|
As emotionally invested as people are on this topic, TL rules still apply. That includes flaming and ad hominem attacks. |
The important thing is that ESPORTS is going to be fine
|
I think something worth considering is that it REALLY won't help Destiny's image if he brings this woman to court. I mean, he's already the guy who breathes obscenities and racism and got his dick posted on Twitter. Does he want to ALSO be the guy who sued a woman who sent him nudes?
It's different if the DA does the deed, obviously, but Destiny's marketability is getting worse and worse by the day. He's probably already unhireable. If he goes much further, he might start getting barred from events because NOBODY wants him remotely associated with them.
|
On August 31 2012 04:37 Leth0 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2012 04:31 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:30 JimSocks wrote:
she hacked his twitter/skype/etc. whatever. thats against the law.
yes, i know she had his email password. but she had that only. she used it to hack his other shit. The fact that she had the password has nothing to do with the law itself actually. It's not the means it's the intent to harm and consent. He gave her his password, That can be seen as giving her permission. The law you quoted says A person commits an offense if the person, without obtaining the other person's consent and with the intent to harm, defraud, intimidate, or threaten any person, uses the name or persona of another person to Which reads to me like both criteria need to be met. Also the person above me makes another point that I forgot even though I mentioned it in my first post. Their locations matter.
What about the part where she changed the password? She obviously didnt have his consent to do that.
|
On August 31 2012 03:42 Ntwadumela wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2012 03:33 StarStruck wrote:On August 31 2012 03:26 Ntwadumela wrote:
He played the saxophone. Need I say more? I played the saxophone too, so did Bill Clinton. Your point? Your joke needs more umph or pizazz. My point is Bill and Destiny have both had their careers hindered by women. You may be next. Also the saxophone is kind of a dorky instrument.
That's really odd. Are you talking about those stereotypes in high school about people in band or something like that?
I certainly wouldn't call the sax a dorky instrument by any means especially the guys I know who play it. I guess you don't like any kind of music with horns in it, or taking a band class is taboo. If you were trying to take a jab at people who play instruments in junior high school and high school then I have news for you.
Lots of people wanted to play the saxophone back at my junior high. Taking strings and band was mandatory until Grade 9. Don't know how much times have changed because that was back in 96-97, but the arts was very much alive back then. You couldn't avoid taking an art class. You had to so there was no clear divide between the students.
Anyway going back to what I said originally. There were only 3 seats for saxophones (2 saxes, 1 bass). The next fewest to the drums and you had to play the clarinet for a year and we had a shit ton of clarinet players. I guess a lot of people played the recorder under Ms McKay's class back at my old public school because like I said, we had an army of clarinet players.
Anyway the guy who played bass got drafted by the LA Dodgers in 2002.
His girlfriend played beside me. No idea what happened to her.
The saxophone to me has a completely different meaning. I'm glad to be in that small group of people who got to play it back in junior high.
*
Going back to Destiny's debacle. Just another reason why I don't like using social media at all and if you sex text or what they call sexting. Then you are bringing it onto yourself.
You don't know these people, so why the fuck would you do something like that? "I was just having fun."
Yeah, well eventually you'll have to deal with the consequences when you have that shit sitting there.
We see athletes doing this all the time and the message is always the same.
|
On August 31 2012 04:58 Acritter wrote:
I think something worth considering is that it REALLY won't help Destiny's image if he brings this woman to court. I mean, he's already the guy who breathes obscenities and racism and got his dick posted on Twitter. Does he want to ALSO be the guy who sued a woman who sent him nudes?
It's different if the DA does the deed, obviously, but Destiny's marketability is getting worse and worse by the day. He's probably already unhireable. If he goes much further, he might start getting barred from events because NOBODY wants him remotely associated with them.
He has never hinted at suing her, and myself am certainly not trying to say it's a good idea to. I was just surprised as all the posts straight up hating on destiny, and forgetting how serious bluetea's actions also were.
|
On August 31 2012 04:50 SilSol wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2012 04:48 The Final Boss wrote:On August 31 2012 04:44 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:40 Sub40APM wrote:On August 31 2012 04:39 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:36 Sub40APM wrote:On August 31 2012 04:28 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:26 Leth0 wrote:On August 31 2012 04:24 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:15 Ntwadumela wrote:
I think its funny Destiny got kicked from a team that consisted primarily of his friends.
Pretty sad the kid can't hold a job. Kicked from the restaurant business, kicked from every team hes been on.
Delinquent father. Poor guy.. Huh Destiny didn't break the law. However bluetea definitly did. My first sentence doesn't excuse Destiny's actions. However the second makes Bluetea the delinquant that got away with it really surprisingly well. I think people should slow down a bit here. They are a bit quick to judge... Can you source the law that was broken? Genuinely interested considering how much of a "Grey Area" this entire situation seems to be, in regards to the rule of law, especially when you factor in the different locations. Then again maybe I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure the "law" here is not so clear cut as you would lead people to believe. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.33.htm . texas state law doesnt apply to either (a) where Destiny is living or (b) where bluefish is living. Realistically there must be some federal law she might have broken, but even if she did, that is only half the battle. The local prosecutor would still have to care enough to press charges against her. Destiny might have a civil case law against her for damages, but it would be hard to quantify how much he 'lost' because of ROOT since I assume they didnt pay him a salary? And if he cant show that his viewership on the stream dropped -- which I highly doubt it did -- then he has to go for some sort of nebulous damages re: his reputation. And courts generally dont care about that kind of stuff, and a judge will especially find it hard to understand what it is exactly that Destiny is/his business model. I'm sure there's the same law everywhere in the states. Search for impersonation, felony and USA should be able to cover it all if I cared to look. Also I'm not arguing whether or not he has a case. I'm just saying that he's not the law breaker here. You can never be sure, state laws differ for a reason. But I am also unsure whether she doesnt have a case re him forwarding around her photos either. On this particular law I'm 95% sure it's everywhere. It might change on details but not on the actual content. On the second topic, maybe but that's not impersonation and that's not under the same law at all (also not related at all to my field of expertise, although online impersonation definitly is). At the same time, given all the circumstances that took place with this situation, I doubt you could get a jury to convict BlueTea if she had a decent. At the same time, Destiny could almost certainly try to go after her for some sort of tort case. I don't think he wants to make everything worse than it already is. But i'm still sure that she did something illegal and he could do something about it if he wants to i guess.
Judging by what Destiny has said he will do to try to ruin her scholarship/job, I think he's pretty mad. And it's not like he has much to lose at this point. The sensible people of the community don't respect Destiny and the people who love Destiny would support Destiny even if he committed hate crimes, defending him as fighting against censorship. To be honest, it wouldn't surprise me if Destiny took this too far and went into the realm of harassment.
|
On August 31 2012 04:33 Myt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2012 04:26 bonifaceviii wrote:On August 31 2012 04:24 Myt wrote:
I really don't get this hole discussion.
Destiny showed some nude pictures to his friends. Not the finest move and quite frankly, to me this seem to be childish bragging. The girl finds out and decide to get back on him including a much bigger audiance. Also not a fine move and as well a bit childish but hey, she is young and probably pretty hurt so I can comprehand her move too. Root fears for their future development and decides to make a cut, also unterstandable.
What I find interessting is the reaction of the comunity. Why is this such ab big deal to the public that Root and their sponsors needed to deal with this? To me this seems to be highschoolcrap between two probably not very mature people which should not bother anybody besides the people involved, but what do we get? 100+ pages arguing about who is more to blame, destiny or the girl. Imo the answer is easy, both are, but again, why would anyone not involved care about their exchange? I really don't get it. Sponsors don't like fielding emails about pictures of penises. Basically that's the crux of this whole thing. as I said, I understand the reaction of Root and the sponsors. This is a big thing with potentially a lot of bad attention that could fall back on them. What I don't get is why this is a big thing.
Probably because this isn't the first incident Destiny has been involved in. It seems every couple months he's involved in another sexist/racist/otherwise offensive situation. If it wasn't for his history, this would probably be less of a big deal.
|
oh yes i do think it is a hilarious double standard though, that what the girl did is ok but what the guy did is not. an example of feminism corrupting the minds of white knight males everywhere. i'm glad destiny got pwned because the guy is seriously immature, but the girl needs to get sued as well. its not much of a stretch to argue that what she did was illegal, and as such she should be held accountable for her actions.
|
On August 31 2012 05:01 The Final Boss wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2012 04:50 SilSol wrote:On August 31 2012 04:48 The Final Boss wrote:On August 31 2012 04:44 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:40 Sub40APM wrote:On August 31 2012 04:39 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:36 Sub40APM wrote:On August 31 2012 04:28 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:26 Leth0 wrote:On August 31 2012 04:24 Bellygareth wrote:
[quote]
Huh Destiny didn't break the law. However bluetea definitly did. My first sentence doesn't excuse Destiny's actions. However the second makes Bluetea the delinquant that got away with it really surprisingly well.
I think people should slow down a bit here. They are a bit quick to judge... Can you source the law that was broken? Genuinely interested considering how much of a "Grey Area" this entire situation seems to be, in regards to the rule of law, especially when you factor in the different locations. Then again maybe I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure the "law" here is not so clear cut as you would lead people to believe. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.33.htm . texas state law doesnt apply to either (a) where Destiny is living or (b) where bluefish is living. Realistically there must be some federal law she might have broken, but even if she did, that is only half the battle. The local prosecutor would still have to care enough to press charges against her. Destiny might have a civil case law against her for damages, but it would be hard to quantify how much he 'lost' because of ROOT since I assume they didnt pay him a salary? And if he cant show that his viewership on the stream dropped -- which I highly doubt it did -- then he has to go for some sort of nebulous damages re: his reputation. And courts generally dont care about that kind of stuff, and a judge will especially find it hard to understand what it is exactly that Destiny is/his business model. I'm sure there's the same law everywhere in the states. Search for impersonation, felony and USA should be able to cover it all if I cared to look. Also I'm not arguing whether or not he has a case. I'm just saying that he's not the law breaker here. You can never be sure, state laws differ for a reason. But I am also unsure whether she doesnt have a case re him forwarding around her photos either. On this particular law I'm 95% sure it's everywhere. It might change on details but not on the actual content. On the second topic, maybe but that's not impersonation and that's not under the same law at all (also not related at all to my field of expertise, although online impersonation definitly is). At the same time, given all the circumstances that took place with this situation, I doubt you could get a jury to convict BlueTea if she had a decent. At the same time, Destiny could almost certainly try to go after her for some sort of tort case. I don't think he wants to make everything worse than it already is. But i'm still sure that she did something illegal and he could do something about it if he wants to i guess. Judging by what Destiny has said he will do to try to ruin her scholarship/job, I think he's pretty mad. And it's not like he has much to lose at this point. The sensible people of the community don't respect Destiny and the people who love Destiny would support Destiny even if he committed hate crimes, defending him as fighting against censorship. To be honest, it wouldn't surprise me if Destiny took this too far and went into the realm of harassment.
That was completely accurate and entirely unbiased. Good work.
|
Both acted pretty stupid. That's it. You can argue about who was bein more stupid. But bein stupid is stupid.
Get my point? :D
|
On August 31 2012 03:55 Shai wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2012 03:28 KoRStarvid wrote:On August 31 2012 01:38 -_-Quails wrote:On August 31 2012 00:58 KoRStarvid wrote:On August 31 2012 00:40 Tyree wrote:
Contacting the sponsors is absolutely fine in this case
This community, as well as the one on reddit or anywhere is else is not responsible for these players and the stupid shit some of them do, whether its racism, sexism, bigotry, general douchey behavior, homophobia, pedophilia or whatever else you can come up with.
Sponsors dont not wish to be associated with such individuals for obvious reasons, calling them out on it and putting a spotlight is the only right thing to do.
The community is not here to cover up for your inability like a professional This can certainly be argued, imo. I believe that what Destiny did here was distasteful. I wouldn't personally want to be associated with someone who shares private pictures with his friends. Is it my business though? No, it isn't. We basically have the power to destroy anyone professionally who is dependant on sponsorship, if we rally in large enough numbers, at least in this business. There's no question about that. I would never believe that I had the right to do it though. To believe the opposite, well, that kind of self-righteousness sickens me. Support those who you want to support, and let others be, and the business side will take care of it self. If I know that player X is sponsored by brand y and player x does z controversial thing, then my telling brand y that I'm uncomfortable with them supporting player x because player x has done z is not me ruining player x's career. It is me telling brand y what is currently affecting my perception of their brand. It is not me being self-righteous either. it's me providing market information without prompt. It is the moral equivalent of e-mailing sponsors to say that their decision to sponsor player a who is a nice guy that does b thing gives you warm fuzzies when you think about their brand. The reason that those complaints often result in consequences in e-sports is that they are often based on things that brands quite strongly do not want to be associated with - racism and the like. Full disclosure: I have not at present e-mailed any sponsors of any players or teams for negative or positive reasons. I may do so in the future if I feel the need. Also, once something becomes public, you are free to judge it any way you want - just like Tiger Wood's adultery. You have to distinguish theory from practice. What has this kind of feedback resulted in eSPORTS historically? People have lost their jobs. It just seems to be the way it has worked in this business so far. If the public believe that that is a punishment that fits the crime, then they are free to make it happen, as they have done now and will continue to do. No one can stop them. Is it " absolutely fine"? In my opinion: hell no. These things work themselves out, and should be left alone to do so. There are more important things at stake here than your opinions. It is self-righteous to try to get someone fired and taking away their livelyhood. That might not be what you are wanting to do when you're mailing the sponsors, saying you don't like someone because of what he does/says, but it is in fact what you are doing. And in any case, IF you are so inclined to voice your opinions about a player, then go to the team first, not the sponsors. And if someone is commiting illegal acts (expressing racist opinions can be illegal for example), there are other ways of handling that, obviously. Everyone are free to judge, and people sure as hell are gonna judge, as they always have. They did that with Tiger Woods, as you say. But I don't think witch hunts are OK based on the single fact that they do exist. I actually hate the phenomenon. And if you disagree, then we'll just have to agree to disagree. If you contact a sponsor letting them know that you think less of their brand because of things, people or whatever they're sponsoring, I think that is you acting as a responsible consumer. If Coca Cola sponsored Hitler, you bet I'd write them and let them know it's affecting my purchasing habits. And yes, sponsorships do affect me. I own 2 samsung tv's and a samsung monitor because of Samsung Khan. Sponsoring something is a show of support for the sponsoree's actions. Generally sponsors want to be remembered for the positive achievements of their sponsorees, but nothing in life is unilateral like that. It is absolutely fine to contact sponsors when it is a legitimate concern over the people they are paying and how that affects your purchasing habits. Now, if you're doing it just to be spiteful, and initiating a "witch hunt" as you call it, no, that is not fine. But I wouldn't financially support Destiny, which means I wouldn't purchase products from a sponsor of his knowingly (obviously companies sponsor a lot more people than I can keep track of). Call me some name if you like, but I call myself a responsible consumer.
So don't buy the products, but don't ruin a man's profession. Because that's what happens. Your reasoning might be sound in an ideal world, but in reality, players seem to lose their jobs as soon as people start whining to the sponsors. Go to the TEAM and let them figure out if it's something to bring up with the sponsors. When people go directly to the sponsors, the team has no option but to fire the player in question. Catz did the right thing given the circumstances, but if people didnt go directly to the sponsors, this might have had an other resolution. Try to understand that.
And dont f*cking go all Hitler, kid. There are some profound faults in that analogy. Firstly, Hitler was a mass murderer and commiter of genocide. I think we can all agree that what he did was morally wrong, which is not exactly the case with Destiny. I don't agree with what Destiny did here, it was very distasteful, but I can't say that he deserves any punishment for it. And secondly, Hitler was a despot, meaning there were no laws he had to obide to. He WAS the law. So, if Coca-Cola sponsored Hitler and Nazi Germany, we would have had to mail Coca Cola and tell them we didn't like Hitler, since there was no authority to contact and it was our responsibility, not as consumers, but as humans to do what we could to stop him.
EDIT: Yeah, I know that last paragraph seems absolutely ridiculous, but it's only fitting as a response to the argument...
|
If you contact a sponsor letting them know that you think less of their brand because of things, people or whatever they're sponsoring, I think that is you acting as a responsible consumer.
If Coca Cola sponsored Hitler, you bet I'd write them and let them know it's affecting my purchasing habits.
And yes, sponsorships do affect me. I own 2 samsung tv's and a samsung monitor because of Samsung Khan. Sponsoring something is a show of support for the sponsoree's actions. Generally sponsors want to be remembered for the positive achievements of their sponsorees, but nothing in life is unilateral like that.
It is absolutely fine to contact sponsors when it is a legitimate concern over the people they are paying and how that affects your purchasing habits.
Now, if you're doing it just to be spiteful, and initiating a "witch hunt" as you call it, no, that is not fine. But I wouldn't financially support Destiny, which means I wouldn't purchase products from a sponsor of his knowingly (obviously companies sponsor a lot more people than I can keep track of). Call me some name if you like, but I call myself a responsible consumer..
Oh I didn't see that. We reached Godwin! Good job everyone...
|
On August 31 2012 05:01 The Final Boss wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2012 04:50 SilSol wrote:On August 31 2012 04:48 The Final Boss wrote:On August 31 2012 04:44 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:40 Sub40APM wrote:On August 31 2012 04:39 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:36 Sub40APM wrote:On August 31 2012 04:28 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:26 Leth0 wrote:On August 31 2012 04:24 Bellygareth wrote:
[quote]
Huh Destiny didn't break the law. However bluetea definitly did. My first sentence doesn't excuse Destiny's actions. However the second makes Bluetea the delinquant that got away with it really surprisingly well.
I think people should slow down a bit here. They are a bit quick to judge... Can you source the law that was broken? Genuinely interested considering how much of a "Grey Area" this entire situation seems to be, in regards to the rule of law, especially when you factor in the different locations. Then again maybe I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure the "law" here is not so clear cut as you would lead people to believe. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.33.htm . texas state law doesnt apply to either (a) where Destiny is living or (b) where bluefish is living. Realistically there must be some federal law she might have broken, but even if she did, that is only half the battle. The local prosecutor would still have to care enough to press charges against her. Destiny might have a civil case law against her for damages, but it would be hard to quantify how much he 'lost' because of ROOT since I assume they didnt pay him a salary? And if he cant show that his viewership on the stream dropped -- which I highly doubt it did -- then he has to go for some sort of nebulous damages re: his reputation. And courts generally dont care about that kind of stuff, and a judge will especially find it hard to understand what it is exactly that Destiny is/his business model. I'm sure there's the same law everywhere in the states. Search for impersonation, felony and USA should be able to cover it all if I cared to look. Also I'm not arguing whether or not he has a case. I'm just saying that he's not the law breaker here. You can never be sure, state laws differ for a reason. But I am also unsure whether she doesnt have a case re him forwarding around her photos either. On this particular law I'm 95% sure it's everywhere. It might change on details but not on the actual content. On the second topic, maybe but that's not impersonation and that's not under the same law at all (also not related at all to my field of expertise, although online impersonation definitly is). At the same time, given all the circumstances that took place with this situation, I doubt you could get a jury to convict BlueTea if she had a decent. At the same time, Destiny could almost certainly try to go after her for some sort of tort case. I don't think he wants to make everything worse than it already is. But i'm still sure that she did something illegal and he could do something about it if he wants to i guess. Judging by what Destiny has said he will do to try to ruin her scholarship/job, I think he's pretty mad. And it's not like he has much to lose at this point. The sensible people of the community don't respect Destiny and the people who love Destiny would support Destiny even if he committed hate crimes, defending him as fighting against censorship. To be honest, it wouldn't surprise me if Destiny took this too far and went into the realm of harassment.
You don't think he just said so basically because everything was so new and he was pretty mad yes? And now when he has calmed down a bit he might of regret that? Of course people says stuff when their mad and don't mean it. Because this is quite hard for both parts but IMO worst for Destiny because it was nude pics in his situation. And that's why i think he won't do something like that. Perhaps if he wants to put her in court or something.
|
On August 31 2012 03:55 Shai wrote:
And yes, sponsorships do affect me. I own 2 samsung tv's and a samsung monitor because of Samsung Khan. Sponsoring something is a show of support for the sponsoree's actions. Generally sponsors want to be remembered for the positive achievements of their sponsorees, but nothing in life is unilateral like that.
It is absolutely fine to contact sponsors when it is a legitimate concern over the people they are paying and how that affects your purchasing habits.
Now, if you're doing it just to be spiteful, and initiating a "witch hunt" as you call it, no, that is not fine. But I wouldn't financially support Destiny, which means I wouldn't purchase products from a sponsor of his knowingly (obviously companies sponsor a lot more people than I can keep track of). Call me some name if you like, but I call myself a responsible consumer.
Not buying a product because of someone they sponsor is being spiteful. You know why I buy from certain brands? Because they make quality products, or a product that serves a function that I need. Where they spend their R&D, salaries, infrastructure, and endorsements has no influence on that, and it shouldn't. This has been a big problem lately for companies, where they are judged not on their products or services, but things outside of that.
|
On August 31 2012 05:14 Bellygareth wrote:Show nested quote +
If you contact a sponsor letting them know that you think less of their brand because of things, people or whatever they're sponsoring, I think that is you acting as a responsible consumer.
If Coca Cola sponsored Hitler, you bet I'd write them and let them know it's affecting my purchasing habits.
And yes, sponsorships do affect me. I own 2 samsung tv's and a samsung monitor because of Samsung Khan. Sponsoring something is a show of support for the sponsoree's actions. Generally sponsors want to be remembered for the positive achievements of their sponsorees, but nothing in life is unilateral like that.
It is absolutely fine to contact sponsors when it is a legitimate concern over the people they are paying and how that affects your purchasing habits.
Now, if you're doing it just to be spiteful, and initiating a "witch hunt" as you call it, no, that is not fine. But I wouldn't financially support Destiny, which means I wouldn't purchase products from a sponsor of his knowingly (obviously companies sponsor a lot more people than I can keep track of). Call me some name if you like, but I call myself a responsible consumer..
Oh I didn't see that. We reached Godwin! Good job everyone...
Yeah, feels good to contribute to that!
|
On August 31 2012 04:52 bonifaceviii wrote:
The important thing is that ESPORTS is going to be fine
to be frank i even think it helps esport "in some way"
edit: people love drama
|
On August 31 2012 05:01 The Final Boss wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2012 04:50 SilSol wrote:On August 31 2012 04:48 The Final Boss wrote:On August 31 2012 04:44 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:40 Sub40APM wrote:On August 31 2012 04:39 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:36 Sub40APM wrote:On August 31 2012 04:28 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:26 Leth0 wrote:On August 31 2012 04:24 Bellygareth wrote:
[quote]
Huh Destiny didn't break the law. However bluetea definitly did. My first sentence doesn't excuse Destiny's actions. However the second makes Bluetea the delinquant that got away with it really surprisingly well.
I think people should slow down a bit here. They are a bit quick to judge... Can you source the law that was broken? Genuinely interested considering how much of a "Grey Area" this entire situation seems to be, in regards to the rule of law, especially when you factor in the different locations. Then again maybe I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure the "law" here is not so clear cut as you would lead people to believe. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.33.htm . texas state law doesnt apply to either (a) where Destiny is living or (b) where bluefish is living. Realistically there must be some federal law she might have broken, but even if she did, that is only half the battle. The local prosecutor would still have to care enough to press charges against her. Destiny might have a civil case law against her for damages, but it would be hard to quantify how much he 'lost' because of ROOT since I assume they didnt pay him a salary? And if he cant show that his viewership on the stream dropped -- which I highly doubt it did -- then he has to go for some sort of nebulous damages re: his reputation. And courts generally dont care about that kind of stuff, and a judge will especially find it hard to understand what it is exactly that Destiny is/his business model. I'm sure there's the same law everywhere in the states. Search for impersonation, felony and USA should be able to cover it all if I cared to look. Also I'm not arguing whether or not he has a case. I'm just saying that he's not the law breaker here. You can never be sure, state laws differ for a reason. But I am also unsure whether she doesnt have a case re him forwarding around her photos either. On this particular law I'm 95% sure it's everywhere. It might change on details but not on the actual content. On the second topic, maybe but that's not impersonation and that's not under the same law at all (also not related at all to my field of expertise, although online impersonation definitly is). At the same time, given all the circumstances that took place with this situation, I doubt you could get a jury to convict BlueTea if she had a decent. At the same time, Destiny could almost certainly try to go after her for some sort of tort case. I don't think he wants to make everything worse than it already is. But i'm still sure that she did something illegal and he could do something about it if he wants to i guess. Judging by what Destiny has said he will do to try to ruin her scholarship/job, I think he's pretty mad. And it's not like he has much to lose at this point. The sensible people of the community don't respect Destiny and the people who love Destiny would support Destiny even if he committed hate crimes, defending him as fighting against censorship. To be honest, it wouldn't surprise me if Destiny took this too far and went into the realm of harassment.
Sure he was mad who wouldnt be. But I somehow doubt he will try to take revenge here.
Also the community is far from black and white (no rasism intended!). Actually I've read of a lot of people here who explicitly said they weren't huge fans, but still sided for him. It's not like every single person here who in some way defends him is a diehard fan.
And as a person who watches his stream frequently I'm like 100% certain he would never ever start harassing that girl.
|
On August 31 2012 05:15 SilSol wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2012 05:01 The Final Boss wrote:On August 31 2012 04:50 SilSol wrote:On August 31 2012 04:48 The Final Boss wrote:On August 31 2012 04:44 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:40 Sub40APM wrote:On August 31 2012 04:39 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:36 Sub40APM wrote:On August 31 2012 04:28 Bellygareth wrote:On August 31 2012 04:26 Leth0 wrote:
[quote]
Can you source the law that was broken?
Genuinely interested considering how much of a "Grey Area" this entire situation seems to be, in regards to the rule of law, especially when you factor in the different locations. Then again maybe I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure the "law" here is not so clear cut as you would lead people to believe.
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.33.htm . texas state law doesnt apply to either (a) where Destiny is living or (b) where bluefish is living. Realistically there must be some federal law she might have broken, but even if she did, that is only half the battle. The local prosecutor would still have to care enough to press charges against her. Destiny might have a civil case law against her for damages, but it would be hard to quantify how much he 'lost' because of ROOT since I assume they didnt pay him a salary? And if he cant show that his viewership on the stream dropped -- which I highly doubt it did -- then he has to go for some sort of nebulous damages re: his reputation. And courts generally dont care about that kind of stuff, and a judge will especially find it hard to understand what it is exactly that Destiny is/his business model. I'm sure there's the same law everywhere in the states. Search for impersonation, felony and USA should be able to cover it all if I cared to look. Also I'm not arguing whether or not he has a case. I'm just saying that he's not the law breaker here. You can never be sure, state laws differ for a reason. But I am also unsure whether she doesnt have a case re him forwarding around her photos either. On this particular law I'm 95% sure it's everywhere. It might change on details but not on the actual content. On the second topic, maybe but that's not impersonation and that's not under the same law at all (also not related at all to my field of expertise, although online impersonation definitly is). At the same time, given all the circumstances that took place with this situation, I doubt you could get a jury to convict BlueTea if she had a decent. At the same time, Destiny could almost certainly try to go after her for some sort of tort case. I don't think he wants to make everything worse than it already is. But i'm still sure that she did something illegal and he could do something about it if he wants to i guess. Judging by what Destiny has said he will do to try to ruin her scholarship/job, I think he's pretty mad. And it's not like he has much to lose at this point. The sensible people of the community don't respect Destiny and the people who love Destiny would support Destiny even if he committed hate crimes, defending him as fighting against censorship. To be honest, it wouldn't surprise me if Destiny took this too far and went into the realm of harassment. You don't think he just said so basically because everything was so new and he was pretty mad yes? And now when he has calmed down a bit he might of regret that? Of course people says stuff when their mad and don't mean it. Because this is quite hard for both parts but IMO worst for Destiny because it was nude pics in his situation. And that's why i think he won't do something like that. Perhaps if he wants to put her in court or something.
That would be the logical and smart decision to make, so Destiny will probably--in a bold act of internet heroism--NOT do just that. Who knows though, maybe he actually will realize how stupid he acts and make a change. Judging by his history of bad decisions and rather choleric nature, I doubt it, but maybe he'll actually surprise us.
|
On August 31 2012 05:11 KoRStarvid wrote:
And dont f*cking go all Hitler, kid. There are some profound faults in that analogy. Firstly, Hitler was a mass murderer and commiter of genocide. I think we can all agree that what he did was morally wrong, which is not exactly the case with Destiny. I don't agree with what Destiny did here, it was very distasteful, but I can't say that he deserves any punishment for it. And secondly, Hitler was a despot, meaning there were no laws he had to obide to. He WAS the law. So, if Coca-Cola sponsored Hitler and Nazi Germany, we would have had to mail Coca Cola and tell them we didn't like Hitler, since there was no authority to contact and it was our responsibility, not as consumers, but as humans to do what we could to stop him.
I'm sorry but that analogy is so wrong in so many ways, that I can't even describe how much you annoy me right now. Steven did something wrong, he paid for it. Hope he he sees what he did wrong, if not: Who cares? If he lands on a street because he does know how to properly live a life with other human beeings, so be it. It's his fault, no questions asked.
|
On August 31 2012 05:11 KoRStarvid wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2012 03:55 Shai wrote:On August 31 2012 03:28 KoRStarvid wrote:On August 31 2012 01:38 -_-Quails wrote:On August 31 2012 00:58 KoRStarvid wrote:On August 31 2012 00:40 Tyree wrote:
Contacting the sponsors is absolutely fine in this case
This community, as well as the one on reddit or anywhere is else is not responsible for these players and the stupid shit some of them do, whether its racism, sexism, bigotry, general douchey behavior, homophobia, pedophilia or whatever else you can come up with.
Sponsors dont not wish to be associated with such individuals for obvious reasons, calling them out on it and putting a spotlight is the only right thing to do.
The community is not here to cover up for your inability like a professional This can certainly be argued, imo. I believe that what Destiny did here was distasteful. I wouldn't personally want to be associated with someone who shares private pictures with his friends. Is it my business though? No, it isn't. We basically have the power to destroy anyone professionally who is dependant on sponsorship, if we rally in large enough numbers, at least in this business. There's no question about that. I would never believe that I had the right to do it though. To believe the opposite, well, that kind of self-righteousness sickens me. Support those who you want to support, and let others be, and the business side will take care of it self. If I know that player X is sponsored by brand y and player x does z controversial thing, then my telling brand y that I'm uncomfortable with them supporting player x because player x has done z is not me ruining player x's career. It is me telling brand y what is currently affecting my perception of their brand. It is not me being self-righteous either. it's me providing market information without prompt. It is the moral equivalent of e-mailing sponsors to say that their decision to sponsor player a who is a nice guy that does b thing gives you warm fuzzies when you think about their brand. The reason that those complaints often result in consequences in e-sports is that they are often based on things that brands quite strongly do not want to be associated with - racism and the like. Full disclosure: I have not at present e-mailed any sponsors of any players or teams for negative or positive reasons. I may do so in the future if I feel the need. Also, once something becomes public, you are free to judge it any way you want - just like Tiger Wood's adultery. You have to distinguish theory from practice. What has this kind of feedback resulted in eSPORTS historically? People have lost their jobs. It just seems to be the way it has worked in this business so far. If the public believe that that is a punishment that fits the crime, then they are free to make it happen, as they have done now and will continue to do. No one can stop them. Is it " absolutely fine"? In my opinion: hell no. These things work themselves out, and should be left alone to do so. There are more important things at stake here than your opinions. It is self-righteous to try to get someone fired and taking away their livelyhood. That might not be what you are wanting to do when you're mailing the sponsors, saying you don't like someone because of what he does/says, but it is in fact what you are doing. And in any case, IF you are so inclined to voice your opinions about a player, then go to the team first, not the sponsors. And if someone is commiting illegal acts (expressing racist opinions can be illegal for example), there are other ways of handling that, obviously. Everyone are free to judge, and people sure as hell are gonna judge, as they always have. They did that with Tiger Woods, as you say. But I don't think witch hunts are OK based on the single fact that they do exist. I actually hate the phenomenon. And if you disagree, then we'll just have to agree to disagree. If you contact a sponsor letting them know that you think less of their brand because of things, people or whatever they're sponsoring, I think that is you acting as a responsible consumer. If Coca Cola sponsored Hitler, you bet I'd write them and let them know it's affecting my purchasing habits. And yes, sponsorships do affect me. I own 2 samsung tv's and a samsung monitor because of Samsung Khan. Sponsoring something is a show of support for the sponsoree's actions. Generally sponsors want to be remembered for the positive achievements of their sponsorees, but nothing in life is unilateral like that. It is absolutely fine to contact sponsors when it is a legitimate concern over the people they are paying and how that affects your purchasing habits. Now, if you're doing it just to be spiteful, and initiating a "witch hunt" as you call it, no, that is not fine. But I wouldn't financially support Destiny, which means I wouldn't purchase products from a sponsor of his knowingly (obviously companies sponsor a lot more people than I can keep track of). Call me some name if you like, but I call myself a responsible consumer. So don't buy the products, but don't ruin a man's profession. Because that's what happens. Your reasoning might be sound in an ideal world, but in reality, players seem to lose their jobs as soon as people start whining to the sponsors. Go to the TEAM and let them figure out if it's something to bring up with the sponsors. When people go directly to the sponsors, the team has no option but to fire the player in question. Catz did the right thing given the circumstances, but if people didnt go directly to the sponsors, this might have had an other resolution. Try to understand that. And dont f*cking go all Hitler, kid. There are some profound faults in that analogy. Firstly, Hitler was a mass murderer and commiter of genocide. I think we can all agree that what he did was morally wrong, which is not exactly the case with Destiny. I don't agree with what Destiny did here, it was very distasteful, but I can't say that he deserves any punishment for it. And secondly, Hitler was a despot, meaning there were no laws he had to obide to. He WAS the law. So, if Coca-Cola sponsored Hitler and Nazi Germany, we would have had to mail Coca Cola and tell them we didn't like Hitler, since there was no authority to contact and it was our responsibility, not as consumers, but as humans to do what we could to stop him. EDIT: Yeah, I know that last paragraph seems absolutely ridiculous, but it's only fitting as a response to the argument...
What players have lost their jobs or not been able to get one because of people complaining to sponsors? You make it sound like there are players left and right who are losing jobs because of people complaining to sponsors. The only ones I can think of is MajOr and Destiny, that's two players out of a rather large pool of players over a decent period of time.
On August 31 2012 05:16 divito wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2012 03:55 Shai wrote:
And yes, sponsorships do affect me. I own 2 samsung tv's and a samsung monitor because of Samsung Khan. Sponsoring something is a show of support for the sponsoree's actions. Generally sponsors want to be remembered for the positive achievements of their sponsorees, but nothing in life is unilateral like that.
It is absolutely fine to contact sponsors when it is a legitimate concern over the people they are paying and how that affects your purchasing habits.
Now, if you're doing it just to be spiteful, and initiating a "witch hunt" as you call it, no, that is not fine. But I wouldn't financially support Destiny, which means I wouldn't purchase products from a sponsor of his knowingly (obviously companies sponsor a lot more people than I can keep track of). Call me some name if you like, but I call myself a responsible consumer. Not buying a product because of someone they sponsor is being spiteful. You know why I buy from certain brands? Because they make quality products, or a product that serves a function that I need. Where they spend their R&D, salaries, infrastructure, and endorsements has no influence on that, and it shouldn't. This has been a big problem lately for companies, where they are judged not on their products or services, but things outside of that.
That's not the point of sponsorship though. Like it's fine that you buy products solely based upon what you are buying, but the reason companies sponsor teams, tournaments, and players is TO SELL THEIR PRODUCT. Otherwise it would be a pointless thing to do. If I buy a Razer product instead of a SteelSeries product because I like TeamLiquid more than EG, then is that a spiteful decision? And regardless of whether or not is is, you have to understand that that the sort of decision that people make and it is for that reason that Razer sponsors Team Liquid. They don't sponsor them because they like to spend money, they do it to get their product out there and get people to buy it.
Both of these posts are painfully stupid, as it feels like you guys are living in this odd world where sponsors pay money because they like to pay money to teams. It's a business decision, and if a lot of people are going to NOT buy their product because they are spending money on a player, then why would they keep paying that player. The customer is always right, it's a simple rule of business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
