are you worried that The ADL wants to push Steam to increase censorship guidelines severity?

[Kzual]

I just watched youtuber TheQuartering's video from Apr. 18th about the Anti-Defamation League wanting to push tech companies like Valve to increase their control over speech on the game they offer on their platform. does this worry you?

[ShelLuser]

No, because there wasn't any free speech on Steam to begin with.

I have one word for channels like that: attention seekers. That's it, that's all. Note; I'm not saying I disagree with them, sometimes they definitely address interesting topics. But always keep in mind that they don't do that to inform the masses: they do so to secure their own income.

As such: attention seekers. Because telling you the obvious truth ('there wasn't any free speech to begin with') wouldn't sound very interesting and that doesn't attract many views. Go figure....

[Grab 'em by the Gens]

Valve can already deny any game for any reason. This is a private website, not the public square. The Quartering is nothing but a grifter for angry gamer types.

[Dr.Shadowds 🐉]

Steam has their own guidelines, and rules, also ADL has nothing to do with Steam, nor can they make Steam do anything, they have no power over any tech companies. If they want to fight over hate speech, they have to do it while following the service guidelines, and rules.
https://support.steampowered.com/kb_article.php?ref=4045-USHJ-3810


Also, if people complain about service enforcing their guidelines, and rules, and cry "censorship abuse" should check this link below.
https://xkcd.com/1357/

[Kzual]

@Dr.Shadowds the ADL has alot of pull politically speaking. if they say publicly that they're targeting Valve specifically (which they did say, see link below), they could very well follow through with some move towards forcing Valve to comply with that demand. and let me remind you that they're the ones that said the OK hand symbol was a white supremacist sign (turns out it wasn't).

https://www.adl.org/free-to-play

now this is all speculation, of course. and I agree with the comic caricature you linked that if you act like a butthole, people will show you the door. but this isn't just that. this is about an organization that has nothing to do with gaming wanting to force Valve to decide for you what you are and aren't allowed to say and do while gaming. and if there's an audience that is rather passionate with their actions and reactions, it's gamers so a banhammer mandated by the ADL would likely hurt.

anyway, let's just hope that Valve remembers who makes them money.

[Dr.Shadowds 🐉]

Do realize they can't force Valve right? Also Valve has their own guidelines, and rules.

If all ADL wants Valve to enforce their guidelines, and rules more often, that's the best they can do is ask Valve to do so, not force them, not take over, not anything but asked Valve to do something. Valve can choose to do what they want, there's a huge gap differences between forcing someone to do something, and asking someone to do something, and that need to be VERY CLEAR ABOUT, which you seem to forget.


"If they want to fight over hate speech, they have to do it while following the service guidelines, and rules." That means, works with the services to help stop hate speechs, and such, not work agasint them to push your agendas.


Valve knows well, but not dumb enough to support hate speechs, which why hence using the report feature, as if someone forgot that thing exist...

[Kzual]

I know they can't force Valve directly. they're not on Valve's board of directors, they're not shareholders, they have no representation whatsoever in Valve's decision-making processes. all I'm saying is that the ADL have a powerful voice, and they have a lot of money.

I'm just worried that they could somehow bring Valve to develop new ways to police and punish gamers more severely than they currently are.

[Aachen]

How are gamers being severely policed and punished by Valve as things stand? I don’t follow.

[Dr.Shadowds 🐉]

Publicado originalmente por Kzual:

I know they can't force Valve directly. they're not on Valve's board of directors, they're not shareholders, they have no representation whatsoever in Valve's decision-making processes. all I'm saying is that the ADL have a powerful voice, and they have a lot of money.

I'm just worried that they could somehow bring Valve to develop new ways to police and punish gamers more severely than they currently are.

You have nothing to worry about really, because there's nothing that need changes. ADL can't police the internet, which they're well aware of, and knows they can't throw money around either.

Valve may update their rules, if you use sites like https://web.archive.org/ or etc and view past rules, you will see how Valve update their rules, and change things on their own terms whenever they want, they don't do what anyone demands to do for their forums. If Valve wants to make new rules they will.

People that break the rules that known, are full well aware they get what they want coming to them sooner, or later. We have reports, support can read history, and nothing can do to really hide themselves on here. They may not be harsh punishment, but can become one if they keep breaking those rules. Like how Microsoft used to give harsh punishment on the 1st go with no ban lifting, they ease up on that because they realize how harsh punishment it really was, and don't believe it to be fair, and better to give those people 2nd, or 3rd chance to correct themselves or accept the harsh punishment. Steam has not changed from this really, they give you temp ban, few times, and turns into perma ban if things get out of hand, or kept on breaking the rules, that's just how it is.

[Start_Running]

Publicado originalmente por Kzual:

I just watched youtuber TheQuartering's video from Apr. 18th about the Anti-Defamation League wanting to push tech companies like Valve to increase their control over speech on the game they offer on their platform. does this worry you?

Nope. There are ratings. All the devs have to do is pick which rating their game comes under. No Censorship needed,. The worst that will happen is a couple extra age gates and we know how honest people are with those .

[Kzual]

I guess one of the closest example I could give is right here, in the comment I made at 7:42 here above, I tried to write butthole b u t t h o l e and it was censored. but in the context of the conversation it wasn't offensive at all to anyone. and that's the main point I'd have to emphasize: in addition to being subjective, an offensive remark is contextual. there really isn't many words or sentences that will be inherently offensive no matter how they're employed. yet companies censor heavily regardless of that, whether it's because the technology isn't there yet to analyse and process context, or whether it's because they don't bother to develop it as it's easier and makes shareholders acceptably happy to just censor a fixed glossary of words despite potential contexts to maintain a good corporate image. and Valve's forums, chatrooms and that of the games they support aren't exactly private spaces either. they're more like privately owned public spaces, and in many of the Commonwealth countries, they are subjected to citizens constitutional rights to assemble and express freely.

[Aachen]

“My swears are obscured” is your bar for severe policing? Not that I’m surprised.

[Kzual]

Publicado originalmente por Aachen:

“My swears are obscured” is your bar for severe policing? Not that I’m surprised.

please don't misquote me. I didn't say that's my bar, I said that's the closest example I had at hand as it had just happened mere minutes earlier. and even if it was, that word was not a swear in the context of that conversation. it was barely a vulgarity and someone claiming it is might want to review their own tolerance of common parlance.

[Kzual]

Publicado originalmente por The_Unknown_05:

why spam this topic

because freedom of expression is important and deserves to be discussed?

[Aachen]

Publicado originalmente por Kzual:

please don't misquote me. I didn't say that's my bar, I said that's the closest example I had at hand as it had just happened mere minutes earlier ....

‘Twere a paraphrase, not a quote.

As for filtered-language-as-example, I still find it hyperbolic to consider such “severe policing.” How about using good examples rather than handy ones?

.... and even if it was, that word was not a swear in the context of that conversation. it was barely a vulgarity and someone claiming it is might want to review their own tolerance of common parlance.

All subjective assertion—and your perspective has quite apparently little weight with tPtB. There are guidelines if you need to see the context relating to “contextually appropriate use of filtered language.”

Publicado originalmente por The_Unknown_05:

why spam this topic

Wait, there’s thread-spam involved now, too?

[Kzual]

alright obviously, being worried with the ADL's public claim to target Valve for an increase in controlling our speech is an unpopular opinion, weirdly enough. but I'm glad people aren't worried for it to happen I guess. I just hope all the push-back I had in this thread was motivated by the belief that I'm worrying over nothing, and not by the belief that the ADL's intention to control our speech would be a good thing, which it definitely wouldn't be IMO.