AfreecaTV bans matchfixers' streams - Page 9

On October 23 2015 08:37 RKC wrote:
Yes, there is a violation of personal right here - no one is saying there isn't. The only issue is whether it's justified and proportional to protect the greater good of society.

On proportionality - how deep is the violation anyway? A person being deprived to stream a particular computer game online? Is it the same as being deprived from livelihood absolutely? Some people make it seem like Korean pro-gamers can only play games as their source of livelihood, and are good at nothing else in life. That, to me, is ridiculous. Are they going to play and live on Starcraft for the rest of their lifetime? No. Now is as good of a start as any for the match-fixers to move on to an entirely different game or try something other than computer games. It's called growing up.

On October 23 2015 10:42 BreAKerTV wrote:

After everything I've seen and learned of in the last week (not just in Korea, but again in my own back yard), I am 100% certain Blizzard only cares about the money and doesn't give a shit about merit. In many ways, it reminds me of what Richard Lewis was talking about when he said, "The good days of eSports will be gone soon." In his interview with Lycan on TLG a few months ago.

On October 23 2015 11:19 Djzapz wrote:

Richard Lewis is great but the guy's the eternal pessimist. How often has he "threatened" to quit, he just did recently, and a while ago he wrote an article that made a bunch of dumb gamers lose their shit and he said he considered quitting. More recently he was completely shaken by a death threat or something, and said something about how the gaming scene is toxic and he should leave it. Richard Lewis is the embodiment of mood swings, and when he's feeling bad, you'll get doomsday predictions from him.

eSports are very clearly trending up with games like LoL (sigh) and CSGO reaching levels never seen before, and Blizzard missed the train.

On October 23 2015 07:21 nimdil wrote:

Second, that's not fair comparison.

On October 23 2015 10:28 pure.Wasted wrote:
What is useful? Answering the question "should the company that owns GSL actively promote the content of SC2 cheaters, hackers, and match fixers?"

Curiously, I haven't seen a single person saying "yeah, there's nothing wrong with that."

On October 23 2015 10:28 pure.Wasted wrote:


Lifetime ban from... what?

I posed this question in the other thread and never received a response.

B4 never match-fixed in individual leagues. So... should he only be banned from team leagues? B4 and Yoda never match-fixed outside of Korea. Should they only be banned from Korean events, and not from WCS EU/NA? B4 and Yoda only match-fixed in events that grant WCS points. Should they be allowed to participate in major tournaments? Minor tournaments? Weekly tournaments like Olimoleague? How about streams of LotV's daily tournaments? Any one of those can be match fixed. Any one of those can be cheated in in some other way.

Whenever someone brings up ethics or morality, I wonder if they understand that the line must be drawn somewhere, and no matter where you draw it, that decision will always be arbitrary. There is no ethically "correct" solution.

Some people believe that the justice system exists to punish criminals, other people believe that the justice system exists to rehabilitate criminals. That alone should tell you that we'll never get anywhere useful by prioritizing minute ethical distinctions, when there are other very important considerations on the table. We might as well argue should a criminal receive 9 years in prison, or 10, or 11?

What is useful? Answering the question "should the company that owns GSL actively promote the content of SC2 cheaters, hackers, and match fixers?"

Curiously, I haven't seen a single person saying "yeah, there's nothing wrong with that."

On October 23 2015 10:44 Drakelon91 wrote:


How is it a violation of personal rights? I'll use the same argument I've seen from those who were rejoicing when they thought Afreeca wasn't going to listen to Kespa. "It is their service, and it is their right to ban or not ban anyone for any reason"

On October 23 2015 12:23 RKC wrote:


I don't mean 'personal right' as in 'fundamental right', of course. I'm just saying that for a private enterprise which offers public or quasi-public service i.e. a service that is available to the public at large (e.g. booking an airline ticket, uploading videos on Youtube, signing up for Facebook), an individual usually feels a sense of legitimate entitlement and expectation to use the service freely and the private enterprise would want individuals to feel that way too. It is wholly within the right of such private enterprises to ban anyone without reason, of course - but they usually set down policies and rules, and are expected to follow them out of commercial good sense, if not ethics.

I'm just saying that the issue is whether Afreeca, a private enterprise, was justified and acting proportionally in banning match-fixers to stream Starcraft to protect the greater good of the StarCraft professional gaming community.

This is not a constitutional or fundamental liberties debate (although there may be some room to make it one, as in governments should not allow private enterprise to blatantly discriminate people - e.g. ultra-Conservative bakers in US refusing to serve gay couples - but let's not go there).

On October 23 2015 11:09 Joedaddy wrote:
what the heck?

Kespa must be the korean e-sports version of the mafia. How do they keep getting their way all the time?

edit: added bold text to make it true.