[Rant]/[D] Witch Hunting and 'eSports' - Page 38

On May 09 2012 03:01 lorkac wrote:


Actually no. Review sites like Yelp has that as an entire business model.

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.

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!'

On May 09 2012 00:42 lorkac wrote:


Are you saying that people should not be against racism within the subculture they are in?

On May 09 2012 03:32 Chocobo wrote:

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.


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.

On May 09 2012 04:08 lorkac wrote:



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.

On May 09 2012 03:47 Raavi wrote:


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 04:28 The KY wrote:


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.

On May 09 2012 04:08 lorkac wrote:

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.

On May 09 2012 04:54 Chocobo wrote:

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.


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 05:08 TrickyGilligan wrote:


Ok, this resteraunt analogy is terrible, and should be dropped.

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.

On May 09 2012 04:54 Chocobo wrote:

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.


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 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).

On May 09 2012 06:22 Raavi wrote:


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 06:27 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.