48 ms·
From https://www.pcgamer.com/blitzchung-removed-from-hearthstone-grandmasters-for-liberate-hong-kong-comments/ https://www.pcgamer.com/blitzchung-removed-from-h
by johnchristopher 7y ago
From https://www.pcgamer.com/blitzchung-removed-from-hearthstone-grandmasters-for-liberate-hong-kong-comments/ https://www.pcgamer.com/blitzchung-removed-from-hearthstone-... a description of the incident :
> As Andy reported earlier today, Blitzchung did not back down after the sudden removal of the broadcast, during which he wore a gas mask and goggles before shouting "Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our age!" Following the incident he released a statement elaborating on his stance, writing "I know what my action on stream means. It could cause me lot of trouble, even my personal safety in real life. But I think it's my duty to say something about the issue."
- ummonk 7y agoOkay that explains it. I thought banning for 12 months was a little harsh for someone making a political statement once, but he knew what he was doing and doubled down on it.
- luckydata 7y agoIt sounds like you agree with the measure. Is that the case?
- ummonk 7y agoI do. I don’t want sporting events, conventions, etc. to become platforms for advocacy about controversial politics. I support non-disruptive actions like kneeling at an anthem, but advocacy about a political issue during a post-match interview streamed by the event organizer certainly crosses the line.
- luckydata 7y agoCrossing lines is the point of activism, we wouldn't have any of the rights we enjoy (and soon we might lose if we're not careful) in the west if not for people that systematically crossed lines and used high visibility occasions to make a point. It might be worth checking this out: https://theundefeated.com/features/mexico-city-olympics-protest-media-john-carlos-tommie-smith/ https://theundefeated.com/features/mexico-city-olympics-prot...
- nashashmi 7y agoWere rules already established in the terms of service that would prevent him from protesting against a country or supporting oppressed people? If it was during the broadcast, then cutting the broadcast is sufficient punishment.
- hannasanarion 7y agoWhy does the fact that the person making a political statement knew that they were making a political statement make their banning okay?
- 3minus1 7y agoThere's a difference between accidentally and knowingly breaking a rule. Regardless of if you feel the rule is fair or right, knowingly breaking is more egregious, e.g. manslaughter is not as bad as first or second degree murder.
- xvector 7y agoWhat a ridiculous comparison. The rule he broke here was literally "don't offend any portion of the public." The rule you're referring to is much more justifiable. If the rules are ridiculous, then the reaction to them should be to dismantle the rules and disavow the rule-makers.
- CobrastanJorji 7y agoKnowing that you're doing something that is not in the interest of Blizzard or China and may bring you trouble is not the same thing as rule-breaking. For example, I have a first amendment right to stand on the street and cry out "that store over there has awful working conditions," and I'm not breaking any rules, but I'm well aware that the store may well not let me in anymore.
- keithnoizu 7y agoMore like you go in the middle of the street and say, America shouldn't support south american dictators, and as a result all ISPs refuse you provide you with internet service. They're private companies they have the right do to so but good luck navigating todays world with out it.
- jammygit 7y agoYou are claiming that morality is irrelevant if there is a rule involved, and your action is substantially worse if you break a rule for a moral reason deliberately instead of accidentally?
- ww520 7y agoBlitzchung is a true hero.