|
On May 09 2012 03:01 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2012 02:37 Chocobo wrote:On May 09 2012 01:50 lorkac wrote:
Destiny is the product, not the waiter...
If you ate at a restaurant and got sick afterwards, you complain to the restaurant, not the steak. Yes! You're finally getting closer to understanding my point. If you got sick, you would simply stop going to the restaurant, and if it really bothered you or if you thought it's something they need to be informed of, you would file a complaint with them. Here's what you shouldn't do: write a detailed blog of your bad experience and share it with the internet, encourage a mass boycott of the restaurant, and escalate the level of anger in the discussion until you have created an angry mob that is threatening the restaurant and everyone the restaurant does business with, with a massive negative publicity campaign unless they give in to whatever your demands are. That would be an inappropriate overreaction to the situation. Would you agree? Actually no. Review sites like Yelp has that as an entire business model.
Heh. Your own analogy arrived at a conclusion that you don't agree with, so now you try to put a political spin on it and compare it to other things that aren't similar at all.
Yelp is a site where people post public reviews of restaurants. There is no equivalent for SC2 streams. If you had a poor restaurant experience on Yelp, you post one negative review. You don't get to advertise your experience before posting and encourage a crowd of people to go on a negative publicity campaign with you, threatening to ruin the restaurant's public image unless your demands are met.
You do not appear to understand (or you choose not to understand) that there is a difference between filing a complaint about your bad experience, and creating/participating in an angry mob.
Let's go back to you saying that if it pissed you off that you go file a complaint. That's what people did. People filed a complaint, razed decided to take action.
And why were the complaints sent to Razer, not Quantic? Answer: because of the angry mob mentality, demanding revenge against the guy they don't like, wanting to take whatever actions they could to cause harm.
Contacting Razer is so out of line and is such clear evidence that these were the actions of an unthinking mob out to harm someone, instead of an appropriate response.
Please stop ignoring the fact that a punishment-seeking angry mob was involved here. You act as if Warden, by himself and with no one else, sent a polite email complaining about inappropriate behavior, and that's all there was to it.
|
Here's hoping this thread gets closed soon. I'm sick of feeling disappointed in the TL community whenever I check it. 
|
On May 09 2012 03:17 The KY wrote:
As far as I'm concerned the problem is everyone on the forums takes themselves and these issues way, way too seriously.
I don't have a stance on Destiny using racial slurs on his stream. I literally do not give a single fuck. That's just me, it's fine if people care about it. But, the problem with this community and how it's affecting ESPORTS in my opinion is not whether or not streamers are acting professional enough or how this or that is going to look to sponsors, it's the prissy fucking know it all drama queens that bicker and argue every tiny detail to death. Whole pages of threads are taken up by petty arguments that quickly devolve until they're just about semantics or stupid over extended metaphors and people stop arguing about the issues and are just arguing because they want to be right on a forum. It's just sad.
Issues like professionalism don't get fixed by people jumping up and down every time someone steps out of line and going 'Miss, Miss, that boy said a bad word!'
What you are describing happens in almost every aspect of life. There will always be drama. I follow football alot, and its x100 worse than this community. This behavior doesnt really affect *insert random sport* nor the professionalism of it, its just human behavior.
Racism however, and bigotry IS serious business, whether you do or dont give a fuck. Also this has nothing to do with just a 'bad word', but racism. There is a big difference.
This whole insident has sent a strong message to both players, teams, sponsors etc. that racism is not acceptable in our community/esport. THAT is a step in the right direction, and towards more professionalism.
|
On May 09 2012 00:42 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2012 00:37 cmcaneff5502 wrote:
Its funny--this community, at times, can almost seem good! Then you realize it's a bunch of sad nerds desperate for any grain of attention they can get. It's disheartening to see so many people working for esports, when the community is really just a bunch of butthurt teenagers with too much time on their hands and an overinflated sense of importance :/ Are you saying that people should not be against racism within the subculture they are in?
No, I'm saying that when someone is streaming on their own time, it's a different issue. If someone rages and name calls in a tournament, I think that's a different case. Everyone has ladder rage, I've been called racist names, I've been called gay names, I've been cursed at. People get mad in anything that's competitive--it's human nature. But the extent to which people hounded destiny (also orb) for doing what so many people do every day was extremely over the top, and, as the OP called it, a witch hunt.
|
On May 09 2012 03:32 Chocobo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2012 03:01 lorkac wrote:On May 09 2012 02:37 Chocobo wrote:On May 09 2012 01:50 lorkac wrote:
Destiny is the product, not the waiter...
If you ate at a restaurant and got sick afterwards, you complain to the restaurant, not the steak. Yes! You're finally getting closer to understanding my point. If you got sick, you would simply stop going to the restaurant, and if it really bothered you or if you thought it's something they need to be informed of, you would file a complaint with them. Here's what you shouldn't do: write a detailed blog of your bad experience and share it with the internet, encourage a mass boycott of the restaurant, and escalate the level of anger in the discussion until you have created an angry mob that is threatening the restaurant and everyone the restaurant does business with, with a massive negative publicity campaign unless they give in to whatever your demands are. That would be an inappropriate overreaction to the situation. Would you agree? Actually no. Review sites like Yelp has that as an entire business model. Heh. Your own analogy arrived at a conclusion that you don't agree with, so now you try to put a political spin on it and compare it to other things that aren't similar at all. Yelp is a site where people post public reviews of restaurants. There is no equivalent for SC2 streams. If you had a poor restaurant experience on Yelp, you post one negative review. You don't get to advertise your experience before posting and encourage a crowd of people to go on a negative publicity campaign with you, threatening to ruin the restaurant's public image unless your demands are met. You do not appear to understand (or you choose not to understand) that there is a difference between filing a complaint about your bad experience, and creating/participating in an angry mob. Show nested quote +Let's go back to you saying that if it pissed you off that you go file a complaint. That's what people did. People filed a complaint, razed decided to take action. And why were the complaints sent to Razer, not Quantic? Answer: because of the angry mob mentality, demanding revenge against the guy they don't like, wanting to take whatever actions they could to cause harm. Contacting Razer is so out of line and is such clear evidence that these were the actions of an unthinking mob out to harm someone, instead of an appropriate response. Please stop ignoring the fact that a punishment-seeking angry mob was involved here. You act as if Warden, by himself and with no one else, sent a polite email complaining about inappropriate behavior, and that's all there was to it.
What disliked conclusion?
Filing complaints to companies is common.
Review sites with one or many bad reviews for a company is common.
Large numbers of people disliking someone and filing complaints, is common.
It is a social practice, it is a business practice, and it isn't any different in any other industry.
People complained about destiny, Razer believed them. Trying to silence people you disagree with by calling them a mob sidesteps the reality. They wrote to the department whose job was to read customer feedback. They actually web through the proper channels. I don't see how that is mob rule.
|
Some people act as if complaining to sponsors is going to hurt e-sports.
At the same time, they act as if key figures using bigoted language is -not- going to hurt e-sports.
Now what is a more likely scenario?
/edit
On May 09 2012 04:08 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2012 03:32 Chocobo wrote:On May 09 2012 03:01 lorkac wrote:On May 09 2012 02:37 Chocobo wrote:On May 09 2012 01:50 lorkac wrote:
Destiny is the product, not the waiter...
If you ate at a restaurant and got sick afterwards, you complain to the restaurant, not the steak. Yes! You're finally getting closer to understanding my point. If you got sick, you would simply stop going to the restaurant, and if it really bothered you or if you thought it's something they need to be informed of, you would file a complaint with them. Here's what you shouldn't do: write a detailed blog of your bad experience and share it with the internet, encourage a mass boycott of the restaurant, and escalate the level of anger in the discussion until you have created an angry mob that is threatening the restaurant and everyone the restaurant does business with, with a massive negative publicity campaign unless they give in to whatever your demands are. That would be an inappropriate overreaction to the situation. Would you agree? Actually no. Review sites like Yelp has that as an entire business model. Heh. Your own analogy arrived at a conclusion that you don't agree with, so now you try to put a political spin on it and compare it to other things that aren't similar at all. Yelp is a site where people post public reviews of restaurants. There is no equivalent for SC2 streams. If you had a poor restaurant experience on Yelp, you post one negative review. You don't get to advertise your experience before posting and encourage a crowd of people to go on a negative publicity campaign with you, threatening to ruin the restaurant's public image unless your demands are met. You do not appear to understand (or you choose not to understand) that there is a difference between filing a complaint about your bad experience, and creating/participating in an angry mob. Let's go back to you saying that if it pissed you off that you go file a complaint. That's what people did. People filed a complaint, razed decided to take action. And why were the complaints sent to Razer, not Quantic? Answer: because of the angry mob mentality, demanding revenge against the guy they don't like, wanting to take whatever actions they could to cause harm. Contacting Razer is so out of line and is such clear evidence that these were the actions of an unthinking mob out to harm someone, instead of an appropriate response. Please stop ignoring the fact that a punishment-seeking angry mob was involved here. You act as if Warden, by himself and with no one else, sent a polite email complaining about inappropriate behavior, and that's all there was to it. What disliked conclusion? Filing complaints to companies is common. Review sites with one or many bad reviews for a company is common. Large numbers of people disliking someone and filing complaints, is common. It is a social practice, it is a business practice, and it isn't any different in any other industry. People complained about destiny, Razer believed them. Trying to silence people you disagree with by calling them a mob sidesteps the reality. They wrote to the department whose job was to read customer feedback. They actually web through the proper channels. I don't see how that is mob rule.
Completely 100% truth.
|
On May 09 2012 03:47 Raavi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2012 03:17 The KY wrote:
As far as I'm concerned the problem is everyone on the forums takes themselves and these issues way, way too seriously.
I don't have a stance on Destiny using racial slurs on his stream. I literally do not give a single fuck. That's just me, it's fine if people care about it. But, the problem with this community and how it's affecting ESPORTS in my opinion is not whether or not streamers are acting professional enough or how this or that is going to look to sponsors, it's the prissy fucking know it all drama queens that bicker and argue every tiny detail to death. Whole pages of threads are taken up by petty arguments that quickly devolve until they're just about semantics or stupid over extended metaphors and people stop arguing about the issues and are just arguing because they want to be right on a forum. It's just sad.
Issues like professionalism don't get fixed by people jumping up and down every time someone steps out of line and going 'Miss, Miss, that boy said a bad word!' What you are describing happens in almost every aspect of life. There will always be drama. I follow football alot, and its x100 worse than this community. This behavior doesnt really affect *insert random sport* nor the professionalism of it, its just human behavior. Racism however, and bigotry IS serious business, whether you do or dont give a fuck. Also this has nothing to do with just a 'bad word', but racism. There is a big difference. This whole insident has sent a strong message to both players, teams, sponsors etc. that racism is not acceptable in our community/esport. THAT is a step in the right direction, and towards more professionalism.
No what I'm describing is peculiar to internet forums where people think their opinions are worth gold. In football you might see drama between Luis Suarez and Patrice Evra but the discussion among fans doesn't look like it does here.
The drama is dealt with by the professionals. And I'd totally disagree that it's 100x worse than this community, I only really follow English football but all the drama is focused around the media trying to create story lines around managers and the occasional player spat. And on those occasions you don't get these fucking witch hunts. The discussion amounts to 'man, Suarez is a bit of a dick isn't he' in the local bar, and if there are these know-it-alls having their all important debates on the internet about it then at least they're out of view; in this community, the forums are how we communicate almost exclusively.
If I must offer an opinion though, racism and bigotry is serious business, and I do give a fuck. But using a racist word and being a racist are entirely separate concepts. I don't think Destiny should be calling people niggers or whatever he did on his stream. But I'd also say it's an issue for his team and sponsors (or was when he had them) and not one that warrants 40 pages of arrogant bickering.
|
Rofl did I just read 5 posts arguing over whether destiny is better compared to a waiter or the product a waiter delivers? Stop digging your hole, guys, you already sound dumb enough.
|
On May 09 2012 04:28 The KY wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2012 03:47 Raavi wrote:On May 09 2012 03:17 The KY wrote:
As far as I'm concerned the problem is everyone on the forums takes themselves and these issues way, way too seriously.
I don't have a stance on Destiny using racial slurs on his stream. I literally do not give a single fuck. That's just me, it's fine if people care about it. But, the problem with this community and how it's affecting ESPORTS in my opinion is not whether or not streamers are acting professional enough or how this or that is going to look to sponsors, it's the prissy fucking know it all drama queens that bicker and argue every tiny detail to death. Whole pages of threads are taken up by petty arguments that quickly devolve until they're just about semantics or stupid over extended metaphors and people stop arguing about the issues and are just arguing because they want to be right on a forum. It's just sad.
Issues like professionalism don't get fixed by people jumping up and down every time someone steps out of line and going 'Miss, Miss, that boy said a bad word!' What you are describing happens in almost every aspect of life. There will always be drama. I follow football alot, and its x100 worse than this community. This behavior doesnt really affect *insert random sport* nor the professionalism of it, its just human behavior. Racism however, and bigotry IS serious business, whether you do or dont give a fuck. Also this has nothing to do with just a 'bad word', but racism. There is a big difference. This whole insident has sent a strong message to both players, teams, sponsors etc. that racism is not acceptable in our community/esport. THAT is a step in the right direction, and towards more professionalism. No what I'm describing is peculiar to internet forums where people think their opinions are worth gold. In football you might see drama between Luis Suarez and Patrice Evra but the discussion among fans doesn't look like it does here. The drama is dealt with by the professionals. And I'd totally disagree that it's 100x worse than this community, I only really follow English football but all the drama is focused around the media trying to create story lines around managers and the occasional player spat. And on those occasions you don't get these fucking witch hunts. The discussion amounts to 'man, Suarez is a bit of a dick isn't he' in the local bar, and if there are these know-it-alls having their all important debates on the internet about it then at least they're out of view; in this community, the forums are how we communicate almost exclusively. If I must offer an opinion though, racism and bigotry is serious business, and I do give a fuck. But using a racist word and being a racist are entirely separate concepts. I don't think Destiny should be calling people niggers or whatever he did on his stream. But I'd also say it's an issue for his team and sponsors (or was when he had them) and not one that warrants 40 pages of arrogant bickering.
imagine SUarez using racial slurs every match for half an year
and have people come onto newspaper say it's no big deal. you think there wouldnt be uproar?
if you dont like bickering, dont try to play this as a witch hunt and contribute yourself
|
On May 09 2012 04:08 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2012 03:32 Chocobo wrote:On May 09 2012 03:01 lorkac wrote:On May 09 2012 02:37 Chocobo wrote:On May 09 2012 01:50 lorkac wrote:
Destiny is the product, not the waiter...
If you ate at a restaurant and got sick afterwards, you complain to the restaurant, not the steak. Yes! You're finally getting closer to understanding my point. If you got sick, you would simply stop going to the restaurant, and if it really bothered you or if you thought it's something they need to be informed of, you would file a complaint with them. Here's what you shouldn't do: write a detailed blog of your bad experience and share it with the internet, encourage a mass boycott of the restaurant, and escalate the level of anger in the discussion until you have created an angry mob that is threatening the restaurant and everyone the restaurant does business with, with a massive negative publicity campaign unless they give in to whatever your demands are. That would be an inappropriate overreaction to the situation. Would you agree? Actually no. Review sites like Yelp has that as an entire business model. Heh. Your own analogy arrived at a conclusion that you don't agree with, so now you try to put a political spin on it and compare it to other things that aren't similar at all. Yelp is a site where people post public reviews of restaurants. There is no equivalent for SC2 streams. If you had a poor restaurant experience on Yelp, you post one negative review. You don't get to advertise your experience before posting and encourage a crowd of people to go on a negative publicity campaign with you, threatening to ruin the restaurant's public image unless your demands are met. You do not appear to understand (or you choose not to understand) that there is a difference between filing a complaint about your bad experience, and creating/participating in an angry mob. Let's go back to you saying that if it pissed you off that you go file a complaint. That's what people did. People filed a complaint, razed decided to take action. And why were the complaints sent to Razer, not Quantic? Answer: because of the angry mob mentality, demanding revenge against the guy they don't like, wanting to take whatever actions they could to cause harm. Contacting Razer is so out of line and is such clear evidence that these were the actions of an unthinking mob out to harm someone, instead of an appropriate response. Please stop ignoring the fact that a punishment-seeking angry mob was involved here. You act as if Warden, by himself and with no one else, sent a polite email complaining about inappropriate behavior, and that's all there was to it. What disliked conclusion? Filing complaints to companies is common. Review sites with one or many bad reviews for a company is common. Large numbers of people disliking someone and filing complaints, is common. It is a social practice, it is a business practice, and it isn't any different in any other industry.
Your restaurant analogy arrived at the conclusion of "if you are served bad food, you should file a complaint."
I said "I agree. That's a perfectly good system and I support that. What I do not support is using your story to generate an angry mob to complain along with you, threatening a negative publicity campaign unless your demands are met."
You then backed away from your valid restaurant analogy and tried to compare the situation to Yelp reviews in order to make it look more positive, when in fact the situation is nothing like a review website.
People complained about destiny, Razer believed them. Trying to silence people you disagree with by calling them a mob sidesteps the reality. They wrote to the department whose job was to read customer feedback. They actually web through the proper channels. I don't see how that is mob rule.
How the fuck is creating an angry mob "going through the proper channels"? How am I "sidestepping reality" by calling an angry mob an angry mob? Are you serious?
Let's go back to the restaurant analogy. I'm served some bad food at the restaurant, and get sick from it. I want you to tell me which of the following is "going through the proper channels".
Option A - I call the restaurant, file a complaint and tell them the details, and choose to stop going to that restaurant in the future.
Option B - I tell everyone I know about my bad restaurant experience. I do this as dramatically as possible, saying that they could have killed me, they could have poisoned who knows how many other people, and they should not be allowed to do business if their standards are so low that they're actually making people sick. I spread the story on the internet as well, until a sizeable crowd of people have been gathered together who are all angry about the restaurant's negligence and demand that something be done about it. Virtually no one in this crowd has gotten sick from this restaurant and many of them have never even been to it.
Someone in the crowd yells out "we should get the chef fired!", and as that's the first option to take action about the problem that was thrown out, the mob is happy to go along with it. The mob heads down to the restaurant, demanding that the chef be fired immediately. The restaurant owner, afraid of the negative publicity (and especially afraid of how much worse it could get if he doesn't comply), fires the chef in order to resolve the situation quickly.
I sincerely hope that you are not going to tell me that you see no difference between the two situations, and that you think Option B is an appropriate course of action.
|
On May 09 2012 04:54 Chocobo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2012 04:08 lorkac wrote:On May 09 2012 03:32 Chocobo wrote:On May 09 2012 03:01 lorkac wrote:On May 09 2012 02:37 Chocobo wrote:On May 09 2012 01:50 lorkac wrote:
Destiny is the product, not the waiter...
If you ate at a restaurant and got sick afterwards, you complain to the restaurant, not the steak. Yes! You're finally getting closer to understanding my point. If you got sick, you would simply stop going to the restaurant, and if it really bothered you or if you thought it's something they need to be informed of, you would file a complaint with them. Here's what you shouldn't do: write a detailed blog of your bad experience and share it with the internet, encourage a mass boycott of the restaurant, and escalate the level of anger in the discussion until you have created an angry mob that is threatening the restaurant and everyone the restaurant does business with, with a massive negative publicity campaign unless they give in to whatever your demands are. That would be an inappropriate overreaction to the situation. Would you agree? Actually no. Review sites like Yelp has that as an entire business model. Heh. Your own analogy arrived at a conclusion that you don't agree with, so now you try to put a political spin on it and compare it to other things that aren't similar at all. Yelp is a site where people post public reviews of restaurants. There is no equivalent for SC2 streams. If you had a poor restaurant experience on Yelp, you post one negative review. You don't get to advertise your experience before posting and encourage a crowd of people to go on a negative publicity campaign with you, threatening to ruin the restaurant's public image unless your demands are met. You do not appear to understand (or you choose not to understand) that there is a difference between filing a complaint about your bad experience, and creating/participating in an angry mob. Let's go back to you saying that if it pissed you off that you go file a complaint. That's what people did. People filed a complaint, razed decided to take action. And why were the complaints sent to Razer, not Quantic? Answer: because of the angry mob mentality, demanding revenge against the guy they don't like, wanting to take whatever actions they could to cause harm. Contacting Razer is so out of line and is such clear evidence that these were the actions of an unthinking mob out to harm someone, instead of an appropriate response. Please stop ignoring the fact that a punishment-seeking angry mob was involved here. You act as if Warden, by himself and with no one else, sent a polite email complaining about inappropriate behavior, and that's all there was to it. What disliked conclusion? Filing complaints to companies is common. Review sites with one or many bad reviews for a company is common. Large numbers of people disliking someone and filing complaints, is common. It is a social practice, it is a business practice, and it isn't any different in any other industry. Your restaurant analogy arrived at the conclusion of "if you are served bad food, you should file a complaint." I said "I agree. That's a perfectly good system and I support that. What I do not support is using your story to generate an angry mob to complain along with you, threatening a negative publicity campaign unless your demands are met." You then backed away from your valid restaurant analogy and tried to compare the situation to Yelp reviews in order to make it look more positive, when in fact the situation is nothing like a review website. Show nested quote +People complained about destiny, Razer believed them. Trying to silence people you disagree with by calling them a mob sidesteps the reality. They wrote to the department whose job was to read customer feedback. They actually web through the proper channels. I don't see how that is mob rule. How the fuck is creating an angry mob "going through the proper channels"? How am I "sidestepping reality" by calling an angry mob an angry mob? Are you serious? Let's go back to the restaurant analogy. I'm served some bad food at the restaurant, and get sick from it. I want you to tell me which of the following is "going through the proper channels". Option A - I call the restaurant, file a complaint and tell them the details, and choose to stop going to that restaurant in the future. Option B - I tell everyone I know about my bad restaurant experience. I do this as dramatically as possible, saying that they could have killed me, they could have poisoned who knows how many other people, and they should not be allowed to do business if their standards are so low that they're actually making people sick. I spread the story on the internet as well, until a sizeable crowd of people have been gathered together who are all angry about the restaurant's negligence and demand that something be done about it. Virtually no one in this crowd has gotten sick from this restaurant and many of them have never even been to it. Someone in the crowd yells out "we should get the chef fired!", and as that's the first option to take action about the problem that was thrown out, the mob is happy to go along with it. The mob heads down to the restaurant, demanding that the chef be fired immediately. The restaurant owner, afraid of the negative publicity (and especially afraid of how much worse it could get if he doesn't comply), fires the chef in order to resolve the situation quickly. I sincerely hope that you are not going to tell me that you see no difference between the two situations, and that you think Option B is an appropriate course of action.
Ok, this resteraunt analogy is terrible, and should be dropped.
BUT
Really? You think you can just go create angry mobs like that? Because that is hilarious. I challenge you to get even 25 angry people, which is hardly a mob, assembled for something they don't really care about.
Here's a much more likely scenario:
You get angry, post about it on the internet and say "WE SHOULD GET THE CHEF FIRED!" No one else has had a bad experience, so they give zero shits. You see this kind of thing constantly online, tons of 1 star reviews for every product and service available. Yet somehow those angry mobs never seem to materialize, they remain as angry posts on the internet.
|
An audience of a professional e-sport should stay as the audience and not try to get so damn involved in everything. It's not like our controversies are anything more than our own little inner-circle drama, this stuff isn't getting picked up by mainstream media or actually hurting anyone but ourselves. We'll kill our own community before anyone else will. People just need to learn to let things slide and let problems solve themselves. The people who run, operate, and finance professional teams and the companies that sponsor them are probably more intelligent and aware of what's good and bad for e-sports reputation than you are. It's fine and perfectly acceptable to get mad and upset over bad player behavior but it's one thing to yell about it on a community forum and a completely different thing to start e-mailing sponsors, that's like personal vendetta shit you're trying to pull at that point.
Excuse me I just got done skimming a reddit thread about the Artosis Pylon shirt controversy. Soooo much rage. What a whiny self-entitled group of Internet Hate Machine retards some people can be.
|
the problem with this thread is that there is not the minimum level of agreement on what is even being discussed.
|
On May 09 2012 05:08 TrickyGilligan wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2012 04:54 Chocobo wrote:On May 09 2012 04:08 lorkac wrote:On May 09 2012 03:32 Chocobo wrote:On May 09 2012 03:01 lorkac wrote:On May 09 2012 02:37 Chocobo wrote:On May 09 2012 01:50 lorkac wrote:
Destiny is the product, not the waiter...
If you ate at a restaurant and got sick afterwards, you complain to the restaurant, not the steak. Yes! You're finally getting closer to understanding my point. If you got sick, you would simply stop going to the restaurant, and if it really bothered you or if you thought it's something they need to be informed of, you would file a complaint with them. Here's what you shouldn't do: write a detailed blog of your bad experience and share it with the internet, encourage a mass boycott of the restaurant, and escalate the level of anger in the discussion until you have created an angry mob that is threatening the restaurant and everyone the restaurant does business with, with a massive negative publicity campaign unless they give in to whatever your demands are. That would be an inappropriate overreaction to the situation. Would you agree? Actually no. Review sites like Yelp has that as an entire business model. Heh. Your own analogy arrived at a conclusion that you don't agree with, so now you try to put a political spin on it and compare it to other things that aren't similar at all. Yelp is a site where people post public reviews of restaurants. There is no equivalent for SC2 streams. If you had a poor restaurant experience on Yelp, you post one negative review. You don't get to advertise your experience before posting and encourage a crowd of people to go on a negative publicity campaign with you, threatening to ruin the restaurant's public image unless your demands are met. You do not appear to understand (or you choose not to understand) that there is a difference between filing a complaint about your bad experience, and creating/participating in an angry mob. Let's go back to you saying that if it pissed you off that you go file a complaint. That's what people did. People filed a complaint, razed decided to take action. And why were the complaints sent to Razer, not Quantic? Answer: because of the angry mob mentality, demanding revenge against the guy they don't like, wanting to take whatever actions they could to cause harm. Contacting Razer is so out of line and is such clear evidence that these were the actions of an unthinking mob out to harm someone, instead of an appropriate response. Please stop ignoring the fact that a punishment-seeking angry mob was involved here. You act as if Warden, by himself and with no one else, sent a polite email complaining about inappropriate behavior, and that's all there was to it. What disliked conclusion? Filing complaints to companies is common. Review sites with one or many bad reviews for a company is common. Large numbers of people disliking someone and filing complaints, is common. It is a social practice, it is a business practice, and it isn't any different in any other industry. Your restaurant analogy arrived at the conclusion of "if you are served bad food, you should file a complaint." I said "I agree. That's a perfectly good system and I support that. What I do not support is using your story to generate an angry mob to complain along with you, threatening a negative publicity campaign unless your demands are met." You then backed away from your valid restaurant analogy and tried to compare the situation to Yelp reviews in order to make it look more positive, when in fact the situation is nothing like a review website. People complained about destiny, Razer believed them. Trying to silence people you disagree with by calling them a mob sidesteps the reality. They wrote to the department whose job was to read customer feedback. They actually web through the proper channels. I don't see how that is mob rule. How the fuck is creating an angry mob "going through the proper channels"? How am I "sidestepping reality" by calling an angry mob an angry mob? Are you serious? Let's go back to the restaurant analogy. I'm served some bad food at the restaurant, and get sick from it. I want you to tell me which of the following is "going through the proper channels". Option A - I call the restaurant, file a complaint and tell them the details, and choose to stop going to that restaurant in the future. Option B - I tell everyone I know about my bad restaurant experience. I do this as dramatically as possible, saying that they could have killed me, they could have poisoned who knows how many other people, and they should not be allowed to do business if their standards are so low that they're actually making people sick. I spread the story on the internet as well, until a sizeable crowd of people have been gathered together who are all angry about the restaurant's negligence and demand that something be done about it. Virtually no one in this crowd has gotten sick from this restaurant and many of them have never even been to it. Someone in the crowd yells out "we should get the chef fired!", and as that's the first option to take action about the problem that was thrown out, the mob is happy to go along with it. The mob heads down to the restaurant, demanding that the chef be fired immediately. The restaurant owner, afraid of the negative publicity (and especially afraid of how much worse it could get if he doesn't comply), fires the chef in order to resolve the situation quickly. I sincerely hope that you are not going to tell me that you see no difference between the two situations, and that you think Option B is an appropriate course of action. Ok, this resteraunt analogy is terrible, and should be dropped.
Shrug, it wasn't mine. Still, it's a pretty valid analogy. It helps people see how things work in the real world, because sometimes people's viewpoints are clouded by ideas of "it doesn't count because it was just an internet forum discussion" or whatever.
Really? You think you can just go create angry mobs like that? Because that is hilarious. I challenge you to get even 25 angry people, which is hardly a mob, assembled for something they don't really care about.
You can on the internet, with the right audience of bored people who are sensitive to the same things that you care about.
Here's a much more likely scenario:
You get angry, post about it on the internet and say "WE SHOULD GET THE CHEF FIRED!" No one else has had a bad experience, so they give zero shits. You see this kind of thing constantly online, tons of 1 star reviews for every product and service available. Yet somehow those angry mobs never seem to materialize, they remain as angry posts on the internet.
Well, yeah. Analogies are just used to make broad comparisons between similar things.... clearly food service at a restaurant and entertainment service on the internet can't be compared directly to each other all the way down to the small details.
|
On May 09 2012 04:54 Chocobo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2012 04:08 lorkac wrote:On May 09 2012 03:32 Chocobo wrote:On May 09 2012 03:01 lorkac wrote:On May 09 2012 02:37 Chocobo wrote:On May 09 2012 01:50 lorkac wrote:
Destiny is the product, not the waiter...
If you ate at a restaurant and got sick afterwards, you complain to the restaurant, not the steak. Yes! You're finally getting closer to understanding my point. If you got sick, you would simply stop going to the restaurant, and if it really bothered you or if you thought it's something they need to be informed of, you would file a complaint with them. Here's what you shouldn't do: write a detailed blog of your bad experience and share it with the internet, encourage a mass boycott of the restaurant, and escalate the level of anger in the discussion until you have created an angry mob that is threatening the restaurant and everyone the restaurant does business with, with a massive negative publicity campaign unless they give in to whatever your demands are. That would be an inappropriate overreaction to the situation. Would you agree? Actually no. Review sites like Yelp has that as an entire business model. Heh. Your own analogy arrived at a conclusion that you don't agree with, so now you try to put a political spin on it and compare it to other things that aren't similar at all. Yelp is a site where people post public reviews of restaurants. There is no equivalent for SC2 streams. If you had a poor restaurant experience on Yelp, you post one negative review. You don't get to advertise your experience before posting and encourage a crowd of people to go on a negative publicity campaign with you, threatening to ruin the restaurant's public image unless your demands are met. You do not appear to understand (or you choose not to understand) that there is a difference between filing a complaint about your bad experience, and creating/participating in an angry mob. Let's go back to you saying that if it pissed you off that you go file a complaint. That's what people did. People filed a complaint, razed decided to take action. And why were the complaints sent to Razer, not Quantic? Answer: because of the angry mob mentality, demanding revenge against the guy they don't like, wanting to take whatever actions they could to cause harm. Contacting Razer is so out of line and is such clear evidence that these were the actions of an unthinking mob out to harm someone, instead of an appropriate response. Please stop ignoring the fact that a punishment-seeking angry mob was involved here. You act as if Warden, by himself and with no one else, sent a polite email complaining about inappropriate behavior, and that's all there was to it. What disliked conclusion? Filing complaints to companies is common. Review sites with one or many bad reviews for a company is common. Large numbers of people disliking someone and filing complaints, is common. It is a social practice, it is a business practice, and it isn't any different in any other industry. Your restaurant analogy arrived at the conclusion of "if you are served bad food, you should file a complaint." I said "I agree. That's a perfectly good system and I support that. What I do not support is using your story to generate an angry mob to complain along with you, threatening a negative publicity campaign unless your demands are met." You then backed away from your valid restaurant analogy and tried to compare the situation to Yelp reviews in order to make it look more positive, when in fact the situation is nothing like a review website. Show nested quote +People complained about destiny, Razer believed them. Trying to silence people you disagree with by calling them a mob sidesteps the reality. They wrote to the department whose job was to read customer feedback. They actually web through the proper channels. I don't see how that is mob rule. How the fuck is creating an angry mob "going through the proper channels"? How am I "sidestepping reality" by calling an angry mob an angry mob? Are you serious? Let's go back to the restaurant analogy. I'm served some bad food at the restaurant, and get sick from it. I want you to tell me which of the following is "going through the proper channels". Option A - I call the restaurant, file a complaint and tell them the details, and choose to stop going to that restaurant in the future. Option B - I tell everyone I know about my bad restaurant experience. I do this as dramatically as possible, saying that they could have killed me, they could have poisoned who knows how many other people, and they should not be allowed to do business if their standards are so low that they're actually making people sick. I spread the story on the internet as well, until a sizeable crowd of people have been gathered together who are all angry about the restaurant's negligence and demand that something be done about it. Virtually no one in this crowd has gotten sick from this restaurant and many of them have never even been to it. Someone in the crowd yells out "we should get the chef fired!", and as that's the first option to take action about the problem that was thrown out, the mob is happy to go along with it. The mob heads down to the restaurant, demanding that the chef be fired immediately. The restaurant owner, afraid of the negative publicity (and especially afraid of how much worse it could get if he doesn't comply), fires the chef in order to resolve the situation quickly. I sincerely hope that you are not going to tell me that you see no difference between the two situations, and that you think Option B is an appropriate course of action.
I don't understand this post. The only thing that happened was that customers filed a complaint. So you're actually in agreement with the letter writing side? Cool.
Destiny was not to some people's liking, they filed a complaint, Razer agreed. I'm glad we're in agreement.
|
Honestly, because of incidents such as these, where the community improperly reacts, I have decided to drop my dreams of being involved in esports and SC2. While I still enjoy watching certain games or tournaments, the community has really ruined this game for me and I will no longer support any part of SC2 with my money and I would not recommend any company get involved.
Ie, there are other indirect consequences other than losing sponsors....losing fans/community members/aspiring esports enthusiasts (I highly doubt I am the only one who has turned away from SC2 as a result of the community).
|
On May 09 2012 06:11 Prplppleatr wrote:
Honestly, because of incidents such as these, where the community improperly reacts, I have decided to drop my dreams of being involved in esports and SC2. While I still enjoy watching certain games or tournaments, the community has really ruined this game for me and I will no longer support any part of SC2 with my money and I would not recommend any company get involved.
Ie, there are other indirect consequences other than losing sponsors....losing fans/community members/aspiring esports enthusiasts (I highly doubt I am the only one who has turned away from SC2 as a result of the community).
In other words, you're fine with racism?
Its mind-boggling that somehow the 'community' is the villains and not, in this case, Destiny. The community stood up against racism and you call that improberly?
|
On May 09 2012 06:22 Raavi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2012 06:11 Prplppleatr wrote:
Honestly, because of incidents such as these, where the community improperly reacts, I have decided to drop my dreams of being involved in esports and SC2. While I still enjoy watching certain games or tournaments, the community has really ruined this game for me and I will no longer support any part of SC2 with my money and I would not recommend any company get involved.
Ie, there are other indirect consequences other than losing sponsors....losing fans/community members/aspiring esports enthusiasts (I highly doubt I am the only one who has turned away from SC2 as a result of the community). In other words, you're fine with racism? Its mind-boggling that somehow the 'community' is the villains and not, in this case, Destiny. The community stood up against racism and you call that improberly?
When did I mention racism?
I said "where the community improperly reacts" by that I mean they contacted sponsors and not teams (the people responsible for the players behavior and the point of the thread). If the team improperly reacts, then sure contact sponsors if you feel that strongly, but at least give them a chance.
Also, the OP mentioned this is not a destiny thread, so please do not take it that direction.
|
No, let's keep burning careers and possible job opportunities for anyone and everyone for anything they could have their reputation tainted forever for. That way, we can purge every single person who is not our ideal professional pro gamer and lead to the beloved e-sports we have wanted for the longest time. Let's have this mob mentality run us to the ground until something irreversible happens and we all have a diffusion of responsibility.
In the end, this community will be what the masses want it to be. Nothing will change that. If everyone wants to put pro gamers on a higher pedestal, so be it. What I want to know is what kind of place TL will be in the couple years to come.
|
On May 09 2012 06:27 Prplppleatr wrote:
When did I mention racism?
I said "where the community improperly reacts" by that I mean they contacted sponsors and not teams (the people responsible for the players behavior and the point of the thread). If the team improperly reacts, then sure contact sponsors if you feel that strongly, but at least give them a chance.
Also, the OP mentioned this is not a destiny thread, so please do not take it that direction.
Right now were discussion that particular case, as are you.
Why is sending an email to the sponsors improberly? As a consumer you're free to send a complain to whoever you see fit. Some people will contact the person, some the team, some the sponsors, some will write letters to the CEO, some dont care etc. Theres no right or wrong. The outcome is the same. The information will get to whoever is in charge and the consequences will be decieded. In whatever case, the community is not at fault, the player is.
What exactly would have changed, if Razer didnt receive any e-mail, but just the team?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
