{suggestion) Let Steam Support moderate game-hub bans

[Elucidator]

Steam Support refuses to moderate hub bans delivered by hub moderators.

Steam Support doesn't even edit the ban messages, regardless of how insulting they are. If you for example receive a permanent ban because the moderator didn't like you, they can freely insult you for whatever and the Steam Support staff won't do anything about it. They don't moderate the Ban Reason. They don't moderate the ban comments.

And of course, they don't moderate the ban itself --- "because a hub may have its own rules".

I would like to see a change in this.
What is your opinion?

[Truth]

Escrito originalmente por xBCxRangers:

Escrito originalmente por Apple:

snip

I just told you, the Senate just passed an act, that negates 230 in it's current form, and gaming sites and games included, when it comes to children and their information.

There is no such act that negates 230, feel free to post a link and i'm sure plenty of us will be able to explain to you what it means. Section 230 also has nothing to do with children or their information so you are VERY confused. It sounds like you are getting confused with COPPA which deals with children and how their data has to be handled.

Escrito originalmente por xBCxRangers:

And so you're backpedaling. First is protects users. Now it only protects users, from such and such. Not altogether. And what someone "else" said. Yeah right.

Nope, sadly you just didn't read and still didn't read. My very first post made it clear

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

Section 230 embodies that principle that we should all be responsible for our own actions and statements online, but generally not those of others. The law prevents most civil suits against users or services that are based on what others say.

Said right up front it protects users from the action of others.

[Pierce Dalton]

Escrito originalmente por Apple:

Escrito originalmente por Pierce Dalton:

Well, you're sadly mistaken, dear friend. Do you really believe that Facebook, for example, won't get in trouble if they start ignoring nazi groups instead of banning them from the platform?

Not legal trouble, but they'd face public distaste but would not be civilly or criminally liable for anything. You clearly aren't aware that Nazism in the US while incredibly distasteful is not illegal. So you really should fact check your claims as your just doubling down and digging yourself even deeper.

I mean are you seriously not aware of organized Nazi gatherings and rallies? Freedom of speech in the US includes speech that others find distasteful.

You might be confused about some countries like Germany where its illegal.

So they're just wasting money paying moderation, correct?

You seem to ignore that instigating violence against certain groups is illegal... not only in the US.

[Leonardo Da Pinchi]

Escrito originalmente por Apple:

Escrito originalmente por Leonardo Da Pinchi:

I gotta ask, when will you actually look up how 230 actually functions?

Oh is this a repeated problem? That makes sense. I knew someone at my old job who often got the laws mixed up and was confused how they worked.

Icing on the cake is apparently his daughter's a lawyer.

[Truth]

Escrito originalmente por xBCxRangers:

I just told you, the Senate just passed an act, that negates 230 in it's current form, and gaming sites and games included, when it comes to children and their information.

There are a few different PROPOSED changes you might be confused about, i know about the SAFE TECH Act and the EARN IT Act which seek to modify section 230 in very specific cases, however they have all failed to pass so it sounds like your confused between the concepts of the Senate proposing a bill and that bill actually passing and becoming law.

An easy mistake to make especially for foreigners with no knowledge of how things work in the US. Feel free to post what you are confused on and i'll be glad to explain it to you.

[xBCxRangers]

Escrito originalmente por Apple:

snip

No, i am not going to post yet another link stating the obvious, and derail the thread, about a matter that has nothing to do with 230. It's easy to look up.

230, as was said, is and will continue to be altered. So there is no 230, when it comes to what happens on Steams property.

That is why another explained to you, that Steam DOES have the responsibility of the Hubs, being it is "their" Hubs and property. Not the developer.

They just "choose" to have them run, Steams property. And as was said, not wise counsel, given the recent realities.

And that's just the states. The UK is now gonna crack down, as will others.

It's just putting Steam in an impossible position. Have fun. And tell the boys over Steams Internal Affairs i said hi lol.

[Leonardo Da Pinchi]

Escrito originalmente por xBCxRangers:

Escrito originalmente por Apple:

snip

No, i am not going to post yet another link stating the obvious, and derail the thread, about a matter that has nothing to do with 230. It's easy to look up.

230, as was said, is and will continue to be altered. So there is no 230, when it comes to what happens on Steams property.

That is why another explained to you, that Steam DOES have the responsibility of the Hubs, being it "their" Hubs and property. Not the developer. They just "choose" to have them run, Steams property. And as was said, not wise counsel, given the recent realities.

And that's just the states. The UK is now gonna crack down, as will others. It's just putting Steam in an impossible position. Have fun. And tell the boys over Steams Internal Affairs i said hi lol.

I almost wish 230 was repealed so Steam would be forced to crack down on bad faith individuals who spread misinformation, because it wouldn't go the way you think.

[Pierce Dalton]

Escrito originalmente por Leonardo Da Pinchi:

Escrito originalmente por xBCxRangers:

No, i am not going to post yet another link stating the obvious, and derail the thread, about a matter that has nothing to do with 230. It's easy to look up.

230, as was said, is and will continue to be altered. So there is no 230, when it comes to what happens on Steams property.

That is why another explained to you, that Steam DOES have the responsibility of the Hubs, being it "their" Hubs and property. Not the developer. They just "choose" to have them run, Steams property. And as was said, not wise counsel, given the recent realities.

And that's just the states. The UK is now gonna crack down, as will others. It's just putting Steam in an impossible position. Have fun. And tell the boys over Steams Internal Affairs i said hi lol.

I almost wish 230 was repealed so Steam would be forced to crack on bad faith individuals who spread misinformation, because it wouldn't go the way you think.

Don't worry, no one reads the forums anyway.

[Truth]

Escrito originalmente por Pierce Dalton:

So they're just wasting money paying moderation, correct?:WH3_greasus_rofl:

You seem to ignore that instigating violence against certain groups is illegal... not only in the US.

Surely you know the difference between being a nazi and believing in something however misguided and inciting violence right? Being a racist doesn't mean you are instigating violence or is that what you are trying to claim?

You also appear to be confused with your understanding of something not being allowed on Facebook doesn't mean its illegal. For instance if Facebook says they don't allow Nazism on their site they would still moderate and remove it. If they miss some or don't remove it however they aren't held liable because its not illegal in the US.

You claimed they were liable for it, which again is false because its not illegal as we already established. Instigating violence is not something restricted to being a Nazi, or are you trying to claim someone can't be say a Republican who believes in equal rights and still instigates violence?

[Truth]

Escrito originalmente por xBCxRangers:

No, i am not going to post yet another link stating the obvious, and derail the thread, about a matter that has nothing to do with 230. It's easy to look up.

I understand, using the internet can be difficult to find things for those who are not familiar with how it works. What is the name of the act that passed and i'll find it for you. If you can't name the act, can't link the act then the only logical assumption is that the act doesn't exist.

Escrito originalmente por xBCxRangers:

230, as was said, is and will continue to be altered. So there is no 230, when it comes to what happens on Steams property.

That is why another explained to you, that Steam DOES have the responsibility of the Hubs, being it is "their" Hubs and property. Not the developer.

Section 230 has not been altered, and as you've had it explained to you that at present they are not responsible for the content.

Now if your memory comes back to you and you are able to actually remember the name of what you claimed passed let me know.

[Pierce Dalton]

Escrito originalmente por Apple:

Escrito originalmente por Pierce Dalton:

So they're just wasting money paying moderation, correct?

You seem to ignore that instigating violence against certain groups is illegal... not only in the US.

Surely you know the difference between being a nazi and believing in something however misguided and inciting violence right? Being a racist doesn't mean you are instigating violence or is that what you are trying to claim?

You also appear to be confused with your understanding of something not being allowed on Facebook doesn't mean its illegal. For instance if Facebook says they don't allow Nazism on their site they would still moderate and remove it. If they miss some or don't remove it however they aren't held liable because its not illegal in the US.

You claimed they were liable for it, which again is false because its not illegal as we already established. Instigating violence is not something restricted to being a Nazi, or are you trying to claim someone can't be say a Republican who believes in equal rights and still instigates violence?

Well, who said that instigating violence is something restricted to being a nazi? A lot of people do that, and get moderated by it (because social media can get in legal trouble if they don't remove this kind of content).

[C²C^Guyver |NZB|]

Escrito originalmente por Apple:

Escrito originalmente por Leonardo Da Pinchi:

I gotta ask, when will you actually look up how 230 actually functions?

Oh is this a repeated problem? That makes sense. I knew someone at my old job who often got the laws mixed up and was confused how they worked.

It's times like these that make me wish I had more points to give out............

[Truth]

Escrito originalmente por Pierce Dalton:

Escrito originalmente por Apple:

Surely you know the difference between being a nazi and believing in something however misguided and inciting violence right? Being a racist doesn't mean you are instigating violence or is that what you are trying to claim?

You also appear to be confused with your understanding of something not being allowed on Facebook doesn't mean its illegal. For instance if Facebook says they don't allow Nazism on their site they would still moderate and remove it. If they miss some or don't remove it however they aren't held liable because its not illegal in the US.

You claimed they were liable for it, which again is false because its not illegal as we already established. Instigating violence is not something restricted to being a Nazi, or are you trying to claim someone can't be say a Republican who believes in equal rights and still instigates violence?

Well, who said that instigating violence is something restricted to being a nazi? A lot of people do that, and get moderated by it (because social media can get in legal trouble if they don't remove this kind of content).

Cool, so you are aware of the inverse then that being a nazi does not mean you are instigating violence. Thus your post is moot as it has no bearing on the discussion.

Escrito originalmente por Pierce Dalton:

You seem to ignore that instigating violence against certain groups is illegal... not only in the US.

Afterall you just pointed out that instigating violence is not a nazi thing, its something ANYONE can do.

Section 230 provides no protection against those who instigate violence, just like the first ammendment doesn't apply to that speech. However users being a Nazi does not mean they are promoting violence for instance.

Some people are just bigots, racists, or generally unlikeable, that doesn't mean they are violent instigatores however and thus break no laws. That is why Nazi's are even allowed to have protests and rallies organized and registered with the state and cities as being a nazi isn't illegal, its just distasteful.

[Pierce Dalton]

Escrito originalmente por Apple:

Afterall you just pointed out that instigating violence has nothing to do with Nazism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeEIgsbA_q0

You just made my day, thank you, Mr. Apple.

[William Shakesman]

Escrito originalmente por Leonardo Da Pinchi:

Escrito originalmente por xBCxRangers:

No, i am not going to post yet another link stating the obvious, and derail the thread, about a matter that has nothing to do with 230. It's easy to look up.

230, as was said, is and will continue to be altered. So there is no 230, when it comes to what happens on Steams property.

That is why another explained to you, that Steam DOES have the responsibility of the Hubs, being it "their" Hubs and property. Not the developer. They just "choose" to have them run, Steams property. And as was said, not wise counsel, given the recent realities.

And that's just the states. The UK is now gonna crack down, as will others. It's just putting Steam in an impossible position. Have fun. And tell the boys over Steams Internal Affairs i said hi lol.

I almost wish 230 was repealed so Steam would be forced to crack down on bad faith individuals who spread misinformation, because it wouldn't go the way you think.

Are you suggesting repealing 230 means Steam will be forced by the govt to crack down on people being wrong on the internet? Given how often people call everything they disagree with "misinformation" i really don't see that working out that way

[xBCxRangers]

Escrito originalmente por Apple:

snip

Dude, you're trying to fight the world. You already know, on your primary tag, it was iterated Steam and even Mr Newell, directly cited about nazi content.

You were already awares of the GAO Report in regards to gaming sites and their extremists content.

You are already aware, the Senate has just passed, by i think 93 to 3, a bill to hold these gaming companies accountable. Even giving states their own priorities on those matters.

You first declared 230 would protect users, only for Jones to be brought up. For you to backpedal and say, "well, they don't protect everything".

You were told even the UK, are holding or pledging to hold, users accountable as to what they post.

Sir, clearly either you are confused, in areas you do not understand, or otherwise derailing this topic. And so, Steam is going to be A OK. Wonderful.

Lets move on.