to every single post, single out everyone that says anything remotely negative. She seems to have largely gone off the reservation and we're getting to the point where I may begin to lose a bit of respect for her, sure it's cultural but what she's doing in regards to her responses seems excessive and ridiculous.
She is actually in diamond, not great but better than gold.
|
whats the point of inviting diamond player to pro team?
Like if they care only about look i think it would be easier to invite a stripper, pay her for playing sc2 and leaking her naked pics from time to time. I bet that such solution would give the team even more attention.
|
So i remeber i watched a stream of someone from FXO and after he finshed a game it showed he was in diamond ... nobody raged about that ...
|
On July 20 2011 08:53 TheExile19 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2011 08:45 Ocedic wrote:
Except you ignored the question: so where do you draw the line? Somewhere arbitrary and based on your own personal sense of morality? Exactly, your view of where freedom of speech (and all freedom) begins and ends is an OPINION.
There's clear legal limitations where it begins and ends in America, and I presume in Korea as well. So the point is that it doesn't matter what the fuck you think the limits SHOULD be, the law decides that. oh, so you're just arguing irrelevant points then. gotcha. do tell, if moral relativism is the order of the day with laws of the land as the ultimate arbiter of right and wrong, why exactly does this thread exist? I mean, it's open and shut, right, since the person in question can litigate? you're trying to dismiss this entire avenue of discussion based on laws alone. supporting a concrete reliance on written law assumes that all laws and customs are always right in their own context and that no one outside of that national/cultural context can criticize or really has the right or point to criticize, which is simply absurd. if I missed something important in your analysis, please feel free to point it out because as of right now you're not much more than someone with their fingers in their ears muttering "this isn't happening...".
I already made my points clear, which is that no, I don't think freedom of speech protects your right to insult people on twitter and make photoshopped pornographic images of people. Freedom of speech is important for the ability to criticize the government and hold them accountable. It's not important for allowing people to bully others.
If anyone here is arguing without a purpose, it's you. I don't even know what your argument is; you're just trying to pick at bits of my points without success and while ignoring my overarching argument/position. What the fuck is your point? That protecting people's rights to insult one another is important? If so, please provide logic as to why.
|
On July 20 2011 08:58 Mordiford wrote:
So yeah, Jessica is over-reacting in my opinion... There's no reason to respond to every single post, single out everyone that says anything remotely negative. She seems to have largely gone off the reservation and we're getting to the point where I may begin to lose a bit of respect for her, sure it's cultural but what she's doing in regards to her responses seems excessive and ridiculous.
Sorry not cultural. What she's doing now is not a representative our culture. She lashing out at everything and her responses are basically based on the freudian excuse that she's protecting Eve from the "evil" netizens out to get her.
Many of us are just going wait, are you sure this was the best timing to show her off? She's only diamond, aren't there better qualified players? And to those tweets she has attacked with threats. It's not wonder the girl who ended up in a argument with her about english deleted her twitter account due to Jessica's fans spamming her and Jessica being a total bitch to her.
|
On July 20 2011 09:04 ranshaked wrote:
She's a whiny little girl. She's on a professional team and should honor that. With that comes hate. We have a few girls that play with us and we give them cra all day and they just kid around
She over reacted
some people would end up honoring their own reputation and such more than being on the team they'd like to be on, on top of honoring the potentially dark sides of the profession---not to say that slayers_eve doesn't do [any of]that already
i have no clue of who you are, and what you consider giving someone crap, but my food for thought for you would be that maybe you should honor that your gaming experience isn't a complete sausage fest all the time
again, i don't know who you are, but i also don't think you know who slayers_eve is just yet
|
it's more that the ability to "insult people" is irrevocably tied in to the entire concept of freedom of speech. if you actually think that the concept allows you to pick and choose what's right and what's wrong, then you don't understand the idea of actually legislating the concept. the second you start arbitrarily shaving off the edges of human expression, stupid and tasteless though much of it may be, the idea is compromised from the judicial standpoint of trying to determine what constitutes ideas that are simply unable to be expressed.
anyway, I think your problem with me is that I don't really have a dog in this fight. I certainly think this level of reaction and personal hurt from jessica, especially given that many of the people who do things like this feed off emotional reactions, is absurd and unjustified. I also think that in a perfect world of moral societies and generally "good" people, phenomena like this wouldn't exist, but that's certainly not the case, is it?
I'm not really sure what you would like from me, to tell the truth...an admission that these people are in the wrong, yes? I'd like to say they are, but in the same breath I'd advocate their right to express it to the utmost so long as no physical harm is involved. in the end, words are just words; they can wound, but rarely fatally harm, and jessica undoubtedly has a fulfilling personal life and people to console her when the "haters" come looking for willing victims to react to their jibes.
edit: to summarize my view on the matter, I basically feel that the american concept of freedom of speech is almost always the best way to go. if it means that the occasional revolting written word slips in under the same idea that allows me to criticize my government/religions/all manner of organizations (I find that fred phelps is always a good example of this), then that's simply a casualty of the ultimate inability to objectively decide what is too lurid and ridiculous for print and expression.
|
double post, my apologies since you can see I'm new here
|
On July 20 2011 09:09 Greenworld wrote:
So i remeber i watched a stream of someone from FXO and after he finshed a game it showed he was in diamond ... nobody raged about that ...
Because the ladder was locked in Korea during that time. Hehe...
|
On July 20 2011 09:09 Greenworld wrote:
So i remeber i watched a stream of someone from FXO and after he finshed a game it showed he was in diamond ... nobody raged about that ...
Ehm, the difference is that at the time the korean ladder was locked. In fact, if you looked at the stream description it said very clearly that currently the korean ladder is locked, and therefore the players can't get into masters/GM. It also said that asserting otherwise would be a bannable offense in chat.
So yeah, that's the difference.
|
On July 20 2011 09:29 marttorn wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2011 09:09 Greenworld wrote:
So i remeber i watched a stream of someone from FXO and after he finshed a game it showed he was in diamond ... nobody raged about that ... Ehm, the difference is that at the time the korean ladder was locked. In fact, if you looked at the stream description it said very clearly that currently the korean ladder is locked, and therefore the players can't get into masters/GM. It also said that asserting otherwise would be a bannable offense in chat. So yeah, that's the difference.
Well that was a while ago ... not sure when but why does this make a difference ? the ladder was locked when she joined the Slayers team too 
|
On July 20 2011 09:29 marttorn wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2011 09:09 Greenworld wrote:
So i remeber i watched a stream of someone from FXO and after he finshed a game it showed he was in diamond ... nobody raged about that ... Ehm, the difference is that at the time the korean ladder was locked. In fact, if you looked at the stream description it said very clearly that currently the korean ladder is locked, and therefore the players can't get into masters/GM. It also said that asserting otherwise would be a bannable offense in chat. So yeah, that's the difference.
So what's the difference? I mean, the ladder is still locked and will be until 26 July?
|
On July 20 2011 09:22 TheExile19 wrote:
it's more that the ability to "insult people" is irrevocably tied in to the entire concept of freedom of speech. if you actually think that the concept allows you to pick and choose what's right and what's wrong, then you don't understand the idea of actually legislating the concept. the second you start arbitrarily shaving off the edges of human expression, stupid and tasteless though much of it may be, the idea is compromised from the judicial standpoint of trying to determine what constitutes ideas that are simply unable to be expressed.
anyway, I think your problem with me is that I don't really have a dog in this fight. I certainly think this level of reaction and personal hurt from jessica, especially given that many of the people who do things like this feed off emotional reactions, is absurd and unjustified. I also think that in a perfect world of moral societies and generally "good" people, phenomena like this wouldn't exist, but that's certainly not the case, is it?
I'm not really sure what you would like from me, to tell the truth...an admission that these people are in the wrong, yes? I'd like to say they are, but in the same breath I'd advocate their right to express it to the utmost so long as no physical harm is involved. in the end, words are just words; they can wound, but rarely fatally harm, and jessica undoubtedly has a fulfilling personal life and people to console her when the "haters" come looking for willing victims to react to their jibes.
I don't expect anything from you. People can have whatever opinions they want and it is not my goal to 'convert' people. I am here for the same reasons as you and everyone else, to discuss my opinions. My 'problem' with you is that you confronted my points so I responded. Then you accuse me of arguing within a moral vacuum, but that's basically what you're doing here by saying "you don't have a dog in the fight."
In your last paragraph you say you advocate their 'right to express themselves as long as no physical harm is involved,' then I'm curious what your issue is with Jessica exercising her right to utilize the law? She isn't hiring the mafia to break anyone's kneecaps nor is she violating anyone's human rights.
It's not as if anything Jessica is doing can 'fatally harm' either, so if you're going to use that argument that you shouldn't have an issue with what she is doing either. Words are just words, lawsuits are just lawsuits.
|
The bottom line with online personalities is that 99% of posters on forums will never, ever have to be accountable for their words. Only those few who are known, and who interact with others who are known and who they might talk about, will.
I for one love the idea that some nub who auto-utters whatever dumb-nut comment he feels that second, can be held accountable for it, by law. Because most flamers are in the end cowards, and would never say anything to that person face to face. Down and out drunks who hang out downtown and yell things at random people are actually braver more honorable people, because they at least have some potential risk involved if the wrong person doesn't like it. Anyway this girl probably feels much the same way most people would feel, but she needs some lessons in being a public personality. Look at politicians or famous athletes, you NEVER come out ahead by attacking. You ALWAYS look better by ignoring rather than engaging haters. For example a good 2/3 of Sarah Palin's reputational problems relate directly to her inability to stop and think for a second instead of stamping her feet and having a tantrum at everyone who looks at her funny. When in the public eye, arguing with fools just make you look foolish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
