The problem is they do allow genuinely toxic people to remain on their platform unpunished, while people who did nothing wrong can sometimes be on the receiving end of an unfair temporary suspension for telling another person who didn't respect our boundaries to back off.
While I have not had any issues with Minecraft's Reporting System, I have seen how fundamentally flawed the Report Feature is for Xbox LIVE Accounts and how Microsoft handles the matter. While the Current Code of Conduct or now Community Standards is a bit vague (Which I prefer the 'to the book version' ), the issue is even telling somebody as simple as to leave you alone in a message in a response to harassment is considered 'retaliation' by the Enforcement Team. They perceive it as you responding to negativity in any way is a retaliatory action which is the wrong mindset to have. If you don't believe me, check out the link above to the older CoC
Quoted from the Older CoC under "If you encounter an obnoxious player:" :
-"Do not retaliate. If you act out, it could be considered harassment."
And it seems due to how vague this actually is, they can (and have in your friend's case AGT) taken a response to tell the wrongdoer to go away as retaliatory, not understanding the context. Basically, if you don't 'Block and Bye' the wrongdoer and you stand your ground even by saying something as simple as "Leave me alone.", it's basically a reportable offense due to being seen as retaliation due to the negativity.
Even though the current Reporting is a bit more Vague on the Community Standards via:
"If you experience or witness inappropriate content and/or behavior, we encourage you to block and mute the content and also to report the player(s) acting inappropriately and/or the piece of content itself. If you report something, Xbox will conduct a review and may issue an enforcement only on the reported item, so ensure you are reporting on the right category (for example, reporting a player’s gamertag triggers a gamertag review only)."
"Show respect - If someone’s uncomfortable with something you say or do, respect that, apologize, and don’t do it again."
The Show Respect part and the Reporting Part contradict each other a bit as it leaves a grey area. If somebody is harassing you, do you tell them to leave you alone first and respect you; or do you 'Block and Bye' them immediately upon the first instance? And since Microsoft has shown their stance on what they consider retaliation to be in the past, it's the second, as if you follow the Platinum Rule, you can be considered retaliating and recieve a suspension for even responding to harassment, and that is the problem. Mixed signals which leaves a grey area of vagueness for Microsoft to hold the wrong person accountable while the wrongdoer gets away either with a slap on the hand or completely, rather than taking a bit of extra time to use context and understand the side of the person who is being harassed.
I mean out of personal experience, I came across a player who randomly joined my Xbox LIVE Party and started making sexually explicit jokes about characters in Halo for basically no reason. I kicked him then Blocked and Byed Him, as did three of my friends. The person then made ten Silver Accounts then sending harassing messages to us four. It took 44 Reports, All four of us Reporting his Gold and his 10 Silver Accounts after 'Blocking and Byeing' him to get Microsoft to issue him a 14 Day Ban on his Gold Account and Permaban on all 10 Silver Accounts. Yet had we told him to leave us alone, we could've ended up with bans instead for 'Retaliating'.
So do I trust Minecraft's Report System? Yes. Do I trust Microsoft's Report System? No.
I would agree that its a horrible framework, for what reason doesn't Mojang simply pass on it to the server proprietors how they need to oversee their server.
I believe it's bad because there are THOSE people that like to abuse stuff. They'll might abuse the chat report feature to the point we'll stop playing the game altogether.
I believe it's bad because there are THOSE people that like to abuse stuff. They'll might abuse the chat report feature to the point we'll stop playing the game altogether.
I trust individual server administrators to handle this more than Microsoft, given the way they have been known to treat their player base, if something illegal and detrimental to society or individuals is being committed, it is the civic duty of the server admin to report that to the police, if they don't and have full knowledge of it, then they are complicit in the crime which too can get them arrested and prison time.
People do abuse the report feature for more trivial stuff though, such as politics or differences in ideology or opinion, a petty spat between individuals who can't handle that not everyone has to agree with them just because they say so or that they got upset because they misunderstand what another person was saying or meant. If somebody is wrong in what they are saying, such as they make an unscientific claim, then it is up to the person debating them to inform them, if that other person doesn't listen, then move on and don't talk to that person they don't like, there's also a block feature.
I totally get where you're coming from. Dealing with botched reports and inconsistent moderation can be frustrating and damaging. It's crucial for platforms like Microsoft to take a stand against toxic behavior and uphold their policies consistently. Discrimination and cyberbullying are serious issues, and their impact on mental health can't be ignored. It's essential for them to genuinely address these concerns and provide a safe online environment. It's unfortunate that some platforms fall short of their promises. Your experience highlights the need for better accountability and transparency in handling such issues.
I totally get where you're coming from. Dealing with botched reports and inconsistent moderation can be frustrating and damaging. It's crucial for platforms like Microsoft to take a stand against toxic behavior and uphold their policies consistently. Discrimination and cyberbullying are serious issues, and their impact on mental health can't be ignored. It's essential for them to genuinely address these concerns and provide a safe online environment. It's unfortunate that some platforms fall short of their promises. Your experience highlights the need for better accountability and transparency in handling such issues.
Yes, discrimination and cyber bullying is appalling behaviour and action must be taken to reduce or stop it when necessary, it is a burden on mental health, however by the same token we must also expect fair and just treatment from the powers that be, because they're not immune to making decisions based on someone's opinion, it could either be based on politics or sometimes not.
in the UK it has been recently reported we've had this de-banking scandal over a similar problem, and according to sources like TheTelegraph, it appears bank bosses are now taking issue with phrases like "sanity check" and "black market" being used, which doesn't bode well for them and is a heavy implication that they may deactivate somebody's bank account just for the use of such words which are not used to discriminate against people. "Black market" is used to describe illegal and oftentimes unethical trade, it has nothing to do with ethnicity, most people aren't that oblivious to this fact.
Just imagine if Microsoft went in a similar direction, and then began suspending people's Xbox Live accounts for the exact same ridiculous nonsense like this
I can think of very plausible scenarios where that would be a burden on people's mental health also, what with them not only losing multiplayer access, but also losing access to their DLC's, generally perma bans aren't handed out for things like this, but that doesn't mean that it can't happen, the biggest issue with their TOS is the escalation of suspensions, they escalate regardless of how small or long ago the previous infraction was. They don't treat this issue as reasonably as this forum does, as such, the chat reporting system is now a problem because of that, if their terms of use were amended to allow more leniency on minor infractions, it wouldn't have mattered, but that's not what has happened.
In no context or conversation I had with anyone over the years, has "sanity check" been used to attack people with mental health problems,
chaptmc has mentioned it in conversations with me, mentioning how this is a terminology used to describe fixing a problem with software, that's pretty much in line with what I already know of it, other than it meaning checking whether or not an action taken or argument being made is logical.
Unfortunately experience has taught me, people aren't logical at all and will pick the smallest things in life to fight about,
and I worry this censorship problem on the internet and in commerce is going to get a lot worse before it gets better.
I won't live forever to put up with it, but other people will, future generations will have to deal with the bad decisions of this one, cause and effect.
It's worse now. You can report skins and names starting from 1.20.2
Don't you hate it when you feel used? it's especially bad in this case because we spend money, supporting a company, and when they've decided they have no further use for us, boom, goodbye account, something I worry could happen to either me or friends, I already know somebody who had a 15 day suspension and I've explained what happened in one of the earlier posts. Sadly unless in a verified case of discrimination by a company that does this to you, something which you have sufficient evidence supporting you in a court of law where they have jurisdiction to assist you in that situation, and it does depend on the laws in your country, without this or sufficient documented evidence to show you've been done wrong, we're powerless to do anything about this.
Don't you hate it when you feel used? it's especially bad in this case because we spend money, supporting a company, and when they've decided they have no further use for us, boom, goodbye account, something I worry could happen to either me or friends, I already know somebody who had a 15 day suspension and I've explained what happened in one of the earlier posts. Sadly unless in a verified case of discrimination by a company that does this to you, something which you have sufficient evidence supporting you in a court of law where they have jurisdiction to assist you in that situation, and it does depend on the laws in your country, without this or sufficient documented evidence to show you've been done wrong, we're powerless to do anything about this.
I agree, the world is being built into a digital prison and stuff like this is one of the small steps of doing so.
And this is why I am convinced we are in a dystopia.
It got worse ever since the migration to digital content, because now the downloads are gated behind a person's access to their account and regardless of the reason somebody else may end up hacked or banned, if an appeal doesn't resolve the situation and if it is permanent, players lose access to potentially thousands of USD or pound Sterling worth of online content. It probably wouldn't be anywhere near as detrimental if say bans only affected multiplayer access, which make sense if somebody is caught cheating in a competitive online multiplayer game, or at the very least disable or reset achievements in the case of online games with less strict policies on cheating with perhaps a temporary suspension or formal warning in email.
But unless somebody is going out of their way to tamper with a server while doing this I cannot say it the punishment fits the crime when a person's entire digital library had been sanctioned, just for a breach of the fair play rules that only applied to one video game. If somebody got caught pirating a game, then charge them for it, if they don't pay up, then disable their access to that game and its multiplayer server, problem solved.
Of course any moderation that doesn't rely on the consensus of the people strictly involved in the incident is never going to work. But that's beyond the point of these changes.
It's not about moderation. It's about cleaning a brand they paid billions for. They keep releasing MC-branded content obviously aimed at children, with the possible goal of controlling the most profitable preadolescent franchise since Pokemon, maybe earning them as future customers of MS products, and nothing threatens a plan like that like having some big media outlet report of someone swearing, promoting unwanted political content, or worse, on a server where children can go.
You don't own a game. You rented a service that can be denied at any time by their real owners if that makes them profit. Welcome to the 21st century, guys.
Of course any moderation that doesn't rely on the consensus of the people strictly involved in the incident is never going to work. But that's beyond the point of these changes.
It's not about moderation. It's about cleaning a brand they paid billions for. They keep releasing MC-branded content obviously aimed at children, with the possible goal of controlling the most profitable preadolescent franchise since Pokemon, maybe earning them as future customers of MS products, and nothing threatens a plan like that like having some big media outlet report of someone swearing, promoting unwanted political content, or worse, on a server where children can go.
You don't own a game. You rented a service that can be denied at any time by their real owners if that makes them profit. Welcome to the 21st century, guys.
One of the many problems of capitalism. We're told we have more freedom and justice under it but the reality is for many people that simply isn't the case. Any commercial good or service can be denied purely by the discretion of private property owners, and they have free reign to make up any policy they want, no matter how petty or nonsensical it may be, it can be something that has absolutely nothing to do with law breaking. Like you said, if it affects their profits or PR/popularity to the general population or a select group of influential people, they will make policies based upon that, just like they already had done.
Also they are not really obliged to carry out their moderation of gaming platforms fairly, if they were, we wouldn't still be having this discussion. In most instances we cannot even sue them when something goes wrong, even when we know for a fact a friend or somebody else we know has been treated unfairly by a deliberately malicious report.
It's not like false and malicious reports against the DWP in the UK, where people can be prosecuted for intentionally wasting investigation teams time and for trying to have severely ill or vulnerable people's social security taken off them.
Private entities very rarely have this same level of accountability, as they're not a democratic institution.
Yes, sometimes regulations can be used to punish them for ruining someone's life, but even then they often find ways around the legal system,
I didn't really mean to make a political comment, but let's go.
It isn't just because of capitalism.
I live in Italy, one of those rare countries where capitalism and socialism were made to coexist on purpose (they called it "the third way" back in the days). You didn't see much corporative 🐂💩 here before US-based corporations began to stomp their way into our economy, but man, you might have no idea of the level of corruption, ineptitude, inefficiency, and criminality that was and is still allowed by the socialist mindset, with the largest industries controlled by politicians i.e. shady people who can afford to corrupt them. Hello shitty jobs with high taxation. Need something basic that the law grants you? Find a politician to beg or forget about it.
And yet we still had capitalism, but in a very different form than US capitalism: a huge network of small companies that still managed to keep our country in the world top 8 economies. Just a few miles of sea away, Albania experienced no capitalism and is still one of the most underdeveloped countries in Europe.
There's lot of examples where capitalism meant a better life, and lot of examples of lack of capitalism leading to poverty. The problem with US capitalism is not capitalism, is the american mindset: get big, or die trying. And 🖕 everybody else.
You know why the USA never really had mafia? Because they don't need it. Like Japan, they just made it legal and forget about it. But don't blame it on an the generic economic theory that people should be free to have their business and protect their property, it's a little unfair.
I didn't really mean to make a political comment, but let's go.
It isn't just because of capitalism.
I live in Italy, one of those rare countries where capitalism and socialism were made to coexist on purpose (they called it "the third way" back in the days). You didn't see much corporative 🐂💩 here before US-based corporations began to stomp their way into our economy, but man, you might have no idea of the level of corruption, ineptitude, inefficiency, and criminality that was and is still allowed by the socialist mindset, with the largest industries controlled by politicians i.e. shady people who can afford to corrupt them. Hello shitty jobs with high taxation. Need something basic that the law grants you? Find a politician to beg or forget about it.
And yet we still had capitalism, but in a very different form than US capitalism: a huge network of small companies that still managed to keep our country in the world top 8 economies. Just a few miles of sea away, Albania experienced no capitalism and is still one of the most underdeveloped countries in Europe.
There's lot of examples where capitalism meant a better life, and lot of examples of lack of capitalism leading to poverty. The problem with US capitalism is not capitalism, is the american mindset: get big, or die trying. And 🖕 everybody else.
You know why the USA never really had mafia? Because they don't need it. Like Japan, they just made it legal and forget about it. But don't blame it on an the generic economic theory that people should be free to have their business and protect their property, it's a little unfair.
But you see, the get rich or die trying attitude some Americans have is magnified by the issue of (laisez-faire) capitalism. It's the reason why many people cannot afford healthcare and often get into debt or bankruptcy over medical bills when Federal assistance programs won't cover their basic needs. Socialism has its problems, but don't pretend that capitalism is inherently altruistic, it isn't and that's why we need laws and regulations to hold private individuals accountable for wrongdoing, if it wasn't for worker protection legislation private companies would get away with paying working populations a lot less, remember when child labour used to be legal in Europe?. We'd have less homelessness if landlords weren't allowed to price gouge their tenants. Also certain kinds of industrial activity is causing alarming amounts of pollution that future generations will be forced to adapt to when we're gone, and loss of our rainforests, some of it is down to overpopulation as well which is more down to human irresponsibility than anything else. But generally speaking competition and market forces alone aren't enough to stop businesses from doing dodgy things, it may make some products cheaper, but it often comes with the price of exploitation. If you buy products from overseas you run the risk of supporting that.
Injustice comes in different forms,
not all injustice is caused by war,
but many injustices in the world are caused by discrimination.
It's the reason why many people cannot afford healthcare and often get into debt or bankruptcy over medical bills when Federal assistance programs won't cover their basic needs.
That's plenty of capitalist countries with public welfare. It's not like they're mutually exclusive, capitalism is not against taxation in itself.
Socialism has its problems, but don't pretend that capitalism is inherently altruistic
Never said that. It's individualistic. But socialism is altruistic only on paper because it's founded on the belief that the individual is supposed to contribute to society, not the opposite.
if it wasn't for worker protection legislation private companies would get away with paying working populations a lot less, remember when child labour used to be legal in Europe?
I know, but Europe adopted capitalism waaay before socialism, it was basically born when the first banks were created in Italy in the middle ages. Socialism is useful to correct capitalism, but look at countries who went directly from feudalism to socialism and see how they're doing.
But generally speaking competition and market forces alone aren't enough to stop businesses from doing dodgy things
Nobody claims that, I hope. Capitalism is just an economic system, there's plenty of other things needed to run a society, for example laws. If the US can't stop their capitalists from abusing the law all the time, while other countries can, it's easy to assume that the issue isn't capitalism in itself.
That's plenty of capitalist countries with public welfare. It's not like they're mutually exclusive, capitalism is not against taxation in itself.
Never said that. It's individualistic. But socialism is altruistic only on paper because it's founded on the belief that the individual is supposed to contribute to society, not the opposite.
I know, but Europe adopted capitalism waaay before socialism, it was basically born when the first banks were created in Italy in the middle ages. Socialism is useful to correct capitalism, but look at countries who went directly from feudalism to socialism and see how they're doing.
Nobody claims that, I hope. Capitalism is just an economic system, there's plenty of other things needed to run a society, for example laws. If the US can't stop their capitalists from abusing the law all the time, while other countries can, it's easy to assume that the issue isn't capitalism in itself.
And I am not saying expensive products are free from exploitation, however I was talking in general, if we purchase products from other countries with less regulations being enforced, as far as the general public is concerned there's no telling where it is sourced and it may very well come from a factory or mine where workers are abused and even underage.
But expensive products even from our country can be unethically produced, which is why Apple recently banned the use of leather in their new products, they had to been made aware of how cruel the leather industry is to animals who are skinned, often is the case without even aesthetic not that it makes it any better, just so people can own some luxury item they don't need. This ethical problem exists across a wide range of products too which is why people need to be mindful of which industries they are supporting and to do their research. Point being, onus is on the consumer as much as corporation or business. If people make their voices heard, a company will respond even for the sake of PR, if not out of the goodness of their heart.
Suicides? Really?
I'm glad i only play on private servers since 1.19.
While I have not had any issues with Minecraft's Reporting System, I have seen how fundamentally flawed the Report Feature is for Xbox LIVE Accounts and how Microsoft handles the matter. While the Current Code of Conduct or now Community Standards is a bit vague (Which I prefer the 'to the book version' ), the issue is even telling somebody as simple as to leave you alone in a message in a response to harassment is considered 'retaliation' by the Enforcement Team. They perceive it as you responding to negativity in any way is a retaliatory action which is the wrong mindset to have. If you don't believe me, check out the link above to the older CoC
Quoted from the Older CoC under "If you encounter an obnoxious player:" :
-"Do not retaliate. If you act out, it could be considered harassment."
And it seems due to how vague this actually is, they can (and have in your friend's case AGT) taken a response to tell the wrongdoer to go away as retaliatory, not understanding the context. Basically, if you don't 'Block and Bye' the wrongdoer and you stand your ground even by saying something as simple as "Leave me alone.", it's basically a reportable offense due to being seen as retaliation due to the negativity.
Even though the current Reporting is a bit more Vague on the Community Standards via:
"If you experience or witness inappropriate content and/or behavior, we encourage you to block and mute the content and also to report the player(s) acting inappropriately and/or the piece of content itself. If you report something, Xbox will conduct a review and may issue an enforcement only on the reported item, so ensure you are reporting on the right category (for example, reporting a player’s gamertag triggers a gamertag review only)."
and the Platinum Rule via:
"Show respect - If someone’s uncomfortable with something you say or do, respect that, apologize, and don’t do it again."
The Show Respect part and the Reporting Part contradict each other a bit as it leaves a grey area. If somebody is harassing you, do you tell them to leave you alone first and respect you; or do you 'Block and Bye' them immediately upon the first instance? And since Microsoft has shown their stance on what they consider retaliation to be in the past, it's the second, as if you follow the Platinum Rule, you can be considered retaliating and recieve a suspension for even responding to harassment, and that is the problem. Mixed signals which leaves a grey area of vagueness for Microsoft to hold the wrong person accountable while the wrongdoer gets away either with a slap on the hand or completely, rather than taking a bit of extra time to use context and understand the side of the person who is being harassed.
I mean out of personal experience, I came across a player who randomly joined my Xbox LIVE Party and started making sexually explicit jokes about characters in Halo for basically no reason. I kicked him then Blocked and Byed Him, as did three of my friends. The person then made ten Silver Accounts then sending harassing messages to us four. It took 44 Reports, All four of us Reporting his Gold and his 10 Silver Accounts after 'Blocking and Byeing' him to get Microsoft to issue him a 14 Day Ban on his Gold Account and Permaban on all 10 Silver Accounts. Yet had we told him to leave us alone, we could've ended up with bans instead for 'Retaliating'.
So do I trust Minecraft's Report System? Yes. Do I trust Microsoft's Report System? No.
I would agree that its a horrible framework, for what reason doesn't Mojang simply pass on it to the server proprietors how they need to oversee their server.
I believe it's bad because there are THOSE people that like to abuse stuff. They'll might abuse the chat report feature to the point we'll stop playing the game altogether.
Sincerely,
CommunityKid
I trust individual server administrators to handle this more than Microsoft, given the way they have been known to treat their player base, if something illegal and detrimental to society or individuals is being committed, it is the civic duty of the server admin to report that to the police, if they don't and have full knowledge of it, then they are complicit in the crime which too can get them arrested and prison time.
People do abuse the report feature for more trivial stuff though, such as politics or differences in ideology or opinion, a petty spat between individuals who can't handle that not everyone has to agree with them just because they say so or that they got upset because they misunderstand what another person was saying or meant. If somebody is wrong in what they are saying, such as they make an unscientific claim, then it is up to the person debating them to inform them, if that other person doesn't listen, then move on and don't talk to that person they don't like, there's also a block feature.
Wow, he told ME right.
Sincerely,
CommunityKid
I totally get where you're coming from. Dealing with botched reports and inconsistent moderation can be frustrating and damaging. It's crucial for platforms like Microsoft to take a stand against toxic behavior and uphold their policies consistently. Discrimination and cyberbullying are serious issues, and their impact on mental health can't be ignored. It's essential for them to genuinely address these concerns and provide a safe online environment. It's unfortunate that some platforms fall short of their promises. Your experience highlights the need for better accountability and transparency in handling such issues.
Yes, discrimination and cyber bullying is appalling behaviour and action must be taken to reduce or stop it when necessary, it is a burden on mental health, however by the same token we must also expect fair and just treatment from the powers that be, because they're not immune to making decisions based on someone's opinion, it could either be based on politics or sometimes not.
in the UK it has been recently reported we've had this de-banking scandal over a similar problem, and according to sources like TheTelegraph, it appears bank bosses are now taking issue with phrases like "sanity check" and "black market" being used, which doesn't bode well for them and is a heavy implication that they may deactivate somebody's bank account just for the use of such words which are not used to discriminate against people. "Black market" is used to describe illegal and oftentimes unethical trade, it has nothing to do with ethnicity, most people aren't that oblivious to this fact.
Just imagine if Microsoft went in a similar direction, and then began suspending people's Xbox Live accounts for the exact same ridiculous nonsense like this
I can think of very plausible scenarios where that would be a burden on people's mental health also, what with them not only losing multiplayer access, but also losing access to their DLC's, generally perma bans aren't handed out for things like this, but that doesn't mean that it can't happen, the biggest issue with their TOS is the escalation of suspensions, they escalate regardless of how small or long ago the previous infraction was. They don't treat this issue as reasonably as this forum does, as such, the chat reporting system is now a problem because of that, if their terms of use were amended to allow more leniency on minor infractions, it wouldn't have mattered, but that's not what has happened.
In no context or conversation I had with anyone over the years, has "sanity check" been used to attack people with mental health problems,
chaptmc has mentioned it in conversations with me, mentioning how this is a terminology used to describe fixing a problem with software, that's pretty much in line with what I already know of it, other than it meaning checking whether or not an action taken or argument being made is logical.
Unfortunately experience has taught me, people aren't logical at all and will pick the smallest things in life to fight about,
and I worry this censorship problem on the internet and in commerce is going to get a lot worse before it gets better.
I won't live forever to put up with it, but other people will, future generations will have to deal with the bad decisions of this one, cause and effect.
It's worse now. You can report skins and names starting from 1.20.2
Don't you hate it when you feel used? it's especially bad in this case because we spend money, supporting a company, and when they've decided they have no further use for us, boom, goodbye account, something I worry could happen to either me or friends, I already know somebody who had a 15 day suspension and I've explained what happened in one of the earlier posts. Sadly unless in a verified case of discrimination by a company that does this to you, something which you have sufficient evidence supporting you in a court of law where they have jurisdiction to assist you in that situation, and it does depend on the laws in your country, without this or sufficient documented evidence to show you've been done wrong, we're powerless to do anything about this.
I agree, the world is being built into a digital prison and stuff like this is one of the small steps of doing so.
And this is why I am convinced we are in a dystopia.
It got worse ever since the migration to digital content, because now the downloads are gated behind a person's access to their account and regardless of the reason somebody else may end up hacked or banned, if an appeal doesn't resolve the situation and if it is permanent, players lose access to potentially thousands of USD or pound Sterling worth of online content. It probably wouldn't be anywhere near as detrimental if say bans only affected multiplayer access, which make sense if somebody is caught cheating in a competitive online multiplayer game, or at the very least disable or reset achievements in the case of online games with less strict policies on cheating with perhaps a temporary suspension or formal warning in email.
But unless somebody is going out of their way to tamper with a server while doing this I cannot say it the punishment fits the crime when a person's entire digital library had been sanctioned, just for a breach of the fair play rules that only applied to one video game. If somebody got caught pirating a game, then charge them for it, if they don't pay up, then disable their access to that game and its multiplayer server, problem solved.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumOf course any moderation that doesn't rely on the consensus of the people strictly involved in the incident is never going to work. But that's beyond the point of these changes.
It's not about moderation. It's about cleaning a brand they paid billions for. They keep releasing MC-branded content obviously aimed at children, with the possible goal of controlling the most profitable preadolescent franchise since Pokemon, maybe earning them as future customers of MS products, and nothing threatens a plan like that like having some big media outlet report of someone swearing, promoting unwanted political content, or worse, on a server where children can go.
You don't own a game. You rented a service that can be denied at any time by their real owners if that makes them profit. Welcome to the 21st century, guys.
One of the many problems of capitalism. We're told we have more freedom and justice under it but the reality is for many people that simply isn't the case. Any commercial good or service can be denied purely by the discretion of private property owners, and they have free reign to make up any policy they want, no matter how petty or nonsensical it may be, it can be something that has absolutely nothing to do with law breaking. Like you said, if it affects their profits or PR/popularity to the general population or a select group of influential people, they will make policies based upon that, just like they already had done.
Also they are not really obliged to carry out their moderation of gaming platforms fairly, if they were, we wouldn't still be having this discussion. In most instances we cannot even sue them when something goes wrong, even when we know for a fact a friend or somebody else we know has been treated unfairly by a deliberately malicious report.
It's not like false and malicious reports against the DWP in the UK, where people can be prosecuted for intentionally wasting investigation teams time and for trying to have severely ill or vulnerable people's social security taken off them.
Private entities very rarely have this same level of accountability, as they're not a democratic institution.
Yes, sometimes regulations can be used to punish them for ruining someone's life, but even then they often find ways around the legal system,
it's very hard to have anything done about them.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumI didn't really mean to make a political comment, but let's go.
It isn't just because of capitalism.
I live in Italy, one of those rare countries where capitalism and socialism were made to coexist on purpose (they called it "the third way" back in the days). You didn't see much corporative 🐂💩 here before US-based corporations began to stomp their way into our economy, but man, you might have no idea of the level of corruption, ineptitude, inefficiency, and criminality that was and is still allowed by the socialist mindset, with the largest industries controlled by politicians i.e. shady people who can afford to corrupt them. Hello shitty jobs with high taxation. Need something basic that the law grants you? Find a politician to beg or forget about it.
And yet we still had capitalism, but in a very different form than US capitalism: a huge network of small companies that still managed to keep our country in the world top 8 economies. Just a few miles of sea away, Albania experienced no capitalism and is still one of the most underdeveloped countries in Europe.
There's lot of examples where capitalism meant a better life, and lot of examples of lack of capitalism leading to poverty. The problem with US capitalism is not capitalism, is the american mindset: get big, or die trying. And 🖕 everybody else.
You know why the USA never really had mafia? Because they don't need it. Like Japan, they just made it legal and forget about it. But don't blame it on an the generic economic theory that people should be free to have their business and protect their property, it's a little unfair.
But you see, the get rich or die trying attitude some Americans have is magnified by the issue of (laisez-faire) capitalism. It's the reason why many people cannot afford healthcare and often get into debt or bankruptcy over medical bills when Federal assistance programs won't cover their basic needs. Socialism has its problems, but don't pretend that capitalism is inherently altruistic, it isn't and that's why we need laws and regulations to hold private individuals accountable for wrongdoing, if it wasn't for worker protection legislation private companies would get away with paying working populations a lot less, remember when child labour used to be legal in Europe?. We'd have less homelessness if landlords weren't allowed to price gouge their tenants. Also certain kinds of industrial activity is causing alarming amounts of pollution that future generations will be forced to adapt to when we're gone, and loss of our rainforests, some of it is down to overpopulation as well which is more down to human irresponsibility than anything else. But generally speaking competition and market forces alone aren't enough to stop businesses from doing dodgy things, it may make some products cheaper, but it often comes with the price of exploitation. If you buy products from overseas you run the risk of supporting that.
Injustice comes in different forms,
not all injustice is caused by war,
but many injustices in the world are caused by discrimination.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumThat's plenty of capitalist countries with public welfare. It's not like they're mutually exclusive, capitalism is not against taxation in itself.
Never said that. It's individualistic. But socialism is altruistic only on paper because it's founded on the belief that the individual is supposed to contribute to society, not the opposite.
I know, but Europe adopted capitalism waaay before socialism, it was basically born when the first banks were created in Italy in the middle ages. Socialism is useful to correct capitalism, but look at countries who went directly from feudalism to socialism and see how they're doing.
Nobody claims that, I hope. Capitalism is just an economic system, there's plenty of other things needed to run a society, for example laws. If the US can't stop their capitalists from abusing the law all the time, while other countries can, it's easy to assume that the issue isn't capitalism in itself.
And I am not saying expensive products are free from exploitation, however I was talking in general, if we purchase products from other countries with less regulations being enforced, as far as the general public is concerned there's no telling where it is sourced and it may very well come from a factory or mine where workers are abused and even underage.
But expensive products even from our country can be unethically produced, which is why Apple recently banned the use of leather in their new products, they had to been made aware of how cruel the leather industry is to animals who are skinned, often is the case without even aesthetic not that it makes it any better, just so people can own some luxury item they don't need. This ethical problem exists across a wide range of products too which is why people need to be mindful of which industries they are supporting and to do their research. Point being, onus is on the consumer as much as corporation or business. If people make their voices heard, a company will respond even for the sake of PR, if not out of the goodness of their heart.