Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Jagex Permanently Bans Twitch Streamer for Telling a Suicidal Person to Kill Themselves on Air

145791015

Comments

  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    Asm0deus said:
    ...snip...

    Just leave this here.

    https://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-teen-texting-suicide-20170803-story.html

    15 months jail for telling boyfriend to kill himself in texts. 
    Again, IF a law was broken then that should be prosecuted.  That person “ had sent numerous text messages telling Roy to "just do it" and was on the cellphone with him during the suicide, at one point ordering him back into the truck when he got cold feet and exited to gasp for air.” I do not even think it’s in the same ballpark as this case, but that is why we have an actual justice system and not mob rule.  Facts matter.

    What you are saying is a little silly here now.

    You say if a law was broken then he should be prosecuted so I gather you agree we should follow the rule of law yet you want to deny the companies right, as allowed by rule of law, to protect itself as the terms you agreed to when signing up to play their game gives them.




    The Rule of Law

    The end of the law is, not to abolish or restrain, but to pre­serve and enlarge freedom. For in all the states of created beings capable of laws, where there is no law there is no freedom. For liberty is to be free from restraint and violence from others; which cannot be where there is no law; and is not, as we are told, a liberty for every man to do what he lists (For who could be free when every other man’s humor might domineer over him?) But a liberty to dispose, and order as he lists, his person, actions, possessions, and his whole property, within the allowance of those laws under which he is, and therein not to be the subject of the arbitrary will of another, but freely follow his own.

    JOHN LOCKE, Second Treatise
    EULA's are not laws, they are a contract you enter into within the terms of you using their game, being in breach of which can lose your access to said game.

    As for the rest, no law was broken as the event in essence, never actually took place. By now everyone should be aware that the guy never told the woman to commit suicide, he just made it appear as if he had to the people he was streaming to, no doubt to try and shock/entertain his viewers, not so much of a douche as i previously thought, more just a foolish idiot. Of course if we were to ban all such people like that from Twitch there wouldn't be any Twitch streamers, the joke was in poor taste, but as such its likely not even contravening Twitch terms of agreement. 
    As usual fake story used to stir up negative opinions, seeing that far too much lately, especially after the infamous covington incident, where a fake story is used to ostracize the innocent.
    Gdemami
  • lahnmirlahnmir Member LegendaryPosts: 5,050
    Phry said:
    Xasapis said:
    And since anybody can stream, they must police their entire playerbase?

    That comes in Phase 2 when everyone is issued a SocialScore and companies are expected to only serve those with a certain number.   Ironically there is an episode of the very liberal show The Orville which demonstrates this future the best: http://orville.wikia.com/wiki/Majority_Rule?quot%3B=undefined&quot%3BMajority_Rule=undefined

    A more dystopian future i couldn't imagine, though these days i think some have taken the book 1984 as a reference point, rather than a warning. :/
    Yet not only are we heading there.  We seem to be eager to get there.
    Lets not pretend we are talking about real freedom here please, we are talking about one sided freedom where someone is given the freedom to act like a douche online for no proper reason. Jagex however isn’t allowed the freedom to ban someone they feel is negatively affecting their property.....

     But hey, we’re not to judge right? If someone did something wrong that can be decided in court, that goes for Jagex too, so lets stop criticising them.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    Asm0deus
    'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'

    Kyleran on yours sincerely 


    'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'

    Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...



    'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless. 

    It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.

    It is just huge resource waste....'

    Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer

  • Asm0deusAsm0deus Member EpicPosts: 4,600
    edited January 2019
    Again. I think some clarity is needed.  If this person had done something wrong IN GAME a TOS might come in to play.  I notice nobody ever responded to the earlier post where the person asked why not have the phone company cut his service since he actually used the phone? Why not the power company shut him down since he used power for his computer?

    Maybe he should get evicted! After all. You sign a lease and that land lord might not want to be associated with him.

    Heck, maybe every food company and grocery store should deny him service so he can just shrivel up and die. Why should they have to transact with someone with such a low social score? Just seeing him go into their establishment might associate them with him!

    Not because he broke any law, but because he was acting like an ass. And that is what you are missing from your John Locke snippet.  Laws are in fact needed, just as Locke states. If you want to make what this guy did illegal.  Go for it.  That’s a different discussion.
    Again being silly, there no way for us to easily correlate which phone company he is using or who provides his electricity, those companies are in no danger financial or otherwise.

    He WAS however streaming runscape which you can argue his action while streaming can color peoples perception of the company.

    Go reread the John Locke quote Slapshot and try to understand it better because I don't think it mean what you think it means.

    But a liberty to dispose, and order as he lists, his person, actions, possessions, and his whole property, within the allowance of those laws under which he is, and therein not to be the subject of the arbitrary will of another, but freely follow his own.

    The streamer has the right to act the fool but likewise the company has the right to protect or dispose how it will its own property with the allowance of the law....which you guys seem keen on taking away from said company.

    You guys are so keen on protecting "freedom and liberty" you are failing to see you are trying to deny the very same you are supposedly arguing for from another.

    Phry contracts are bound by the rule of law.  If the streamer has an issues he can use the courts of law to protest his ban.




    Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.





  • mmoloummolou Member UncommonPosts: 256
    edited January 2019
    Again. I think some clarity is needed.  If this person had done something wrong IN GAME a TOS might come in to play.  I notice nobody ever responded to the earlier post where the person asked why not have the phone company cut his service since he actually used the phone? Why not the power company shut him down since he used power for his computer?

    Maybe he should get evicted! After all. You sign a lease and that land lord might not want to be associated with him.

    Heck, maybe every food company and grocery store should deny him service so he can just shrivel up and die. Why should they have to transact with someone with such a low social score? Just seeing him go into their establishment might associate them with him!

    Not because he broke any law, but because he was acting like an ass. And that is what you are missing from your John Locke snippet.  Laws are in fact needed, just as Locke states. If you want to make what this guy did illegal.  Go for it.  That’s a different discussion.
    According to Jagex, he broke the ToS and/or the EULA, so they have banned him.

    Nothing more, nothing less.

    What he did is irrelevant. Shitty thing to do, but still irrelevant.

    If a games company decides to act on the part of their ToS/EULA that allows them to deny access to their game, because of something a player does, that is their right.

    If you do not like it, do not agree to the ToS or the EULA, and do not play that game.
    Gdemami
    It is a funny world we live in.
    We had Empires run by Emperors, we had Kingdoms run by Kings, now we have Countries...
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 17,590
    Here's another example:



    This is a writer for SNL.  I seriously doubt she meant it.  Just like the ass in the OP didn't really mean the girl should kill herself.  She also deleted it. Should twitter ban her?  Should she lose her job?  Should all the 1370 people that "liked" this post get banned?  There are people screaming for exactly that.

    It's all this outrage mentality... on both sides. 


    GdemamiScotty787

    All time classic  MY NEW FAVORITE POST!  (Keep laying those bricks)

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    lahnmir said:
    Phry said:
    Xasapis said:
    And since anybody can stream, they must police their entire playerbase?

    That comes in Phase 2 when everyone is issued a SocialScore and companies are expected to only serve those with a certain number.   Ironically there is an episode of the very liberal show The Orville which demonstrates this future the best: http://orville.wikia.com/wiki/Majority_Rule?quot%3B=undefined&quot%3BMajority_Rule=undefined

    A more dystopian future i couldn't imagine, though these days i think some have taken the book 1984 as a reference point, rather than a warning. :/
    Yet not only are we heading there.  We seem to be eager to get there.
    Lets not pretend we are talking about real freedom here please, we are talking about one sided freedom where someone is given the freedom to act like a douche online for no proper reason. Jagex however isn’t allowed the freedom to ban someone they feel is negatively affecting their property.....

     But hey, we’re not to judge right? If someone did something wrong that can be decided in court, that goes for Jagex too, so lets stop criticising them.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    Fine, however, you have mentioned Jagex several times now and there may be some negative implications, so on that basis, you are okay with your Runescape account being banned?
  • lahnmirlahnmir Member LegendaryPosts: 5,050
    Phry said:
    lahnmir said:
    Phry said:
    Xasapis said:
    And since anybody can stream, they must police their entire playerbase?

    That comes in Phase 2 when everyone is issued a SocialScore and companies are expected to only serve those with a certain number.   Ironically there is an episode of the very liberal show The Orville which demonstrates this future the best: http://orville.wikia.com/wiki/Majority_Rule?quot%3B=undefined&quot%3BMajority_Rule=undefined

    A more dystopian future i couldn't imagine, though these days i think some have taken the book 1984 as a reference point, rather than a warning. :/
    Yet not only are we heading there.  We seem to be eager to get there.
    Lets not pretend we are talking about real freedom here please, we are talking about one sided freedom where someone is given the freedom to act like a douche online for no proper reason. Jagex however isn’t allowed the freedom to ban someone they feel is negatively affecting their property.....

     But hey, we’re not to judge right? If someone did something wrong that can be decided in court, that goes for Jagex too, so lets stop criticising them.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    Fine, however, you have mentioned Jagex several times now and there may be some negative implications, so on that basis, you are okay with your Runescape account being banned?
    That depends, did I display unacceptable behavior while doing so? If yes, then I guess they could.

    Look, I am all for freedom, but we can not give that freedom to a single kid but don’t want ‘them evil companies’ to have it too.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'

    Kyleran on yours sincerely 


    'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'

    Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...



    'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless. 

    It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.

    It is just huge resource waste....'

    Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer

  • newbismxnewbismx Member UncommonPosts: 276
    Amathe said:
    I came across a crowd once gathered in front of a multi-story building. An old woman had crawled out  on her window ledge and was contemplating suicide. Some people were yelling for her to jump. I was horrified. Luckily the police reached her in time. 
    Yeah man- good thing the police got there with their telepathic powers in order to stop the jumper who really was going to do it until the police arrived...or something.


  • Asm0deusAsm0deus Member EpicPosts: 4,600
    Here's another example:



    This is a writer for SNL.  I seriously doubt she meant it.  Just like the ass in the OP didn't really mean the girl should kill herself.  She also deleted it. Should twitter ban her?  Should she lose her job?  Should all the 1370 people that "liked" this post get banned?  There are people screaming for exactly that.

    It's all this outrage mentality... on both sides. 


    Indeed maybe you should stop being outraged because a company banned some idiot from their game.

    Furthermore maybe you should stop claiming it's somehow a slipper slope leading to the loss of our freedom or unalienable right which will lead to a dystopian future...lol

    It reminds me of people back in the day saying DnD was devil worship and all the do00omm about the game from people.


    ForgrimmGdemami

    Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.





  • ForgrimmForgrimm Member EpicPosts: 3,069
    Here's another example:



    This is a writer for SNL.  I seriously doubt she meant it.  Just like the ass in the OP didn't really mean the girl should kill herself.  She also deleted it. Should twitter ban her?  Should she lose her job?  Should all the 1370 people that "liked" this post get banned?  There are people screaming for exactly that.

    It's all this outrage mentality... on both sides. 


    If Twitter wanted to ban her for that they could, and they would be well within their right to do so.

    We may suspend or terminate your account or cease providing you with all or part of the Services at any time for any or no reason.

    It's not like she said it in a text message or a private conversation with a friend. She broadcasted it for the whole world to see. That's the issue we're seeing more and more with the rise of social media and web 2.0; people broadcasting their stupidity for the whole world to see and then getting upset when they realize that their actions have consequences.
    Asm0deusmmolou[Deleted User]
  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 8,164
    edited January 2019
    If he thinks he has been banned unjustly why doesn't he appeal the ban then? That's the right avenue isn't it. Asking them to reconsider afterall its Jagex's right to decide in the end.

    There's no slippery slope here because he has avenues of appeal. 
    mmolouAsm0deusGdemami

  • Asm0deusAsm0deus Member EpicPosts: 4,600
    edited January 2019
    Forgrimm said:
    Here's another example:



    This is a writer for SNL.  I seriously doubt she meant it.  Just like the ass in the OP didn't really mean the girl should kill herself.  She also deleted it. Should twitter ban her?  Should she lose her job?  Should all the 1370 people that "liked" this post get banned?  There are people screaming for exactly that.

    It's all this outrage mentality... on both sides. 


    If Twitter wanted to ban her for that they could, and they would be well within their right to do so.

    We may suspend or terminate your account or cease providing you with all or part of the Services at any time for any or no reason.

    It's not like she said it in a text message or a private conversation with a friend. She broadcasted it for the whole world to see. That's the issue we're seeing more and more with the rise of social media and web 2.0; people broadcasting their stupidity for the whole world to see and then getting upset when they realize that their actions have consequences.
    Indeed it's far harder to get away from/avoid the consequences of your actions nowadays due to cameras everywhere and people posting shit in public venues or public social media. 

    Which leads to us seeing more and more people being held accountable which some people are somehow mistaking as a loss of liberty.
    mmoloukitaradForgrimm

    Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.





  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Here is an example to chew on.  Just a day or so ago a CNN contributor tweeted that a 16 year old should be punched in the face.  This is clearly wrong.  More facts came out related to the incident which made it not quite so clear who was in the wrong.  The contributor, realizing his mistake... deleted his tweet.


    https://mobile.twitter.com/sshotbot/status/1087200950635266048


    Twitter, according to these same arguments as JagEx and Twitch should ban the contributor and also CNN. But I will wager a huge portion of the people in this thread will jump through every hoop to find reasons to excuse it in this case.

    No... that is not the way it works.   Was this guy also an ass?  Absolutely, you do not call for violence against a kid.  Ever.  Should he be banned from Twitter?  NO.  Should CNN be banned? Absolutely NO.

    This rush to ban/censor by all sides needs to stop.  If someone breaks a law, they should be prosecuted. If what they do is not illegal, folks need to think long and hard about jumping to judgement.
    CNN firing the reporter is more apropos to this situation than Twitter banning CNN.

    Jagex didn't ban streaming in general because of one bad actor.  They banned the bad actor.

    There's scientific evidence that allowing dangerously ignorant groupthink to fester emboldens dangerous action.  It's not guesswork anymore.

    Regardless, the guy brought bad publicity to Jagex's product, one he had no actual right to, as @Asm0deus implied with his posts.  Jagex likely could've banned the kid because they disliked his haircut and I doubt the kid would have much legal recourse.  It would just reflect poorly on Jagex as a company with regards to consumer relations.


    You have every right to hold this against Jagex and boycott their products if you find it's a terrible practice.  But Jagex had every right to ban this kid.
    mmolou[Deleted User]Asm0deusForgrimm

    image
  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 8,164
    Asm0deus said:
    Forgrimm said:
    Here's another example:



    This is a writer for SNL.  I seriously doubt she meant it.  Just like the ass in the OP didn't really mean the girl should kill herself.  She also deleted it. Should twitter ban her?  Should she lose her job?  Should all the 1370 people that "liked" this post get banned?  There are people screaming for exactly that.

    It's all this outrage mentality... on both sides. 


    If Twitter wanted to ban her for that they could, and they would be well within their right to do so.

    We may suspend or terminate your account or cease providing you with all or part of the Services at any time for any or no reason.

    It's not like she said it in a text message or a private conversation with a friend. She broadcasted it for the whole world to see. That's the issue we're seeing more and more with the rise of social media and web 2.0; people broadcasting their stupidity for the whole world to see and then getting upset when they realize that their actions have consequences.
    Indeed it's far harder to get away from/avoid the consequences of your actions nowadays due to cameras everywhere and people posting shit in public venues or public social media. 

    Which leads to us seeing more and more people being held accountable which some people are somehow mistaking as a loss of liberty.
    Yes people are getting upset that their shitty behaviour is getting exposed and is falsely claiming their freedom is being impugned.
    [Deleted User]Asm0deusSovrath

  • InteritusInteritus Member UncommonPosts: 236

    SBFord said:


    Aeander said:

    As someone with a friend who has survived multiple suicide attempts, I don't think words can be a sufficient apology for this streamer's actions.

    The very least that might help redeem him for these actions would be donations to suicide prevention charities.


    If you looked over the main article, he did make a donation of $200 to a prevention charity, so at least there's that.



    If these screenshots from his apology are to be believed, he was bringing in $70 and hour. Meaning a $200 donation was a few hours of gaming. Big sacrifice.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DxcwW8bXcAEJDWt.jpg
  • KlikaeKlikae Member CommonPosts: 5
    oh look its under runescape.. im not surprise lmao
  • SBFordSBFord Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
    @parrotpholk Don't bring in hot-topic groups and politics please. The thread's stayed largely clear of it, so let's keep it that way in order to keep it open. 
    Slapshot1188Panther2103


    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 


  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 17,590
    SBFord said:
    @parrotpholk Don't bring in hot-topic groups and politics please. The thread's stayed largely clear of it, so let's keep it that way in order to keep it open. 
    Yeah... I think by this point folks understand my position.  So before we get further afield I shall bow out to allow the discussion to continue because it causes me physical pain when discussions are closed :smile:


    SBFord

    All time classic  MY NEW FAVORITE POST!  (Keep laying those bricks)

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • kryntokkryntok Member UncommonPosts: 77
    Not cool at all, *sigh* I just wish everyone could lift people up, it all goes back to the golden rule we learned in kindergarten. "Treat others how you would like to be treated" Thank goodness that for every one of them, there are 1000's more ready to offer a shoulder.
    SBFord
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    WBadger said:
    https://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/leadcause.html  CDC application for 2017 (CDC hasn't updated for 2018 yet.)  It's actually been bumped up to the number 2 leading cause between 10-14 and 25-34.

    https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/suicide.shtml National Institute for Mental Health's page on suicide for more info on the stats.
    Thanks.

    Interesting data, albeit nothing to be concerned about.
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    MisterZebub said:
    The fact of the matter is the guy has been banned and these companies don't give one wet fart about how any of us feel about it. 
    ...one would guess that was the primary reason for the ban - they care how people feel since it does affect their business. 

    But hey, don't let common sense stand in your way!
    [Deleted User]SovrathForgrimm
  • lahnmirlahnmir Member LegendaryPosts: 5,050
    Gdemami said:
    MisterZebub said:
    The fact of the matter is the guy has been banned and these companies don't give one wet fart about how any of us feel about it. 
    ...one would guess that was the primary reason for the ban - they care how people feel since it does affect their business. 

    But hey, don't let common sense stand in your way!
    You know what @Gdemami Although I don’t agree with you it is nice to see you posting more actively instead of just silently LOLing away. I see it in this and other threads, much appreciated.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'

    Kyleran on yours sincerely 


    'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'

    Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...



    'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless. 

    It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.

    It is just huge resource waste....'

    Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    lahnmir said:
    it is nice to see you posting more actively instead of just silently LOLing away.
    ...I can can do both.
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 7,591
    Over the years I've stopped doing business with a handful of my customers because I figured they were more of a pain in the ass then they were worth.

    Am I within my rights?
    SBFordLimnicAsm0deusmmolou

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • kryntokkryntok Member UncommonPosts: 77
    edited January 2019

    Xasapis said:


    Wankyudo said:


    Xasapis said:


    Wankyudo said:

    ...



    Did he talk to that girl through the phone or he messaged her through the game? If it's the former, why the phone company did not terminate his subscription. If it's the former, why is the game's TOS relevant?


    He's streaming in the runescape directory with runescape running in the background while he is doing this, thus the user content and content standards policy are applicable.  What the phone company does is completely irrelevant to what happened to his game account or his actions, they have their own standards.  This is completely on Jagex's user content rules, which because he's in that directory he has to uphold or they can terminate his account.


    You are reverting back to my Netflix argument. Either he was acting in the game, which would make the ban justifiable, or he wasn't. 

    Let me put it this way, if there was no stream, would Runescape would be justified in their ban? 





    Game of Thrones is HBO isn't it?
Sign In or Register to comment.