Streamer Banned because Lead Dev has Double Standards?

[Bloody Bubba]

https://youtu.be/mQ-5ZE7T8-0?si=BlzlOHhhb9LOM-dX

[Quineloe]

Watched two minutes, still no idea what he got banned for, lost interest.

Get to the point or move on.

[Myth Alric]

They kicked Baron out because he was spamming the channel, and being disruptive to the community. He was upset and throwing a tantrum over it, which is neither productive or helpful to the community. He forced their hand, and they had to ban him.

What Psycho did was wrong, but what should they do? What control does Phas have over what random streamers do? They could ban him from the channel but what is the point of that? Just to be vindictive? They asked him to stop, he stopped, problem over. They have no real control to do anything else.

Baron could of ranted and raved all he wanted on his own channel, and nothing likely would of happened. He could of used the exploit and nothing would of happened. He got banned for spamming their channel.

[Shurenai]

Originally posted by Myth Alric:

They kicked Baron out because he was spamming the channel, and being disruptive to the community. He was upset and throwing a tantrum over it, which is neither productive or helpful to the community. He forced their hand, and they had to ban him.

What Psycho did was wrong, but what should they do? What control does Phas have over what random streamers do? They could ban him from the channel but what is the point of that? Just to be vindictive? They asked him to stop, he stopped, problem over. They have no real control to do anything else.

Baron could of ranted and raved all he wanted on his own channel, and nothing likely would of happened. He could of used the exploit and nothing would of happened. He got banned for spamming their channel.

Psycho abused their trust for months and doesnt even get a verbal slap on the wrist- Just a "He wont do it again, right psycho my buddy my pal?"

Psycho absolutely SHOULD be removed from the content creators, Or be punished in literally any way, Because he abused the privileged information he was entrusted with. But he wont, Because he's buddy buddy with the devs. So he wont get in trouble, He probably will continue to just keep making videos early and then have them primed to go up an hour before hand or maybe right on time or maybe 20 minutes after because, as you say, Noone can stop him and even if the devs wanted to, which they clearly have no interest in doing so, they couldnt anyway.

This is "You did bad for 8 months abusing our trust and exploiting the mechanics of our game, But you're good to go buddy" vs "You caused some trouble for 5 minutes for a pretty legitimate reason, get the ♥♥♥♥ out you're no longer one of our content creators and permabanned from the server".

This is favoritism.

[Myth Alric]

He wasn't given privileged information. He either found the exploit himself or found it online. He asked to use it and they said okay, but isn't like they could of stopped him anyway. Him voluntarily agreeing to stop using it, is the best outcome for them, seeing as they have no power to stop him. It doesn't make sense for Phas to try and ban everyone who uses that exploit. If you watched the video, then you know how it works, and you know it is completely ridiculous for the Devs to try to ban players who do it.

So as you said yourself, no one can stop him from doing it, so him agreeing to not do it on his own accord is in their best interest. Baron on the other hand is trying to damage the community and the game. There is no reason to welcome him when he is utterly uninterested in working things out or having a rational conversation. He tried to burn everything around him so got kicked out.

It just shows that having a calm rational conversation gets you better results than throwing a tantrum and trying to flame people.

[Switorik]

I don't care about streamers but the ban was wrong.

There is obvious favoritism being shown and the only way to make dk show his cards was to do what beardboy did. Otherwise it would all be pushed under the rug and no one would know about it.

[thundorn]

Originally posted by Traltwin:

Originally posted by thundorn:

This isn't double standards.

Psycho was allowed to do something because he asked. Bearded flagged it up that he considered it to be unfair so the devs said Okay nobody is allowed to do it anymore, problem solved.

Beard was the one who kept pushing the issue to crap on someone he claims to have no problem with by insinuating that Psycho should be banned. Play word gymnastics as much as you want but that's what he was trying to do.

When the Devs didn't comply with Beards point of view he started acting out and rightly got put in his place.

Having said that, It IS a bad look for CJ Dixon to keep streaming playing games with Psycho and Insym. For streamers / non-partners it does make us feel kinda excluded when the Devs clearly favour the most popular streamers.

Here's the thing you're missing out on ... Psycho asked for ONE video ... and that should've been that... but he continued to do that trick for SIX MONTHS afterwards... and he's not even punished for taking advantage of that friendship ... because then they'd get rid of their cash cow in their eyes...

You're missing the point.

Nah it's you who are missing the point. Baron was banned because he tried to force the Devs' hand by threatening to publicly share the exploit if they didn't take punitive action against Psycho.
Baron put the Devs in the position of either siding with him, a low-tier streamer and Psycho their top creator.
Baron also broke the terms of the partnership agreement which is considerably more serious than psycho taking advantage of an exploit which the Devs gave him permission to use.

Business is business and frankly Baron should consider himself lucky if they don't sue him for breech of contract and Libel. Favouritism is a fact of life, particularly when it comes to streaming. Businesses can and absolutely should give recognition to their top performing partners.

[Myth Alric]

Originally posted by Switorik:

I don't care about streamers but the ban was wrong.

There is obvious favoritism being shown and the only way to make dk show his cards was to do what beardboy did. Otherwise it would all be pushed under the rug and no one would know about it.

He got banned from their discord channel, for spamming the exploit video on their discord channel. He could of(and did) post the video on youtube.

So let me ask you this. Why do you feel he has to spam their discord channel with the video, in order for people to know about it? Wasn't posting it on youtube sufficient?

[Switorik]

I see his reasoning. The chat wasn't going anywhere and in order to bring this to light he did the only thing he could think of. Was it right, debatable. You are right, there are alternative avenues that would have showcased the issue better. However, now I know the dev has admitted he has favorites and allows them to use exploits.

This should be formally addressed.

[Tox]

Aaaand this is why I loathe what streaming has done to the gaming world.
TL;DR: Developers prioritising streaming/streamers/content creators ahead of the sanctity and development of the game.


It's bad enough when a game diverts resources away from gameplay development to making it cater to twitch "drops" or other integrations (that part thankfully not being relevant to phas), but when the devs start playing favorites with "content creators", letting them exploit but banning the peasant players (or less-favored streamers) for it, creating division among the community for the sake of stream-generated $$ (meanwhile, and particularly with this game, not having any new maps(read: diverting resources away from gameplay development) for how long now?)

One could argue that bearded's approach was flawed until they're blue in the face; the fact remains that the blatant display of "rules for some but not for our bestest buddies" is just deplorable.
They let their golden boy abuse an exploit while threatening anyone else should they do the same.

Now, I don't know who any of these streamers are, I don't actually care about the people involved (respectfully said). The core of the issue here is the principals involved. Letting someone exploit to benefit their stream (thus generate money for the streamer and interest for the game, thus generating money for the game), but threatening others with a ban for it...

If anyone fails to see what's wrong with that, I weep for the gaming world just a little more.

[Sam]

Originally posted by Myth Alric:

He wasn't given privileged information. He either found the exploit himself or found it online. He asked to use it and they said okay, but isn't like they could of stopped him anyway. Him voluntarily agreeing to stop using it, is the best outcome for them, seeing as they have no power to stop him. It doesn't make sense for Phas to try and ban everyone who uses that exploit. If you watched the video, then you know how it works, and you know it is completely ridiculous for the Devs to try to ban players who do it.

So as you said yourself, no one can stop him from doing it, so him agreeing to not do it on his own accord is in their best interest. Baron on the other hand is trying to damage the community and the game. There is no reason to welcome him when he is utterly uninterested in working things out or having a rational conversation. He tried to burn everything around him so got kicked out.

It just shows that having a calm rational conversation gets you better results than throwing a tantrum and trying to flame people.

Hey buddy. Baron WAS trying to have a normal conversation. Then they locked the conversation he was having because they didn't like his questions.
Love how you are spewing the same thing over and over, ignoring the fact that their BFF psycho got no warning, no anything, just a "don't do it again plz?".

Lol what's wrong with people.

[Quineloe]

Originally posted by Switorik:

I see his reasoning. The chat wasn't going anywhere and in order to bring this to light he did the only thing he could think of. Was it right, debatable. You are right, there are alternative avenues that would have showcased the issue better. However, now I know the dev has admitted he has favorites and allows them to use exploits.

This should be formally addressed.

He had no choice? What was it that forced him to do something? What would have happened it he had just let it go? What even was the issue to him, personally?

[Tox]

Originally posted by Quineloe:

Originally posted by Switorik:

I see his reasoning. The chat wasn't going anywhere and in order to bring this to light he did the only thing he could think of. Was it right, debatable. You are right, there are alternative avenues that would have showcased the issue better. However, now I know the dev has admitted he has favorites and allows them to use exploits.

This should be formally addressed.

He had no choice? What was it that forced him to do something? What would have happened it he had just let it go? What even was the issue to him, personally?

He made pretty clear what he took issue with; the favouritism (in the form of granting their favourite streamer permission to exploit but threatening others if they do it; by definition, double standards).
He could have taken a more principled route by removing himself as a CC and proceeding to expose the situation on his own two feet, and in that regard, pushing the envelope in their discord was a proverbial suicide mission. But the result ends up being effectively the same, due to his issue with the double standards he ceases being on their CC team and exposes the background machinations of the devs allowing "the chosen one(s)" to abuse an exploit for financial gain (in the form of bolstering their streaming).

[Tox]

Now, this is an extreme example, but the principals are similar:
Imagine you're friends with a police officer. You go up and ask that police officer "Hey I found a way to steal money without being caught. If I give you some of that money, will you let me off and bury it?"
The police officer responds, "Sure, just don't tell anyone else how you did it"
The police officer then catches someone doing the exact same thing, and proceeds to arrest, charge and prosecute them.

Not okay, right?
Not identical to this situation, but in many ways similar. Not okay.

[Jimmy Hunter]

Originally posted by Tox:

If anyone fails to see what's wrong with that, I weep for the gaming world just a little more.

To be fair, this decent into darkness began way back when gamers decided that they wanted to pay for cosmetics instead of performing difficult feats to unlock the cosmetics.

Once companies realized that gamers are a bunch of fools with their money, they realized they could get away with basically anything.

[Virtuous Guard]

Originally posted by Tox:

Now, this is an extreme example, but the principals are similar:
Imagine you're friends with a police officer. You go up and ask that police officer "Hey I found a way to steal money without being caught. If I give you some of that money, will you let me off and bury it?"
The police officer responds, "Sure, just don't tell anyone else how you did it"
The police officer then catches someone doing the exact same thing, and proceeds to arrest, charge and prosecute them.

Not okay, right?
Not identical to this situation, but in many ways similar. Not okay.

IF you complete the analogy to the entire scenario, it completely breaks your comparison though.

Firstly, in this scenario, the new guy should be a similar standing to the first money stealing guy.

New guy comes along and robs a bank after being told he shouldn't by the cop. Would get away with it but starts coming into the cop's office and sharing a statement about how he did it to the whole precinct. He gets shown the door but keeps coming back. They arrest him for disturbing the peace and attempting to incite crimes to be committed.

It's not really a 1 to 1 even remotely.

That being said, I think a big issues that a lot of people are missing Is that almost nobody is denying that favoritism is OK. They're just saying its inevitable in this world.

I absolutely agree that a statement should be given if it hasn't already, but I also agree that Baron was out of line. Not at first. He was very much in the right when he was asking about it and the devs were certainly within their rights (though unreasonable) to lock the discussion.. But Baron went about it in a childish way and he didn't even deny that much.