i havent seen anyone propping him up. but i do see people in this thread saying he is guilty and doing some olympic level mental gymnastic to explain why laws should be ignored.
2 Likes
To signal their great virtue
By not dropping him at the first sign of trouble, Blizzard hurts itself. It’s practical.
I just want to know the functional difference in declaring him innocent from declaring him guilty. There’s an obvious lack of objectivity when one goes to immediately assert innocense alongside an unsubtle conspicary theory.
Because, that’s how western courts work. You are functionally innocent until you are proven guilty in a court of law. Blizzard dropped him not for practical reasons but because, like many other morons, they have to signal great virtue all the time. On stage at blizzcon they’re all ‘don’t get political on our platforms’ while Brack wore a pride pin, on stage, telling others not to be poilitical, because even when they’re condemning any topic deemed unsanitary, they still need to virtue signal.
Human rights are only controversial to those that oppose them. 
1 Like
Oh look, you’re one of those people, that like to MISS THE POINT BEING MADE.
1 Like
That any point can be dismissed as virtue signalling to invalidate any argument in stubborn refusal, yes.
No, it’s foolish to hold onto a person accused of sexual abuse for any length of time, so Blizzard severs contact. This is sensible, not a conspiracy.
1 Like
Cool, you keep missing those points lil buddy. You’ve got a narrative to stick to and I’d hate to interupt it.
2 Likes
It must be exhausting to see a conspiracy in all things.
because the burden of proof is on the accuser not the accused. this is literally how almost every single court system in the world works. But i dont expect a marxist such as yourself to understand.
Funny you mention human rights because this is literally one of them and your trying to take it away.
As for the functional difference when you are guilty you lose certain rights, when you are innocent you retain those rights.
The point is the functional difference of asserting innocense when no such thing is proven. Neither guilt nor innocense is proven, so the objective stance is to investigate. Yet those declaring him innocent are quick to assert such as proof and accusations as a conspiracy against him trying to ruin him. The burden of proof is on them to prove he’s being sabotaged if they want to hold onto that claim.
And there’s the conspiracy thinking.
Fans declaring you innocent before trial is not a human right, people choose to be offended by pride pins.
My point stands tall and proud, casting a long shadow; blizzard is doing self harm by not dropping the accused while controversy persists
2 Likes
2 Likes
I would say they have to ban you, till we sort it out.
5 Likes
its not a conspiracy if you yourself are bashing on capitalism. and show me these people declaring him innocent because i have yet to see any. all i see is people saying we should ignore laws and just jail people based on accusations like yourself.
and your wrong. it is a fundamental right that you are innocent until proven guilty. The UN even says this is a human right.
and there you go again claiming everyone is saying he innocent, show me some examples because i dont see any. and what does a pride pin have to do with this? its literally not even related. your point is moot because your basing it off your own personal bias.
i dont care if blizzard removes the npc or not. but people like you arguing against fundamental human rights is a serious concern
No it looks like we do because we go innocent until PROVEN guilty.
Why do YOU assume Guilty until proven innocent?
If the trail say he is guilty at least for me I will support that but I do not support witch hunts like you do.
We live in 2020 not the 1450s why do you act like people did around 1450s?
1 Like
Whatever my politics may be, capitalist practicality makes dumping swifty immediately a high priority to dodge controversy. Simple.
I never said so, but okay. I see plenty of posts screeching that men are being destroyed and that metoo is a conspiracy.
I advocate for objectivity, so I’m equally confused by both crowds asserting either guilt or innocense.
Not in the sense people are using it in these threads. Not (yet) being proven guilty is the legal default and a prosecutorial case must be made against it. You’re not automatically deemed “innocent” as you are under suspicion. Innocense comes from uncontested evidence to the contrary of guilt, hence you can be judged innocent, not guilty or guilty in the end.
Most are just blindly invoking legalese to assert complete innocense without a trial, and that is utterly incorrect.
I do not. Read my posts better. I’m not doing a witch hunt, I am not asserting either guilt nor innocense, I’m waiting for answers and express understanding for Blizzard’s financial decision to avoid controversy. To that plain calculation, swifty is not worth it to anyone.
Please. Besides his npc no one was banned.
1 Like
But you are assuming I am assering he is innocent when I want the people that deal with guilt or innocence to do there job then we can judge.
You are assering that people who are blamed for something is guilty until proven innocent.
Then we agree, so what’s the issue?
Incorrect. I assert that people are using “innocent until proven guilty” in a way that doesn’t reflect its actual legal use, all to assert swifty did nothing wrong for their own cause.
1 Like
Yo i accuse u all of “insert any sexual assault”. Nobody cares what u have to say, believe me plz i dont lie!
Cya in prison
/sarcasm off