I’m not talking within the law, in fact i’ve made it clear what happened had nothing to do with the law several times. I’m just trying to get you to abandon the “it’s guilty until assumed innocent” you’ve been touting because that invokes legal thinking.
It’s all social actions. You don’t like it. You think “it’s not fair, what grounds do they have to do this? No legal process have proven their guilt!” I accept you think this, you are totally entitled to your opinion and I respect that.
My point is so what? You dislike it- and? Blizzard are totally within their rights to change their game as they see fight and refuse anyone participation in their business for any reason whatsoever, it’s in the TOS, it’s a lynchpin of many modern businesses. They can terminate association with you for any reason they like - that is liberty, that is the price of living in a free country.
So your issue is the liberty of one person is being mildly interrupted but what? Do you deprive others of their liberty to behave as they like (totally legally i might add) because of this?
I’m not saying false accusations are fine. They’re not. The law punishes them after all, and people become pariahs if they’re caught in doing so. I just don’t understand your point with this, you can’t prevent a business operating as they like totally legally. You’re consuming liberty to recover liberty, it makes no sense.
And kindly stop with the “from my safe secure little life” garbage. You know absolutely nothing of my life. I work in a public sector where the risk of suspension for false accusations is impressively high and as a male individual as well in a female dominated arena. I have seen a few colleagues over the years get suspended for such accusations, and two were vindicated thereafter and the accusers promptly expelled, and in the other case the individual was found to be doing what he was accused of whilst in access to a position where he would have had countless opportunity to keep doing so whilst the investigation (which took over 6 months) was underway.
Honestly it’s rich to call others “safe and secure” when you’re arguing about the inconvenience of no longer being quite as big an internet star as you thought is your biggest bugbear. Are you actually serious? How many people here asked who this individual was? Quite a few. So you think these actions are going to impact them in the “real world” how exactly?
I’d love to have a life where my principal worry was over how e-liked I am. Unfortunatley mine involves having to carefully manage all my interactions and keep meticulous records so I avoid risks to my reputation in a very real way. But you know what, I understand why, because the position I work should not be one where risks to safety should be tolerated in any way shape or form because of the trust involved.
Lol. Trying to act like I’m just doing the whole good will hunting thing huh?
That’s not what I was doing.
Here you are, on an online forum for a video game telling me it’s justified that unproven accusations can ruin someones life while you’re not going through the same thing.
What are you even going on about now?
This has nothing to do with online fame. This is about a humans life being ruined over unproven accusations.
Are you really that insensitive and dehumanizing him just because hes an online figure?
I’m not arguing for Swifty or trying to be his lawyer. I am arguing about the precedent this sets. The whole ideology of cancel culture is sickening.
The people who made accusations even used those words.
“We should immediately cancel these people”.
I’m not insensitive to his needs, i’m placing the inconvenience of having your e-persona temporarily dented against the risks of individuals being assaulted if you just do nothing whilst investigations are underway.
You are so focused on the accused you appear to operate in a world where they could not possibly ever actually be guilty of what they are accused of. Have you spared any thought for the individual victims in such a case where the individual is guilty and them knowing said individual is continuing to do what they’ve been accused of? No. You’re entirely focused on the rights of the accused group. What about the rights of those on the other side?
It might not be fair but is fairness worth the risk of allowing a potential raft of victims or criminal actions to occur whilst an individual is under investigation? Simply because putting some sanctions on them is unfair? How is that fair on any of the victims in the meantime when the risk is suspected?
Ultimatley you’re saying i’m being cold for not recognising the situation of the accused, and i’m saying you’re being completely nonchalant about the potential victims in a situation where someone is guilty is what they’re accused of. We don’t live in a perfect world where you can determine guilt quickly or not. Supporting the principle of fairness over exposing people to potential risk is just something I don’t agree with, because what of the fairness to them? It is irresponsible to completely ignore a risk in my opinion.
Let’s say i’ve been accused of a serious of assaults that involved me spiking drinks from more than one source. Would you let me be the drink mixer for your teenage daughter’s sleepover whilst i’m being investigated, yes or no? Would you let me operate as a commerical cocktail mixer at a work event of yours where you’re looking to impress (and your guests will have read the news and know about the accusations against me) yes or no?
It wasn’t intended that way, if it came across that way I apologize… I was just explaining why I thought I may know the name, but like others in this thread did not really recognize them.
Online reputation vs risk of actual assault exposure. That’s what i’m saying. I’m not passing judgement on e-persona individually, I just place it lower than someone’s risk of being assaulted. I say e-persona because even here, not everyone knows who this person is. I know a real human has been accused, but how many people realistically know who they really are? I’m not saying it’s nothing, i’m saying you’re making out it’s worse than exposing another individual to assault from this person.
Also; please address the rest of my points like the questions of whether you’d let me bartend your work event and slumber party. Don’t just pick certain parts of my post that make for good soundbytes
It wasn’t.
The guy was being overly sensitive for no reason about calling the video an eye sore or however it was phrased.
They was missing the context of the video. The whole point is it’s supposed to be cringe and bad. It was originally a deleted / hidden video that was found but he leaned into the joke anyway.
Are you going to respond to my direct question of whether you’d hypothetically let me bartend those events mentioned when i’m under investigation for a series of drink-spiked assaults? It’s weird you’ve avoided it twice now.
I imagine you have a job, a workplace, or a group of friends. Imagine it’s me, with this accusation hanging nicely over my head, known in the news. Would you let me bartend for these groups, yes or no?
I wouldn’t read too much into the NPC’s removal as being condemned as guilty. It’s a precaution, and an easily reversible one at that.
If the lad is deemed innocent, there’s no reason to simply add his NPC back.
And if he’s proven to have done whatever he’s accused of, it would be in pretty bad taste to maintain a tribute of him in the game.
Still, I’d rather wait for the truth before making any full condemnations, one way or another.
Assault allegation is a serious one, and should be investigated in a manner that exposes the facts of the matter.
Sorry aswell then, so easy to misinterpret over text!
Galedron not really, since it is hard to tell what people mean to say especially when its a reply to a hateful comment that could easily be misinterpreted. (which is was not and again I am sorry Shammoz)
I’ll be honest, I didn’t avoid them, I didn’t see them.
When your first few sentences are so out of touch of anything remotely human, to degrade someones life as an e-persona and to show such strong bias to just believe the accuser because “It’s better than not believing them” then anything that follows already holds no ground to me and it’s not worth reading.
But I’ll answer that.
If you was a new employee and it happened twice in a week, I’d let you go. I am not saying we disregard common sense.
But if you worked at my bar for 16 years with no issues and then suddenly out of the blue someone accuses you of spiking their drink I would not fire you, nor would I suspend you. I would tell that individual to go through the legal system.
I would even offer all CCTV footage, staff schedules, etc to the authorities to help uncover the truth.
That is what the legal systems are there for.
This is not justice or right, this is mob mentality, torches and pitchforks, demanding blood without proof.
Are you ignorant to what false claims do to peoples lives?
I’m growing tired of this subject. I’ve wasted enough of my afternoon discussing it.
When the tables turn and you’re the one at the end of the spear, I hope you simply accept whats coming, you would be a hypocrite if you try and defend yourself outside of the court room.
Well thank you for answering if you did indeed miss them. A tad unnecessary to throw the comments about the rest of my post, i’ve not done you a similar disservice but it is what it is.
My point stands - you see it as reasonable to issue sanctions under certain circumstances, therefore apply the same grace to blizzard. The individual is not a “trusted employee” of blizzard, they have nowhere near the kind of information about their personal life and general conduct as a manager would in a work situation, so i’d argue that’s a false equivalence.
But you’re right, this discussion is getting us nowhere, thank you for discussing it all the same, even if we disagree. Have a pleasant evening.
Is it because you know this streamer? Why are you taking a side? Why don’t you and captain hypocrite not care at all about the lives of the girls (minors at that!)? You can’t simply ignore it.
If you’re saying his life is ruined, but you’re taking a side here, that’s a problem. Because of this mindset victims often don’t say anything. How could a victim even accuse anyone with your standard?
I don’t know this guy, I don’t say he did anything. I’m also not the biggest fan of Blizzards anymore, but in this case their hands were forced (not even talking about the NPC).
Which is something I refuse to take part in, which is why I’ll refrain from making a definitive judgement one way or another, though I cannot fix the world around me in that regard.
If Swifty is proven innocent, then he’d be the victim of an attack (of some sort at least), and the ideal would be that the victim find justice, whoever it may be.
But the world is unjust, people will jump to conclusions, and there will always be people who hurt others, be it through false accusations or assault, and neither side should have to suffer with no way to find said justice.
I don’t like ‘cancel culture’ or whatever it’s called, but I also wouldn’t want to see legitimate abuse cases get buried and forgotten.
I don’t know him personally. I don’t know what goes on in his personal life, I simply enjoyed his content a few years ago.
If the girl had issues she has to sort it out with him or get the authorities involved if he really was abusive and there is evidence to prove it, otherwise, if it’s just her word against him, I will stand with him.
I’m sorry I don’t try to offend ANYONE with this but just something in general about the relationships these days is so off.
We need Jesus, or green Jesus in the context of Wow, where is Chris?