|
On May 10 2012 05:36 pirsq wrote: People seem to really love that word around here. So let's make the analogy more concrete, shall we? In this analogy, being a witch means making racial slurs. It's bad, but in your opinion, not enough to justify burning a witch. Okay, let's stick with that opinion, and take a look at what happened. Act I: Several weeks ago, the community gathered to burn a witch, a fellow named Orb. Another fellow named Destiny nonetheless continues his witchcraft, unmoved by the whole situation. Act II: Some dude announces to the community: "Destiny is a witch! I have evidence!" Act III: The community gathers to discuss what they should do. Act IV: Destiny arrives. "Look at all the fucks I don't give!" "I have a right to be a witch, I'll do whatever I want!" "Why did I choose witchcraft? It was the first thing that came to mind, really." "You're a moderator? I don't care, I'm going to insult you too!" Act V: The community burns Destiny. Threads get made about unimportant things all the time. Warden's thread wasn't the first to bring up this issue, and if he hadn't made one, it would only have been a matter of time before someone else did. The only act above that could have been avoided was Destiny coming in to stir up the hornet's nest.
Lol @ you spinning this into a story where the "burning" of Destiny only started after he started being defensive. It started because of the screenshot of him saying gook and you know it. The dominant complaint in this thread and the other one is that Destiny should be punished for using racial language, not that he should only be punished for not apologizing. It's funny that you would try to spin it in this way - do you think the sponsor contact etc isn't justified on the basis of the racist insult alone?
And I see you admitted to contacting Razer about this, and have been pretty vocal in this thread about why people are justified in doing so. So I have to wonder, why aren't you posting in the it's Gosu/NOS thread congratulating the team and thanking NOS? You seem very concerned about the greater good of esports, and playing an active role in influencing players and teams to align with your opinion. You also are obviously keenly aware of the influence of sponsors. Why not channel this energy towards a positive event, then? Why would you just want to focus on the drama? Maybe try backing up your sentiments in this thread and contact NOS to thank them.
EDIT: ROFL I see you posted instructions multiple times in Warden's thread on how to contact Razer. Yet, one of your stated reasons for going directly to Razer rather than contacting Quantic was that you didn't already know how to contact Quantic and couldn't be bothered to take the time to figure it out. Yet you had enough time to pull the link from Razer's site and give people instructions on how to contact them. Seems like there's a trend of hypocrisy here. I don't think you really wanted to carry the banner of justice for esports, I think you just wanted to join in on the drama. Same with everyone else who contacted Razer instead of Quantic. Shame on you.
|
Deleting my original response because I think this thread ran its course long ago. Everyone needs to stop trying to speak on behalf of the whole community, and realise that their opinions apply only to themselves.
|
Agreed with OP, Teamliquid has turned into a terrible community over the past year or so. I went from coming here daily to monthly.
|
Perhaps we should reform the thread a little bit to put this discussion in a positive light.
Noone is going to change the minds or opinions of others by posting here, thats just how the internet is.
HOWEVER. we could still discuss the need for a rulebook and regulating body to reform the media sc2 produces. For example, if we start following the guidelines of the ESRB by rating streams, we could keep the racial slurs labelled and kept behind closed doors, instead of the mainstream sc2 media. This should also deflate the need for a witch hunt.
So instead of posting stances upon stances of how Destiny, Orb or others were handled, perhaps we should consider how current and future streams should be catagorized?
|
On May 11 2012 08:08 pirsq wrote:Deleting my original response because I think this thread ran its course long ago. Everyone needs to stop trying to speak on behalf of the whole community, and realise that their opinions apply only to themselves.
It's good you deleted it because it was chock full of fallacies, red herrings, and inconsistencies with previous posts you've made on these forums. I have a feeling you realized how utterly terrible it was making you look lol. I've exposed blatant hypocrisy in at least three of the bandwagoners who cried to Razer over this issue. If you're going to continue to act like that, and still won't take up my challenge to thank NOS for sponsoring It's Gosu, this community would truly be better off without you.
|
On May 11 2012 10:00 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2012 08:08 pirsq wrote:Deleting my original response because I think this thread ran its course long ago. Everyone needs to stop trying to speak on behalf of the whole community, and realise that their opinions apply only to themselves. It's good you deleted it because it was chock full of fallacies, red herrings, and inconsistencies with previous posts you've made on these forums. I have a feeling you realized how utterly terrible it was making you look lol. I've exposed blatant hypocrisy in at least three of the bandwagoners who cried to Razer over this issue. If you're going to continue to act like that, and still won't take up my challenge to thank NOS for sponsoring It's Gosu, this community would truly be better off without you.
What hypocrisy?
Everyone is free to write whatever to whomever. Not everyone agrees with each other. It's silly to believe it's okay to tell people whether or not they are allowed to dislike someone or something. If, after complaining, the guys who pay the bills feels a punishment (of their choosing) needs to be implemented--they implement it.
Sometimes it leads to Naniwa saying sorry and skipping out on Code B.
Sometimes it leads to Destiny getting fired.
The end results are arbitrary.
In the end, people are free to and will always be able to go to sponsors to complain. It could be gamers insulted at Destiny, it could be mothers who accidentally walk in on a her son watching a stream. Whatever, people will complain at some point and the number of people who will complain will increase as SC2 becomes more and more ubiquitous.
So the choice is that TL posters try to police the world OR teams police their problem players.
People, at some point, *will* send letters to sponsors no matter what you believe. I will never write to sponsors because that's not my personality--but that doesn't mean others will not or should not. Everyone is free to write to whoever they damn please--it's not your call how someone lives their life.
It is a Team's call to decide how manage and hire their players. That's actually the entire point of their job description.
|
On May 11 2012 08:08 Teogamer wrote:
Agreed with OP, Teamliquid has turned into a terrible community over the past year or so. I went from coming here daily to monthly.
What changed exactly?
|
On May 11 2012 12:41 Seldentar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2012 08:08 Teogamer wrote:
Agreed with OP, Teamliquid has turned into a terrible community over the past year or so. I went from coming here daily to monthly. What changed exactly?
People have changed from getting excited watching starcraft to getting excited about the latest drama. TL have allmost become a gossip tabloid.
|
On May 11 2012 12:41 Seldentar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2012 08:08 Teogamer wrote:
Agreed with OP, Teamliquid has turned into a terrible community over the past year or so. I went from coming here daily to monthly. What changed exactly?
Isn't it obvious?
Someone got called a gook.
The community got upset.
He hated the community for disliking racism.
|
On May 11 2012 12:48 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2012 12:41 Seldentar wrote:On May 11 2012 08:08 Teogamer wrote:
Agreed with OP, Teamliquid has turned into a terrible community over the past year or so. I went from coming here daily to monthly. What changed exactly? Isn't it obvious? Someone got called a gook. The community got upset. He hated the community for disliking racism.
If you really belive thats what happend then you are really naive and quite frankly stupide. It was a hate campaign designed to crucify a public figure. And it was disguised as a poltical correct theme. Most disturbing thing about the hole incident was it actually worked.
|
On May 11 2012 13:14 Benjamin99 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2012 12:48 lorkac wrote:On May 11 2012 12:41 Seldentar wrote:On May 11 2012 08:08 Teogamer wrote:
Agreed with OP, Teamliquid has turned into a terrible community over the past year or so. I went from coming here daily to monthly. What changed exactly? Isn't it obvious? Someone got called a gook. The community got upset. He hated the community for disliking racism. If you really belive thats what happend then you are really naive and quite frankly stupide. It was a hate campaign designed to crucify a public figure. And it was disguised as a poltical correct theme. Most disturbing thing about the hole incident was it actually worked.
Does Destiny call people gooks and niggers as an insult? Yes.
Does that offend some people? Yes.
Do people, when offended, complain? Yes.
Do you have a right to dictate how people feel about the world? No.
Were the accusations against Destiny false? Nope, he does call people gooks and niggers.
Did Razer have a system already in place to receive such feedback that was used as intended? Yes.
Did the community talk to Destiny first? Yes.
Did Quantic know already that Destiny does this kind of stuff? Yes.
Quantic knew Destiny would say offensive things--but didn't prepare for it. Destiny not only said what he was accused of saying--but refused to apologize for it.
A combination of bullheadedness and lazy management came to a head and screwed Quantic and Destiny over.
But that's besides the point.
My oversimplistic description of the events was not a serious commentary on the situation--it was mainly a jab at you to suggest that you were supportive of racism. Read it again in context as a response to the question quoted. It's a joke. No need to get so upset over a joke. Calm down fella.
|
Like I said, I do believe that it was right for Destiny to get punished, but that the way the punishment was handed out, and it's severity, was wrong. Why so?
It was completely unprofessional, with the Razer and Quantic's hands being forced by the community; by an unprofessional set of individuals. No other sport does that same thing; instead, they let leagues and a governing/regulatory body handle the decision making.
We are expending our energies on short-term solutions (i.e. vigilante justice) that only sounds ugly to those outside the community (the exact same people we want to attract) because we actually sound like people who think we are morally ascendant and have every right to decide how, why, and when to punish individuals.
The long-term solution to this is by revising the actual system of e-sports, by calling on the leagues, teams and sponsors to get their act together and form a governing/regulatory body, to handle issues like these.
Here's a real world analogy for you guys: I live in Davao City. A simple search for "Davao City DDS" (DDS meaning Davao Death Squad) will probably show you hundreds of news reports on vigilante killings in our city. The sad fact is, the majority of our people (the Davaoneos, as we are called) actually support this. Oh sure, it does remove rapists, drug pushers/addicts, murderers, etc. from our city, but is it a short-term or long-term solution? It isn't, because it is more likely that the DDS members will actually revel in their power (morally ascendant comes into mind), and will lead to an abuse of it; no need for evidence, all the DDS needs to do before they act are "a few complains" or "their assumptions" or "their own confidential evidence" (sounds familiar, doesn't it). And they decide what actions to take. Soon enough, not only criminals were "punished," but also critiques, etc. that went against the DDS. Add in the fact that such events scare away investors, because they have to deal with that situation, as well as the fact that there is no rule of law; things can happen at a whim, punishments are handed out without clear deliberation and a clear system.
To outline the analogy:
Davao City = StarCraft2
DDS = mobs/"punishers"/vigilante justice by the community
Criminals = players that aren't conforming to our personal standards
Investors = outsiders from the community, new sponsors
Rule of law = a formalized regulatory body
All other sports communities have professional regulatory bodies. They didn't start out having those regulatory bodies, but their communities called for them, instead of resorting to an anarchist/vigilante way of regulation, like we're doing. That's all I'm calling for, but it seems that by calling for it, the responses I get (except for prisq's, which I can say I agreed to 90%) can be summarized as:
1. "You're a racist" (either implied or blatant)
2. "This is what we need"
3. "I don't agree with the formation of a regulatory body"
Haven't ever heard any of them saying that we need or should have a regulatory body. I wonder why. Power does seem to go up individual's heads.
|
People mailing the sponsors are not vigilantes. I don't understand how sending an email makes them unprofessional. For that matter, they aren't professionals, they're concerned consumers. There's nothing wrong with people doing that. Really, there's a problem with thinking you can shame people into not doing it.
You seem to have a lot of vivid analogies, but they don't really line up role for role and they just seem to be overblown with melodrama. It's the kind of like looking at numerology.
|
Here's the thing with going directly to sponsors instead of teams first: it's delegitimizing the actual teams. So what significance do the teams hold here as a result? Absolutely nothing, since we can't even tell them stuff and tell them to control players (which is how football teams work, besides having FIFA regulations, bans and fines and such). What's wrong with that: the simple fact that it is becoming a PR nightmare to sponsors. They'd ask, "Why bother sponsoring teams when we take so much flak? Why not just sell our products like we did before, when we didn't support teams in the past? We were able to make our business profitable without having to deal with these shit storms and having to deliberate so hard on dealing with the community, and instead just focus on actually making good products?"
Razer's job is to provide the players with salaries and equipment; in return, they get their branding on those players. The team's job is to DIRECTLY MANAGE THE PLAYERS; that's their only 'effin job, recruitment and management. It isn't the sponsors job. Period. Now, by circumventing the teams, we are delegitimizing the actual position of teams, and we are actually kind of like showing that teams don't have any actual significance in this community other than name, which isn't really much.
Michael Llordra's sponsors didn't have to deal with a community shit storm when he called a fan "fucking Chinese," now did they? Seems like everybody's going around that example too.
|
On May 11 2012 14:28 DN.rSquar3d wrote:
Like I said, I do believe that it was right for Destiny to get punished, but that the way the punishment was handed out, and it's severity, was wrong. Why so?
It was completely unprofessional, with the Razer and Quantic's hands being forced by the community; by an unprofessional set of individuals. No other sport does that same thing; instead, they let leagues and a governing/regulatory body handle the decision making.
We are expending our energies on short-term solutions (i.e. vigilante justice) that only sounds ugly to those outside the community (the exact same people we want to attract) because we actually sound like people who think we are morally ascendant and have every right to decide how, why, and when to punish individuals.
The long-term solution to this is by revising the actual system of e-sports, by calling on the leagues, teams and sponsors to get their act together and form a governing/regulatory body, to handle issues like these.
Here's a real world analogy for you guys: I live in Davao City. A simple search for "Davao City DDS" (DDS meaning Davao Death Squad) will probably show you hundreds of news reports on vigilante killings in our city. The sad fact is, the majority of our people (the Davaoneos, as we are called) actually support this. Oh sure, it does remove rapists, drug pushers/addicts, murderers, etc. from our city, but is it a short-term or long-term solution? It isn't, because it is more likely that the DDS members will actually revel in their power (morally ascendant comes into mind), and will lead to an abuse of it; no need for evidence, all the DDS needs to do before they act are "a few complains" or "their assumptions" or "their own confidential evidence" (sounds familiar, doesn't it). And they decide what actions to take. Soon enough, not only criminals were "punished," but also critiques, etc. that went against the DDS. Add in the fact that such events scare away investors, because they have to deal with that situation, as well as the fact that there is no rule of law; things can happen at a whim, punishments are handed out without clear deliberation and a clear system.
To outline the analogy:
Davao City = StarCraft2
DDS = mobs/"punishers"/vigilante justice by the community
Criminals = players that aren't conforming to our personal standards
Investors = outsiders from the community, new sponsors
Rule of law = a formalized regulatory body
All other sports communities have professional regulatory bodies. They didn't start out having those regulatory bodies, but their communities called for them, instead of resorting to an anarchist/vigilante way of regulation, like we're doing. That's all I'm calling for, but it seems that by calling for it, the responses I get (except for prisq's, which I can say I agreed to 90%) can be summarized as:
1. "You're a racist" (either implied or blatant)
2. "This is what we need"
3. "I don't agree with the formation of a regulatory body"
Haven't ever heard any of them saying that we need or should have a regulatory body. I wonder why. Power does seem to go up individual's heads.
Razer and Quantic could have also not fired Destiny. They could have done all sorts of punishments. Live broadcasted apology, fines, forced community service, dance to an accordion, anything. The choice of punishment was theirs to make.
I grew up in Negro Oriental. You know what we did when someone got in trouble for being stupid? We understood that it was because that person was being stupid.
|
On May 11 2012 14:47 DN.rSquar3d wrote:
Here's the thing with going directly to sponsors instead of teams first: it's delegitimizing the actual teams. So what significance do the teams hold here as a result? Absolutely nothing, since we can't even tell them stuff and tell them to control players (which is how football teams work, besides having FIFA regulations, bans and fines and such). What's wrong with that: the simple fact that it is becoming a PR nightmare to sponsors. They'd ask, "Why bother sponsoring teams when we take so much flak? Why not just sell our products like we did before, when we didn't support teams in the past? We were able to make our business profitable without having to deal with these shit storms and having to deliberate so hard on dealing with the community, and instead just focus on actually making good products?"
Razer's job is to provide the players with salaries and equipment; in return, they get their branding on those players. The team's job is to DIRECTLY MANAGE THE PLAYERS; that's their only 'effin job, recruitment and management. It isn't the sponsors job. Period. Now, by circumventing the teams, we are delegitimizing the actual position of teams, and we are actually kind of like showing that teams don't have any actual significance in this community other than name, which isn't really much.
Michael Llordra's sponsors didn't have to deal with a community shit storm when he called a fan "fucking Chinese," now did they? Seems like everybody's going around that example too.
If only Quantic managed Destiny properly and told him to not say gook in public.
Well Quantic won't make that mistake again.
It's like, now that the teams know that bad shit can happen if they don't babysit their players, they now have to manage the players. If Quantic was doing their job Destiny would never have been caught calling people gook in public. But because they were not managing him they got in trouble and sponsors got called.
|
I find it amusing the quotes are around esports instead of 'witch hunting'.
|
Do we really want to get into the exact details of what the community e-mailed to Razer? The usual sort, most likely, would have been "Fuck you for supporting Destiny, I'm not going to support your product anymore." If that's the kind of message you get, I think the choice the community is presenting is clear-cut and only one: boot him.
Building on your example, murdering someone is stupid. If he gets killed for it, no due process, courts, or law involved; just plain eye-for-an-eye. It's still his fault, right? Nothing's wrong with it, right?
|
Once again, the issue that undoes you entire idea is the actual case we're discussing: where a guy with a track record of making himself an extremely toxic property - unapologetically and repeatedly - does something extremely distasteful and escalates the issue further when people call him out on it. Just the amount of time he's been in the limelight is a pretty compelling case for the idea that his situation, and the management supposedly responsible for him, was highly abnormal.
And for fucks sake stop with the highly charged analogies unless you can make them into a better fit. Really, eye-for-an-eye would mean that... people emailed razer with highly racist names for destiny? Sorry, there aren't really any words you can say to destiny that seem to hurt him. That's part of his highly - I hate to say it: 'privileged' worldview.
|
On May 11 2012 14:55 DN.rSquar3d wrote:
Do we really want to get into the exact details of what the community e-mailed to Razer? The usual sort, most likely, would have been "Fuck you for supporting Destiny, I'm not going to support your product anymore." If that's the kind of message you get, I think the choice the community is presenting is clear-cut and only one: boot him.
Building on your example, murdering someone is stupid. If he gets killed for it, no due process, courts, or law involved; just plain eye-for-an-eye. It's still his fault, right? Nothing's wrong with it, right?
Except there was due process.
They talked to Destiny.
They then talked to the guy who signed Destiny's checks. (in other words, the boss)
The boss didn't decided to take action.
No one walked up to Destiny and killed him.
No one walked up to Razer's CEO and grabbed his arm and forced him to write up the pink slip.
No one smashed Destiny's computer set up.
People filed a complaint to a company, the company responded. That's it. It was actually completely by the book and by the rules of conduct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://s14.postimage.org/qr1iwv6a7/Untitled.png)
